Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Education
13 August 2002
Suzanne Rees
Independent Schools Association of Southern Africa (ISASA)

1. Points of Departure

1. The status of independent schools is recognised in the South African Constitution:

1. Independence must have some substance: the purpose of that clause is surely to allow for the provision of education that is different from that provided by public schools. The differences may be of a philosophical, cultural or religious nature.

1. Current regulation of independent schools
1. Independent schools are already significantly regulated within the limits of the Constitution

• The SA Schools Act requires that all independent schools are registered and meet basic quality standards
• Additional criteria are checked for schools which receive a subsidy
• All teachers in independent schools must be registered with the South African Council for Educators (SACE)
• All independent schools will be required to undergo quality assurance through the uMalusi Council
• In order to receive tax exemption, independent schools must be registered as public benefit organisations (PBOs)
• Independent schools must comply with the regulations of their legal persona (Section 21 company, trust, etc.)

1. The current South African Schools Act imposes no additional conditions on independent schools.
2. The current National Education Policy Act makes no reference to the Minister’s powers in respect of independent schools.
3. The Education Laws Amendment Bill therefore represents a significant departure from previous legislation and could curtail the discretion of independent schools in key areas of teaching and assessment.
4. Independent Schools in South Africa are already very publicly accountable.
5. Is additional regulation necessary or desirable?

1. A National Curriculum
1. The Bill states that the Minister may make regulations to prescribe a national curriculum for public and independent schools.
2. The second draft of the Bill refers to a "national curriculum".
3. If the intended meaning is a fully prescribed national curriculum, it would serve to homogenise education and could disempower centres of good practice, excellence and innovation.
4. Clarification is required of the terms "national curriculum" and "national curriculum statement".
5. The international norm is that countries that have a national curriculum allow independent schools the choice of alternatives – provided they meet the required outcomes and standards.
6. Our education system must model diversity and tolerance, and our curricula must provide options and choice at all levels
7. ISASA interprets "national curriculum" to mean comparable outcome standards – in line with the constitutional requirements.

Minister Kader Asmal, Letter of 5 July – "under the outcomes-based curriculum, only the outcome standards are prescribed, while the content and methods by which the learners achieve these are determined by the professional in charge".

2. Prescribing a National Process for Assessment
1. The Bill states that the Minister may determine a national process for the assessment of learner achievement in public and independent schools.
2. A national examination creates a "backwash effect", where curriculum development is circumscribed through being geared towards the examination.
3. ISASA supports the principle of comparable standards at exit levels, but it is important that these can be achieved in diverse ways.
4. SAQA and the NQF already provide the means to equate different learning paths and qualifications. Why then do we need a national process for assessment?
5. The international norm is to allow independent schools to choose their examining body and instrument.
6. An independent examinations body provides many benefits.

• An additional South African exam of high quality benchmarked against international standards

• Expertise in assessment design, delivery and training.

• Considerable professional development for teachers at a regional level, for example through IEB user groups.

1. Diversity benefits the entire system and is best achieved if independent assessment exists.

1. Prescribing Quality Assurance
1. The Bill allows the Minister to prescribe a national process for the assessment, monitoring and evaluation for quality education.
2. SAQA, the NQF and the GENFETQA (uMalusi) already provide a system to quality assure all public and independent schools.
3. It is unnecessary to include such a requirement in the Bill if the same outcome is already achieved by existing structures.
2. Increased Regulatory Power of the Minister
1. The substantive areas for regulation are spelled out in the specifics of the Bill.
2. Why is it necessary for the Bill to state that the Minister may make regulations on any matter which may be necessary or expedient to prescribe in order to achieve the objects of this Act?
3. ISASA is concerned that an incumbent of this post may use such power to undermine the independence of our schools or preclude bottom up input and experience.
4. Because of the open-ended nature of this clause, the full implications cannot be predicted.
3. Consequences
1. The Bill clearly disempowers the provincial education departments in favour of the National Department. This is contrary to the notion of concurrent powers contained in the Constitution.
2. The Bill will allow the Minister to control significant areas of education policy by means of regulation, without having to make legislation.
3. Parliament and the Portfolio Committee will lose their right to scrutinize education policy in these areas.
4. ISASA believes this is contrary to any notion of democratic governance or decision-making.
4. Conclusion
1. We are encouraged by the changes made to the first draft of the Bill.
2. We seek an unambiguous definition of key terms in the Bill.
3. ISASA maintains the right of choice and the recognition of diversity in independent schooling.
4. There must be enough discretion to allow independent schools to provide a form of education which is substantively different from that offered in public schools.