Report of
the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education on public hearings concerning Access
and Delivery of Quality Education, dated 12 April 2011
The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, having conducted public
hearings on access and the delivery of quality education, reports as follows:
1.
Introduction
and Background
1.1.
The Portfolio Committee on Basic
Education held public hearings in Parliament on access and delivery of quality
education.
1.2.
These public hearings followed a growing
recognition that whilst much was done to achieve the government’s goal of
access to education, there remained areas of concern, particularly with regard
to equal access to quality education from all categories of learners and the
questionable levels of learning outcomes.
As part of the Committee’s oversight role and due to growing interest in
the subject of quality education, it was decided to ascertain the views of
various stakeholders, and in particular teachers, through public hearings.
1.3.
Through these public hearings, the Committee
intended to obtain first-hand information on the pressure points and to find
mutual solutions that would make a positive contribution towards improving the
quality and integrity of the basic education system.
1.4.
The Committee received 223 written
submissions and 24 oral submissions from a range of stakeholders, including
teachers, principals, unions, parents, academics, Non-Governmental
Organisations (NGOs) and the business sector. The oral phase of the hearings
was held between 12 May and 29 July 2010 (see Annexure 1). Although the cut-off
date for the written submission was 28 February 2010, the Committee continued
to receive and accept these submissions until the end of September 2010. It was
always envisaged that the hearings would not be a once-off exercise, but an
ongoing theme within the Committee. The Committee considered the written
submissions between 4 August 2010 and 12 April 2011 (Annexure 1).
1.5.
During the consideration of submissions,
the Committee looked at a summary of each individual submission in conjunction
with the relevant full submission received. Due to the large response to the
call for submissions and the Committee’s resolve to consider each submission reasonably,
the process took a long period of time to complete. Simultaneously, the
Committee had other very pressing business to attend to in Parliament.
1.6.
At each oral submission, Department of
Basic Education senior officials were present to clarify the position of the
department on issues raised by the public. Where possible, the Committee also
conducted its research to verify claims made in the submissions.
1.7.
Where the Committee felt there was
merit in the submission, core aspects of that submission were included in the
report.
1.8.
There was a substantial overlap in
the issues that emerged. The report gives an account of these issues and the
deliberations of the Committee. As the Department of Basic Education had
embarked on a major process to review the implementation of the National
Curriculum Statement during the period of these hearings, the Committee took a
decision to present issues raised pertaining to the curriculum as a separate
section. These are captured in section 2.1, while the other issues raised are
set out in section 2.2. Where the Department has made progress in addressing
the issues raised in this report, this is noted.
2.
Issues
emerging from the Hearings
2.1.
Curriculum
issues
Issues that emerged during the
public hearings pertaining to the curriculum can be classified under two main
categories, namely, curriculum design and structure, and curriculum
implementation:
2.1.1
Curriculum design and structure
There were several problem areas
raised pertaining to curriculum design and structure. These related to
curriculum coherence, pitch of content, assessment standards, sequence and
progression in terms of content and language policy.
Although the Review report of Curriculum 2005 (DoE, 2000) identified
some of these issues in its evaluation of Curriculum
2005, for example, the importance of curriculum coherence, content specification
and progression, and the Department had been making some progress in addressing
them, it was clear from the hearings and submissions that further work needed
to be carried out in some of these areas.
To this end, there was general
support for the findings and recommendations of the recent Ministerial Review
of the implementation of the National Curriculum Statement (NCS)[1].
The discussion below indicates the problem areas raised.
2.1.1.1 Curriculum coherence
The submissions and hearings
highlighted gaps in content in certain subjects/learning areas. Specifically,
teachers[2]
noted a lack of articulation of the syllabus between Grades 11 and 12 in Life
Sciences and between Grades 9 and 10 in Mathematics. It was indicated that when
learners pass Life Sciences in Grade 11, they are unable to perform basic
experiments in the subject in Grade 12. With regard to the gap in content in
Mathematics, the hearings pointed out that too little time was allocated to
algebra in Grade 9 than is required to lay a foundation for Grade 10. Natural
Science was also raised as particularly problematic with the subject lacking
continuity in Grade 9. In addition, it was also reported that the gap between
Grade 9 and 10 in this subject is too great with regards to the amount of
content and level of cognitive development.
2.1.1.2 Pitch of content
The suitability of content in
certain grades was questioned. It emerged from the hearings that practical work
in Life Science grades 11 and 12 is difficult for learners to execute,
particularly in reproduction and DNA application. This was attributed largely
to the fact that many schools are under-resourced and do not have science
laboratories and computer centres. This situation results in practical work
being conducted theoretically without any experiments to enhance understanding
and application of knowledge. It also emerged that practical work was difficult
to perform in Natural Science Grade 9, for example, genetics. Furthermore, some
topics were deemed to be too advanced in Natural Science for the Grade 9 level,
for example, excretion and respiration. In Economics, learners in Grades 10 –
12 were said to be having difficulty with Learning Outcome 2 – Micro Economics
in comprehending the content and graphs[3].
Similarly, concepts in the Intermediate Phase were reported to be introduced
before the learners were developmentally ready. This was said to be
particularly the case in Mathematics, Geography, History, Economics and
Management Sciences (EMS) and Technology[4].
In Mathematics, division, fractional, measurement and time concepts were cited
as cases in point. With regard to the concern about
In Accounting, it was felt that
learners were expected to deal with real life scenarios and situations in which
they have no experience[5].
There was also a concern that certain topics such as cash flow statements were
difficult for learners and as a result the weaker learners were discouraged.
A concern was also raised that the
curriculum for First Additional Language (FAL) was similar to that of Home
Language in Afrikaans and isiZulu[6].
It was argued that FAL should focus more on communication skills, building confidence
in speaking, reading understanding and writing the language[7].
The gaps in the suitability of
content as identified in the subjects above should be addressed in the
curriculum documents to facilitate the effective implementation of the National Curriculum Statements.
2.1.1.3 Content overload
There were concerns raised in
written submissions that the content is compact in the following subjects,
which resulted in learners experiencing difficulty in comprehending the
subjects[8]:
·
Afrikaans, First Additional Language
(FAL) (Grade 12)
·
Economics (Grade 10 – 12)
·
Natural Science (Grade 7 – 9)
·
Physical Science (Grade 10 - 12)
Similarly, in Foundation and
Intermediate Phases, submissions[9]
commented that there was insufficient time to develop and internalise basic
concepts and skills. Specifically, several submissions and hearings called for
more focus on basic numeracy skills of addition, subtraction, multiplication
and division as well as literacy skills such as spelling, reading, phonics and
comprehension[10]. The
Committee welcomes the progress that the department has made in a bid to
address this challenge in the Intermediate Phase through the planned reduction
in the number of subjects from eight to six, with effect from 2012[11]. Care should be taken to ensure that there is
sufficient time for learners to develop and internalise basic concepts and
skills in the reconfigured subjects.
Recommendations
from the submissions
The submissions made the following
recommendations for the department’s consideration:
·
With regard to the subjects
mentioned above for the Senior and FET Phases, the amount of content to be
taught should be revised or the time allocated to these subjects should be
increased.
·
Physics and Chemistry should be
separate subjects as taught in other countries[12].
2.1.1.4
Curriculum relevance
The need to incorporate the
following themes/subjects in the curriculum was raised:
2.1.1.4.1
Vocational guidance
Several submissions observed that
many learners lack awareness of the many varied jobs available in the market
place. The Committee endorses the recommendation from some of these submissions
with an emphasis on teaching subject choices in Grade 9 for Grade 10. It
is also crucial for provincial education departments to evaluate the feasibility
of introducing innovative web-based programmes[13]
identified elsewhere in this report, to support learners in making their subject
choices.
2.1.1.4.2
Teaching values
A number of submissions and hearings from parents and teachers called for
the inclusion of values as a major component of the curriculum in order to
instil discipline and promote good morals. Despite the fact that religious
education is included in the curriculum as part of Life Orientation[14],
many of these submissions called for the introduction of religion as a primary
medium to impart values. This may well be the result of varied and inconsistent
coverage of religion and values in general, between schools, districts and
provinces. Other submissions[15]
called for a greater promotion of Constitutional values such as human rights,
citizenship, equality and freedom from discrimination.
Recommendations
2.1.1.4.3
Physical
Education
Some submissions called for the
reintroduction of Physical Education into the curriculum as a separate subject
or at least to allocate more periods in its current form as a component of Life
Orientation.
The Committee welcomes the plans of
the Department to allocate time for Physical Education within the timetable in the
Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS). It further supports a plea
from the submissions that schools should be provided with human and material
resources to support this change.
2.1.1.4.4
Financial literacy and entrepreneurship
There was also a call from some
submissions[16] for the
inclusion of financial literacy and entrepreneurship as compulsory components
of Life Orientation that should be introduced as early as possible to inculcate
responsible financial behaviour and to prepare learners to be self-sufficient
as adults and potential entrepreneurs.
2.1.1.5
Assessment standards
At the time of the public
hearings, assessment standards were a central curriculum organising devise for
the NCS which detailed expected knowledge, skills and values. Consistent with
the findings of the Ministerial Review of the NCS, the hearings and submissions
indicated that assessment standards were unclear in some subjects and limited
in the extent to which they show scope, sequence, pace and progression.
Assessment standards were argued to be particularly problematic in Technology[17].
The manner in which knowledge, skills and values had been integrated, often
within the same assessment standard, called for a more specific interpretation,
often not known to the teacher and therefore not easily interpreted into usable
activities[18].
Consequently, teachers continued teaching the content they were
in the habit of teaching prior to 1998. Teachers randomly selected assessment
standards to match what they were teaching, often neglecting most of the
assessment standards. As a result, learners progressed with many assessment
standards not completed thus not achieving those covered, creating an
accumulated backlog of work.
2.1.1.6
Sequence and progression
with regard to content
Similar to the findings of the Ministerial Review of the
NCS, one of the key concerns that emerged from the hearings and submissions is
that the NCS does not specify the scope and sequence of the content to be
taught in certain subjects. This concern was especially expressed in relation
to GET Natural Science, Technology Grade 4 and Business Studies Grades 10 – 12.
In the case of Business Studies, it was reported that, owing to the lack of
content specification, many schools articulated that teachers lacked the
necessary guidance to prepare their learners for the Grade 12 examination paper[19].
The Committee commends the department’s plans to introduce
comprehensive Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) that will
provide content and assessment specification on a grade-by-grade and
subject-by-subject basis.
2.1.1.7
Assessment
It was felt that learners are required to cover many
assessment tasks for many subjects. As a result they experience problems when
setting to complete the required assessment tasks and submit them on time.
Assessment concerns were also expressed relating to certain
subjects. In Afrikaans (First Additional Language) it was reported that there
are too many assessment tasks repeated during the year. It was recommended that
Paper 3 should be left out of the June examination paper and rather be written
in November[20] or it
should be excluded from examination and made an in-school assessment[21].
A second concern expressed regarding Afrikaans was that there was little
distinction between First Additional Language and Home Language in their
examination papers[22].
Accounting examination question papers were said to have an
excess of theory content and audit work. In addition, there was a complaint
that time allocation for the subject was inadequate. This was especially
experienced in the 2009 Trial Paper.
A concern was raised that the NSC memoranda appear to be
drawn from one particular textbook which creates problems for schools that use
a different textbook.
The Committee feels that it is crucial that the above
concerns regarding assessment are addressed, including, where possible, via the
proposed Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements.
2.1.1.8
Quality of systemic
assessment tests in primary schools
Three concerns were raised regarding the quality of systemic
assessment tests conducted in primary schools in the
·
There were language errors in papers which appeared to have
been translated from English to Afrikaans.
·
While learners are normally provided with rubrics prior to
any written work for in-school assessment these were not provided in the
provincial systemic assessment tests.
·
There were mistakes in the memoranda and they gave no
guidance on how to mark spelling and grammar mistakes in language.
The need to ensure that these concerns are addressed was
raised.
2.1.1.9
Administrative load
As with the Ministerial Review of the NCS, many submissions
complained about the excessive administrative duties and paper work required in
the National Curriculum Statement, which impacted on actual teaching and the
psychological well-being of teachers.
The Committee welcomes progress made by the department to reduce this
administrative workload by reducing the amount of recording, reporting and the
number of projects for learners[24].
This will allow teachers more time to focus on teaching. However, the Committee
notes the complaint from some submissions that contrary to what the department
suggests, the changes to the portfolios and teacher files do not create less
work. It is maintained that although the teacher is now required to have only
one file, the information contained therein remains the same and where a
teacher teaches more than one subject and grade, it is not possible to keep all
the information in one file. The Committee urges the department to investigate
this matter.
2.1.1.10
Quality of textbooks
There were complaints in some submissions regarding the
quality of textbooks, which was a stumbling block in the achievement of
academic knowledge, skills and values. In a comprehensive submission on
textbooks, their variable quality was attributed to design flaws in the National
Curriculum Statement and the inefficiency of the evaluation process[25].
The submission noted that some textbooks were pitched at a language level higher
than the ability of students. This often caused problems for second language
learners, a factor which manifested in the high matriculation failure rate. The
submission further highlighted that many textbooks were poorly structured,
explanations confusing, new concepts and technical terms introduced without
definitions, examples irrelevant and content uninspiring.
Some submissions showed concern with the lack of quality of
textbooks in Numeracy in the Foundation Phase, Indigenous Languages and
Physical Science. It was felt that Numeracy was not supported by sufficient
textbooks or materials in a modular form to allow for practice and
consolidation to be conducted in an organised manner. Exercises were said to be
changing from one aspect to another in a haphazard manner. The Committee notes
the positive steps the department has taken in improving the quality of
textbooks for numeracy through the provision of workbooks for learners in
Grades 1 – 6 and the development of a national catalogue of learning and
teaching support materials from which schools can select textbooks[26].
It will be vital that this catalogue includes quality learning and teaching
materials produced in Indigenous Languages[27].
Regarding the textbooks for Physical Science, the concern
expressed was that those provided by the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE)
were incomplete on certain topics and did not contain the detail and depth
expected of learners in Grade 12.
Recommendations
·
Much more work remains to be done to ensure that the quality
of the textbooks used is not limited by the financial capacity of the school.
·
Submissions recommended that examiners of the Physics and
Chemistry papers work through the textbooks on the GDE list of accepted
textbooks and identify areas where these books are incomplete in order to
compile a list of acceptable definitions for terms asked in the exam.
·
There was support for the department’s recent recognition of
the need for teachers to effectively utilise textbooks and it was felt that
this should be included in the education and training of teachers[28].
·
It was further recommended that relevant research
institutions should be encouraged to conduct coordinated research with regard
the development of quality textbooks and their utilisation as part of effective
teaching practice[29].
2.1.1.11
Provision of Learning and
Teaching Support Materials
Submissions expressed concern at the failure of provinces
and districts to deliver sufficient Learning and Teaching Support Materials
(LTSM) before the start of the school year, with one submission[30]
indicating that they were in their third week of the school calendar year and
had still not received textbooks.
2.1.1.12
Academic versus
vocational stream
Several submissions and hearings[31]
made an appealing case for vocational education to be introduced in mainstream
schooling to cater for learners who have limited interest in the academic
stream and are either practically oriented or need to acquire skills within a
short time, find work and support their families. Schools of Skills which are
mainly located in the
2.1.1.13
Language barriers
A number of submissions touched on challenges related to
language. While there was considerable support to educate young learners in
their mother tongue[33]
in lower grades, in order to develop literacy and thinking skills, there was
also an appreciation that English as an international language should be
introduced as a First Additional Language in Grade 1 to enable learners to
develop educational concepts and provide their foundation to be accessible to
learn in the global arena. It was also recommended that the teaching of English
as a First Additional Language and the indigenous languages should be supported
with the provision of appropriate texts and a variety of appropriate
supplementary readers for all grades.
Some submissions raised the need for official documents to
provide guidance on the implementation of the Language in Education Policy
(LIEP), particularly with reference to the promotion of multilingualism[34].
2.1.2
Curriculum
Implementation
Key problem areas pertaining to
curriculum implementation related to the curriculum approach, constant changes
and teacher development.
2.1.2.1 The curriculum approach
It has emerged from the hearings
that the introduction of OBE was characterised by top-down approaches which
failed to relate change to what teachers knew and were trained in. This has
left teachers confused and insecure. In most instances, there has been little
fundamental change to the teachers’ approach to learning and teaching but
teachers failed to be aware of this as they have been bombarded with new
terminology and concepts for what they were doing already[35].
Another important factor which was
raised, and highlighted by the NCS Review report, was that most principals were
the last to understand what was going on and failed to facilitate the changes[36].
2.1.2.2
Constant changes
Constant policy changes, including through the issuing of
circulars, are reported to be confusing to teachers. Consideration should be
made to minimize the issuing of many policy changes simultaneously.
2.1.2.3
Teacher development
Many submissions and hearings
recognised teacher quality as the most important lever for improving student
outcomes[37].
However, there was general consensus that most educators lack the requisite skills
to perform the range of functions that the new curriculum requires of them.
These include being assessors, possessing pastoral care roles and developing
learning programmes.
In line with the findings of the Ministerial Review of the NCS, the submissions and hearings argued
that the cascaded training of subject
advisors/curriculum implementers provided by the state has not been effective.
It is argued inter alia that OBE trainers were not adequately equipped to teach
the OBE system and that training neglected practical implementation and skills[38].
There was an urgent call for the training of subject advisors/curriculum implementers to be
centralised and located in a number of suitable centres, by the most
experienced educator trainers available and for a longer period of time than is
currently the case. Most submissions and hearings suggested the need for more
subject specific training. Many also called for educators to be credited when
completing their training. There was a plea that training should be suitably
differentiated to suit teachers at different levels of understanding and with
varying degrees of experience and expertise[39].
It was also recommended that there should be a strong
component of post training classroom and cluster support and monitoring which
is currently inadequately provided for. In this respect, the establishment of
NEEDU to focus on issues of evaluation and monitoring is a necessary
development and there is an urgent need to fastrack its operations. A view was
also expressed that the department should consider providing learners with a
toll-free number to report the lack of curriculum coverage to a unit such as
NEEDU.
2.2
Other issues
This section of the report identifies other issues that featured
prominently in the submissions and hearings in relation to the delivery of
quality education. These include issues at the school level, access to
education for vulnerable children, initiatives from the private sector, teacher,
management and district/department issues.
2.2.1
Issues at the Schools level
2.2.1.1
Class size
The issue of class size was frequently raised. Many submissions
complained about the existence of large classes in many schools and called for
their reduction in order to promote the quality of educational outcomes. Most
of these submissions suggest class sizes ranging from 20 – 30 learners per
class. Some submissions and hearings called for special provision to be made
for the Foundation Phase[40]
and multilingual schools[41],
where learners need a great deal of individual attention.
Research conducted by the HSRC has found significant disparities in class
size both within and between provinces and the urban and rural divide. Recent
statistics compiled by the Department of Basic Education[42],
show that there are approximately 671 ordinary schools nationally that have
classes with more than 46 learners in class.
The Committee notes that the issue of whether to reduce class size with a
view on student outcomes is underpinned by many factors, including financial
costs which are considerable, particularly if the reduction is substantial.
Compounding the problem of class size is the observation that some principals
are overloading schools to have high enrolment to enable them to earn salaries
since learner enrolment figures have a bearing on their salary. The Committee
is of the opinion that the Department should first pay attention to ensuring
that the current national norms and standards for teacher-learner ratio (1:35
in secondary schools and 1:40 in primary schools) are enforced consistently across
provinces and schools. The Committee also welcomes the proposed revised
post provisioning model which aims to compensate for the different needs of
small schools and schools where there is multi-grade teaching. The Committee
expects a report on the pilot study to assess the impact of this model on the quality
teaching and learning in schools.
2.2.1.2
Inclusive education
There were
numerous comments in the submissions and hearings regarding inclusive
education. Many teachers feel that inclusive education is difficult to realise
considering the shortage of resources and large class sizes in many schools[43].
At the same time, teachers themselves are not given enough support to educate
learners with special needs since their training is not specialised to deal with
such learners. Further, learners who are not challenged are held back by those
learners needing more attention. There were strong calls that the district
support for inclusive education be improved to be able to address the purpose
of inclusive education. The need for schools to have adequate access to
specialist support staff such as counsellors, psychologists, speech therapists,
social workers and diagnostic psychiatrists was also raised[44],
as was the need for more qualified ELSN educators. One submission[45]
noted that there were several counsellors and psychologists in the
private/independent sphere who would be willing to give of their time to either
engage with schools directly or to train the departmental trainers. Another
submission[46],
drawing from experience in implementing school-based care and support
interventions, recommended that the Inclusive Education strategy developed by
the KwaZulu Natal Department of Education should be considered as a model for
the country for its ‘holistic’ and ‘practical’ approach.
2.2.1.3
Special schools
Several
submissions and hearings noted that inclusive education does not meet the needs
of learners with problems such as cerebral palsy and autism and that there were
insufficient special schools that cater for these learners. The need to
increase the number of schools that cater for children with special needs such
as the blind, deaf and mentally challenged was also raised. Research conducted by the Committee drawn
from the Department’s data, shows that the Western Cape and Gauteng have a
disproportionately high number of schools for special needs education compared
with other provinces. The relative lack of special schools in other provinces
means that learners with special needs who cannot be adequately catered for in
mainstream schools are either placed inappropriately in public ordinary schools
or remain out of school. According to the General Household Survey[47],
the percentage of 7-to-15 year olds with disabilities who do not attend school
is estimated at 10 per cent. The Survey further suggests that a considerable proportion
of children, aged 16 to 18, who suffer from a disability (47 per cent), is not
participating in any form of education[48]. There is clearly a need to ensure that
all learners have equal access to remedial education, regardless of their
socio-economic background.
The
Committee recommends that an approach to support learners through specialised
classes be explored whereby learners are removed from the mainstream for the
period required to attend to their challenges and then reintroduced into the
mainstream if possible. In addition, there should be a programme system of
infrastructure provision that will address the challenge of infrastructure that
accommodates all learners who are physically challenged, e.g., ramps, etc. To
this end, it is essential that the department accelerates the expansion of full
service schools from the current 20 such schools established in 20 districts to
the envisaged full service school in every one of the 92 education districts in
the country[49].
Recommendation
While the envisaged increase in the current number of full service
schools will no doubt help to alleviate the challenge posed by a relative lack
of special schools in most provinces, further research should be conducted to
explore the feasibility of increasing the number of special schools in the
provinces where there is an acute need.
2.2.1.4
School readiness
The
Committee is of the view that there should be full screening processes on
health matters like eyes, malnutrition, etc and not necessarily the IQ or
cognitive tests to assist in the school readiness. A key strategy to address
the school readiness challenge should be to intensify the rollout of Grade R to
all schools. Care should be taken to ensure that Grade R curriculum includes
perceptual development.
2.2.1.5
Libraries
Several submissions and hearings called for the provision of a functional
library for every school[50]
including the employment of school librarians. In a detailed submission,
Equal Education[51]
submitted that they had costed this provision and found that it was attainable.
Concerned about delays in finalising relevant policies, the Equal Education
submission also called for the finalisation of the draft National Policy for an Equitable Provision of an Enabling School
Physical Teaching and Learning Environment, and the National Minimum Norms and Standards for School Infrastructure[52]. The
Committee notes the department’s recognition that the availability of a school
library is critical to the effective delivery of the curriculum and welcomes
positive steps taken by the ministry to improve infrastructure including
libraries. These steps include the subsequent gazetting of the National Policy for the Equitable
Provision of an Enabling School Physical Teaching and National Environment, the
commitment that the Minimum Norms and Standards
for School Infrastructure would be in place by the end of the 2010/11
financial year and the introduction of the Accelerated
Schools’ Infrastructure Delivery Initiative to accelerate the delivery of school
improvements. The Committee also
notes that the new post-provisioning model for educators and support staff
makes provision for librarian posts and will closely monitor its implementation
and that of other initiatives.
Recommendation
The Committee requests that the department provide clear targets for all initiatives
related to the provision of libraries to facilitate its oversight.
2.2.1.6
Promotion of learners
Some
submissions attributed low pass rates in higher classes to the promotion policy
designed to keep learners with their age-cohorts. It is felt that when learners
are promoted without due regard to their level of ability, problems which arise
throughout their education are not addressed at an early stage and have a
tendency to build up and create fundamental difficulties in the final year. The
department needs to look into this matter.
On another
aspect of the promotion requirement, the Committee recommends that the 40% pass
rate requirement for Home Language and Mathematics in Grade 8 should be
extended to First Additional Language or the Language of Instruction.
2.2.1.7
Funding
A number of concerns were raised regarding funding. Firstly, it emerged
from the submissions that some schools had not been classified as no-fee
schools in terms of the Education Laws Amendment Act of 2004, whereas they felt
they fitted into this category[53].
The Committee is aware of the problem of inconsistencies in the classification
of schools and has taken it up with the department in previous reports. It has
further expressed the view that despite the school fee exemption for needy
learners, parents have other considerable responsibilities, for example, school
uniforms, shoes and stationary and that ways should be found to subsidise these
costs[54].
This is particularly necessary given that a recent study found household
poverty and the cost of education as one of the most common reasons for learners
leaving school in the 7 to 18 age group[55].
The Committee expects a progress report to address these issues.
It was a matter of concern that parents who pay fees are subsidising
those who do not at fee-paying schools[56].
It was felt that the state needs to compensate fee-charging schools for
learners who are admitted and whose parents cannot or will not pay fees.
A perception also existed among schools that the better a school
performs, the less funding it receives. As a result, it was felt that there was
a financial disincentive for schools to be financially efficient and strive to
increase the quality of their teaching[57]. Much more needs to be done to dispel this
perception, including the implementation of a much clearer positive incentive
structure.
A further concern raised was the provincial
education departments’ delay in crediting qualifying school accounts with their
norms and standards monies, thereby posing a challenge to the school’s
operations.
2.2.1.8
Early Childhood Development (ECD)
There was widespread support for the need to focus on improving the
quality of early childhood education, including the implementation of
government’s Foundation for Learning Campaign, which emphasises the promotion
of language and numeracy.
Recent research on Early Childhood Development (ECD)[59]
suggests that the lives of young children can be enhanced by increasing access
to quality training for practitioners, improving the service conditions of
practitioners and expanding the range and quality of ECD programmes supported
by government. The Committee notes that government funding has significantly
increased access to ECD training. However, over and above receiving regular
updates from the department on the expansion of access to quality ECD
opportunities and training, the Committee requires a report on the
effectiveness of this training and conditions of service of practitioners at
registered ECD sites. The Committee also urges the department to strengthen
coordination in planning and implementing ECD programmes with the Department of
Social Development.
2.2.1.9
Mentoring of learners
There was a suggestion that just as medical and other graduates perform
community work, all university students should be expected to mentor or tutor
younger learners in Grades 10 – 12[60].
It was felt that mentoring was also about safety and a sense of belonging.
2.2.1.10 Infrastructure
The issue of infrastructure is a challenge in many schools and requires
special attention. Specific areas of infrastructure noted were the state of
ablution facilities[61],
access to water, libraries, electricity and science laboratories. It was also
reported that several schools suffer from a lack of basic furniture and it
takes up to two years for more chairs to arrive[62].
In addition some submissions highlighted that subject-specific resource
shortages are also a problem, including those of physical education, music and
the arts[63].
The Committee welcomes the department’s proposed “Accelerated Schools’
Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI”) whose main goal is to eradicate mud
and unsafe structures and improve other areas of infrastructure such as
laboratories, libraries and administration blocks by 2014. The Committee feels
that the initiative forms an important foundation to ensure sound
infrastructure and will closely monitor the roll-out and allocation of
resources to this initiative. However, much more needs to be done if all the infrastructure
concerns expressed by the submissions and hearings are to be addressed.
Recommendations
Attention was drawn in the submissions to the need for local
municipalities to be engaged regarding provision of services for schools,
appropriate library facilities as well as land needed for school buildings[64].
It was also suggested that capacity should be developed at district level
to assist in identifying pressure points in school infrastructure provision.
2.2.2
Access to education for vulnerable children
2.2.2.1
Orphans and street children
It was asserted that the provision
of basic education should take into cognisance the fact that there are many abused,
abandoned and disturbed children such as orphans and street children who
required special support. In this regard, it was argued that inclusive
education when implemented effectively should assist in building up the
psychical dimensions of orphans[65].
Some submissions emphasised however that providing levels of support required
partnership with appropriate agencies and departments[66].
It was also suggested that mobile schools should be used for homeless children
and orphans where they have no direct access to a proper school[67].
A submission[68]
drawing from the experience of educating street children in the
2.2.2.2
Children living on farms
With regard to children living on
commercial farms, a household study on access to education in
2.2.2.3
Children in trouble
with the law and education in prisons
It was felt that not enough consideration is given to the rehabilitation
of children in prisons into the family or possible community structures[71]. Many of these children are often abandoned by
their families[72] and are
not allowed back to their previous school[73].
It was further reported that there is no curriculum coordination for learners
in conflict with the law who are temporarily placed in ‘schools of safety’ for
the duration of their court cases[74].
The
Committee supports the need to strengthen interventions aimed at supporting all
vulnerable children.
2.2.3
Proposed initiatives from the private sector, NGOs, individuals
and institutions
A number of submissions from the private sector, NGOs and individuals
proposed valuable and varied initiatives to improve the quality of teaching and
learning. These initiatives included materials which have been developed and
books written on aspects of education and these are marketed to the Department
and interested stakeholders. While most of the submissions generally described
the proposed initiatives and their envisaged benefit to education, some also
provided details of implementation processes and monitoring measures. The
proposed initiatives and materials covered areas such as cognitive development,
learning skills, curriculum content, career guidance and teaching and learning
methodology. They included the following:
Recommendation
The Committee proposes that the Department creates an ongoing forum for
these kinds of initiatives to be showcased and give different provincial
departments an opportunity to evaluate and exercise their options.
2.2.4
Teacher issues
2.2.4.1
Values in education
Low standard values and attitudes of teachers were also raised as a
barrier to quality education regardless of the content knowledge the teacher
might possess[85].
In FEDSAS’ view, far too many teachers lack work ethic, discipline and
dedication[86].
The Committee notes that values in education are absolutely important and
should receive sufficient attention.
Recommendation
2.2.4.2
Discipline
The issue of discipline was repeatedly brought to the attention of the
Committee. This comprises both learner and teacher discipline. Several
submissions viewed the lack of learner discipline as one of the biggest threats
to the quality of education. While the department’s initiative to develop a
manual on alternatives to corporal punishment is commendable, it is clear that
most teachers need more thorough exposure to these alternatives. Some
submissions and hearings[87]
described successful methods to discipline learners. Such methods should be
adopted by other schools.
Many submissions noted that serious learner discipline problems referred
to the provincial departments by schools are often not followed up. It was felt
that the department needed to increase their support, including through the
provision of social workers and psychologists to provide support structures for
teachers when disciplining children who have committed serious offences.
Discipline amongst teachers was identified as a considerable problem in
certain areas. The Committee felt that teacher discipline needed to be
dealt with through the Education Labour Relations Act. Further research and
support in disciplinary mechanisms in each province was needed. The Committee
agreed that a forum of Chairpersons of Committees on Education should monitor
and oversee the implementation of a uniform system of discipline with teachers
in all provinces.
2.2.4.3
Passion and commitment for the profession
Consistent with recent research[88],
a number of submissions[89]
emphasised the strength of the commitment, dedication, goal orientation and
focus of teachers as fundamental in producing good results in effective
schools. Closely related was the endorsement of the need for teachers to be in
school, in class, on time, teaching seven hours a day[90],
as prioritised by Government.
The Committee supports the position that committed teachers and their
schools should be supported and recognised.
2.2.4.4
Teacher remuneration
Several submissions from teachers and former teachers argued that
teachers are underpaid. As a result, experienced teachers are leaving the
profession. The Committee notes that the issue of teacher remuneration is not
an isolated issue but affects the provision of textbooks, teacher-learner ratio
and other essential needs in education.
2.2.4.5
Use of former teachers as volunteers
The Committee supports the recommendation from several submissions that
the department encourage volunteers from willing and available members of the
community, in particular, the cohort of former teachers of critical subjects
such as Mathematics and Science to assist schools in the teaching of these
subjects. This is essential in ensuring that education becomes a community
issue.
2.2.4.6
Teacher assistants
Some submissions[91]
raised the need for a teacher assistant in every classroom or at least for each
grade. It was felt that in this way qualified teachers could focus on ensuring
that learners are learning the required academic content and that they are not
distracted by additional workloads of administration. It was also maintained
that having an assistant in each classroom would provide an opportunity for the
qualified teacher to mentor the teacher in training who in turn could be
studying part time while assisting, thus increasing the teacher workforce every
year[92].
2.2.4.7
Teacher development
It emerged from the submissions that new subjects were introduced without
subject specialists at school level and existing educators were not adequately
trained to teach these subjects. Along with insufficient and inadequate teacher
training at school level, some submissions noted a lack of teacher training
programmes in higher education institutions for new subjects such as Consumer
Studies[93]
and sections such as statistics in mathematics and notes in accounting[94].
They argue that this lack of foresight hamper the development and expansion of
the subjects. The Committee supports the recommendation from submissions that
new subjects should not be introduced unless there is a proper induction and
training for teachers. There is also a need for newly qualified teachers to
work alongside experienced teachers for mentoring and support[95]
in respect of subject specialisations and adequate preparations for appropriate
methodologies.
Several submissions and hearings[96],
concerned with issues of quality and timing of teacher training, articulated
the need to centralise the training of teachers and subject advisors in a
number of suitable centres, by the most experienced trainers available for a
period of at least three weeks for each target group in order to suffice
sustainable capacitation. Teachers and principals complained that current
training provided by subject advisors tends to put more focus on administration
rather than providing relevant curriculum support to teachers[97].
There was a strong call for the training to emphasise content and be held
pre-term during the holidays. The need
to involve competent teachers in planning and leadership was also raised, as
was a plea for teachers to receive computer literacy.
In addition, it was felt that teachers need to be encouraged to study
further. In this regard, it was suggested that study leave and financial
support by Government should be reintroduced[98].
2.2.4.8
Colleges of education
Several submissions called for the reopening of colleges of education to
help increase the teaching work force required in the system[99]
and to provide on-going teacher development and support[100].
It was argued that the closure of colleges of education had resulted in
the departments of education losing control over this important process which
was now largely in the hands of universities[101].
It is maintained that teacher training is not the highest priority of
universities[102].
This could be the reason for the shortage of Grade R – 3 African Language
mother tongue teachers in the system[103].
The perception also exists that teachers who enter the profession with a degree
are not trained in crucial areas such as discipline, preparation and planning,
extra-mural activities and required school administration.
2.2.4.9
Teacher shortages
The teacher shortage was also raised as a problem affecting many schools,
which results in inter alia schools joining several classes together to be
taught by one teacher and teachers teaching more classes each week, thereby
severely compromising the quality of teaching and learning. There was a concern that while in theory
schools should be allocated additional teachers when their number of learners
increase and when they introduce new subjects, in practice this was not
actualised. Requests from schools that qualified for additional teachers often
went unanswered or were turned down for reasons which schools did not
understand[104].
The Committee feels that this matter should be investigated further. With
regard to teacher shortages in general, the Committee notes that Government has
prioritised the filling of all civil service vacant posts by June 2011[105],
and will closely monitor the fulfilment of this priority with regard to Basic
Education.
2.2.4.10 Teacher recruitment
Submissions
supported the need to market the teaching profession more vigorously in order to
attract the best performing young people to the profession[106].
It was also emphasised that the
placement of recipients of Funza Lushaka bursaries should receive special
attention[107]. The
School Management and Leadership submission cited
2.2.4.11 Influence of unions
Some
submissions complained about the militancy of unions and their perceived
willingness to disrupt schooling through strike action when their demands are
not met, thus affecting learners’ progress. It was also felt that their
insistence to hold meetings during teaching time disrupted learning.
The Committee notes that the Constitution (Act 108 of 1996) ((Section 23
(2) (c)) guarantees the right to strike and that trade union activities at
school are regulated through the prescripts of the Labour Relations Amendment
Act and collective agreements between the employer and teacher unions. The challenge regarding trade union activities
at school is therefore a management issue that needs closer monitoring.
2.2.5
Management issues
2.2.5.1
Management capacity at school
Submissions
raised at least four different challenges in relation to managerial capacity in
school. The first was that most current school managers/principals confuse
their roles and do not acknowledge that they are part of the entire system. The
second concern was that most principals are reluctant to upgrade, re-sharpen
and refine their skills. The third problem raised was that the recruitment
process of school principals, especially at the former “Black Township and
Homeland” schools, is put in the hands of “incompetent parents” and teachers[108]
who often make appointments on the basis of relationships they have with candidates
rather than on the “ability, integrity and work ethic”[109].
A further concern was that many good teachers are promoted out of the position
that they excel in to become principals. They are then lost to the learners who
need their expertise and input. Support was shown for promotional posts within
the system where such teachers could benefit financially and the schools could
benefit from the expertise and experience of their leadership.
Further recommendations
2.2.5.2
Parent Involvement
Many submissions decry the lack of parental involvement in most schools.
They recognise that successful schools often have an active and supportive
parent body.
2.2.5.3
School Governing Bodies
There was an appeal that School governing Bodies (SGBs) should be
developed continuously to provide the necessary support to schools. It was felt
that the “three hour training session” offered to SGB members by District
Offices are insufficient to enable them to perform their functions effectively.
The absence of adequate training results in School Governing Bodies deferring
to principals and teachers on important issues, resulting in a scenario whereby
“the school leads its governing body rather than vice versa around”[114]
2.2.6
District/Departmental support
2.2.6.1
District support
Many submissions felt that districts provided little or no support to
schools. It was maintained that subject advisors seldom visited schools to
support teachers, and the need for more regular visits was emphasised[115].
In general, it was maintained that subject advisors are inept, badly trained, ill-prepared
and more often than not impose unrealistic and worthless requirements upon
teachers[116].
The
Committee notes the concerns expressed regarding the technical capacity of the
subject advisors, and feels that their training needs to be considerably
upgraded. The Committee will monitor this closely.
There was also a view from the submissions and hearings that more circuit
offices should be set up to support the needs of schools. Noting that some
circuit managers were responsible for more than 40 schools, it was felt that this
number should be reduced to 15 – 20 schools to allow them adequate time to
visit schools and monitor them effectively.
2.2.6.2
Departmental support
The department’s strategy to devote its attention and resources to
underperforming schools often has the unintended consequence of encouraging performing
schools to compromise their standards in return for resources. The
3.
Conclusion and Recommendations
3.1 The Committee has
identified many issues in this report that the executive needs to act on. The
Committee will also ensure that these recommendations are acted on.
3.2 The Committee also notes
the many challenges confronting basic education. Considerable effort will be
required to deal with these challenges. Crucial to addressing them will be the
active participation of all key stakeholders, including parliament, principals,
teachers, unions, parents, NGOs, higher education institutions, business and other
key segments of civil society. These
public hearings demonstrated that there is enormous good will, experience,
passion and energy ready to support and make a difference. The Committee feels
that if all role players work effectively together the quality of education
will be significantly improved.
3.3
Issues for follow up
It was
agreed that the Committee should follow up on the following issues:
3.3.1
Teacher remuneration
The Committee agreed to convene a symposium on the subject with all
relevant stakeholders, including the department, unions, Treasury and the
Education Labour Relations Council in order to gain their perspectives.
3.3.2
The role of inspectors
The issue regarding the role of inspectors and the use of retired
teachers has been flagged until a briefing session by the Department.
3.3.3
Using Television to present lessons
The Committee supports the idea of recruiting quality teachers in different
subjects to present supplementary lessons on specialised television channels to
support learners particularly in areas where quality teachers are difficult to
attain. The Committee agreed to hold a briefing session with the SABC on the
issue of the timing and slotting of these programmes.
3.3.4
Early Childhood Development
The Committee requires a report on
the effectiveness of the training and conditions of service of practitioners at
registered ECD sites.
3.3.5
Funding
The Committee expects a progress report in measures undertaken to address
inconsistencies in the classification of schools and to subsidise parents in
expenses related to school uniforms, shoes and stationary.
References
Department of Basic
Education. (2009). Report of the Task
Team for the Review of the Implementation of the National Curriculum Statement.
Final Report.
Department
of Basic Education. (2010a). Statement
from the Department of Basic Education: Strengthening Curriculum
Implementation, from 2010 and Beyond. Department of Basic Education website.
Department of Basic Education.
(2010b). School Realities 2010.
Department of Basic
education, (2010c). Action Plan to 2014:
Towards the Realisation of Schooling 2025. Government Notice 752 of 2010.
Department of Education,
(2002). Revised National Curriculum
Statement Grades R-9 Policy, LIFE ORIENTATION.
Department of Education.
(2008). Strategic Plan 2008-2012.
Human Sciences Research
Council. (2008). Scaling up Early Childhood
Development services (0 – 4 years) in
South African Democratic
Teachers
Zuma, J.
(2011). State of the Nation Address of
the President of the
Statistics
Report to be considered.
ANNEXURES
Annexure 1
Procedure and timelines of the
Public Hearings
|
Date |
Process |
|
|
|
|
November
2009 |
Press
Statement issued by Committee calling for written submissions (closing date
for submissions – 28 February 2010) |
|
|
|
|
12
May 2010 |
Oral
Hearings Commence: -
Ukufunda -
-
Funda Afrika -
-
Mr B Zondi |
|
|
|
|
18
May 2010 |
Oral
Hearings continued: -
-
-
Social Surveys -
-
-
National Youth Development Agency |
|
|
|
|
19
May 2010 |
Oral
Hearings continued: -
Senior Education Specialist (M Jooste) -
SA Institute for Distance Education -
Junior Achievement -
Izingane Zethu -
Lawyers for Human Rights & Consortium for Refugees and
Migrants in SA -
Education Support Services Trust |
|
|
|
|
25
May 2010 |
Oral
Hearings continued: -
SA Media -
Pestalozz1 Trust -
Mind Lab -
Textbook Development Institute -
Mental Health and Poverty Project -
Equal Education |
|
|
|
|
27
July 2010 |
Oral
Hearings continued: -
Leaders in Learning -
GM South -
Education Specialist ( -
-
University of the |
|
|
|
|
28
July 2010 |
Oral
Hearings continued: -
Dr Yusuf Dadoo Primary School -
Federation of Governing Bodies of South African Schools
(FEDSAS) -
-
-
Maths Centre Incorporating Science |
|
|
|
|
29
July 2010 |
Oral
Hearings continued: -
-
-
Siyahamba Foundation for Academic Excellence -
Projects Abroad |
|
|
|
|
4
August 2010 |
Commencement
of Consideration of submissions received: BAS.EDU 2 – BAS.EDU 6 |
|
|
|
|
5
August 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 7 – BAS.EDU 11 |
|
|
|
|
10
August 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 12 – BAS.EDU 19 |
|
|
|
|
17
August 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 20 – BAS.EDU 30 |
|
|
|
|
24
August 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 31 – BAS.EDU 66 |
|
|
|
|
7
September 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 67 – BAS.EDU 74 |
|
|
|
|
14
September 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 75 - BAS.EDU 112 |
|
|
|
|
15
September 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 114 - BAS.EDU 128 |
|
|
|
|
16
September 2010 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 134 - BAS.EDU 150 |
|
|
|
|
8
February 2011 |
Consideration
of submissions received continued: BAS.EDU 150 – BAS.EDU 223 Secretariat was
asked to incorporate issues raised in these submissions in the draft report |
|
|
|
Annexure 2
Submissions were received from the
following organisations, stakeholders and individuals:
Mr G
Ahrendse (BAS.EDU 2), Ms A Hattingh (BAS.EDU 3), Makwassie Primary School
(BAS.EDU 4), Ms I De Beer (BAS.EDU 5), E P Nel (BAS.EDU 6), Mr L Muthimba
(BAS.EDU 7), Ms B Brooks (BAS.EDU 8), Ms J Barnard (BAS,.EDU 9), Pambili High
School (BAS.EDU 10), Central Primary School (BAS.EDU 11), Mr F McShane (BAS.EDU
12), Equal Education (BAS.EDU 13), Mr N Mostert (BAS.EDU 14), Ms M Janse Van
Vuuren (BAS.EDU 15), Prof J Higgins (BAS.EDU 16), Connecting Africa (BAS.EDU
17), Textbook Development Institute (BAS.EDU 18), Mr G Bloch (BAS.EDU 19), Ms E
Nyathela (BAS.EDU 20), Awesome SA (BAS.EDU 21), Ms M Van Vuuren (BAS.EDU 22),
DAG (BAS.EDU 23), N Du Plessis (BAS.EDU 24), Ms L Hough (BAS.EDU 25), Lee
Saunders (BAS.EDU 26), South African Christian Football Association (BAS.EDU
27), Mr C Becker (BAS.EDU 28), Mr C Hugo (BAS.EDU 29), Mr P Snyman (BAS.EDU
30), F Klerck (BAS.EDU 31), Ms D Brown (BAS.EDU 32), Concerned Mom (BAS.EDU
33), Mr P J Pelser (BAS.EDU 34), D A Liebenberg (BAS.EDU 35), Leaders In
Learning (BAS.EDU 36), Mr A Kepkey (BAS.EDU 37), Mr C Snell (BAS.EDU 38), Ms D
Glendining (BAS.EDU 39), Ms T Nell (BAS.EDU 40), Dr C Herold (BAS.EDU 41), J M
Pillai (BAS.EDU 42), Janine (BAS.EDU 43), Gert (BAS.EDU 44), Mr M Matthew
(BAS.EDU 45), Louise (BAS.EDU 46), Senzo Ngcobo (BAS.EDU 47), Mr R Matlock
(BAS.EDU 48), South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU) (BAS.EDU 49),
Pretoria West High School (BAS.EDU 50), Transition Software (BAS.EDU 51),
Walter Sisulu University (BAS.EDU 52), Mr Ronald Pillay (BAS.EDU 53), Infundo
Consulting (BAS.EDU 54), Theocentric Christian Education (BAS.EDU 55), Niko
Mgiba (BAS.EDU 56), Mr S Hajane (BAS.EDU 57), Dr M Venter (BAS.EDU 58), M T S
Krige (BAS.EDU 59), Rynfield Primary School (BAS.EDU 60), Grahamstown Amasango
Career School (BAS.EDU 61), North West University (BAS.EDU 62), Tony Khatle
(BAS.EDU 63), Wynberg Boys High School (BAS.EDU 64), Shayandima School of
Tomorrow (BAS.EDU 65), Unknown (BAS.EDU 66), Swellendam Primary School (BAS.EDU
67), Sandveld High School (BAS.EDU 68), Goudrif High School (BAS.EDU 69),
United Herzlia Schools (BAS.EDU 70), Unknown (BAS.EDU 71), Sameeha Idas
(BAS.EDU 72), Edenglen Primary (BAS.EDU 73), Panorama Secondary School (BAS.EDU
74), Dr Yusuf Dadoo Primary School (BAS.EDU 75), A P Pepler (BAS.EDU 76), Liesl
Van Der Merwe (BAS.EDU 77 + 78), Mr C Mashikinya (BAS.EDU 79), Liezel Du Toit
(BAS.EDU 80), Mr A Verrijdt (BAS.EDU 81), Bhekani Zondi (BAS.EDU 82), Ms A
Edwards (BAS.EDU 83), Parktown Boys High School (BAS.EDU 84), Bergville Primary
School (BAS.EDU 85), Monument Primary School (BAS.EDU 86), Alliance for Children’s
Entitlement to Social Security (BAS.EDU 87), North West University (2) (BAS.EDU
88), Grahamstown Literacy Project (BAS.EDU 89), Accelerated Christian Education
(BAS.EDU 90), Dr E Van Zyl (BAS.EDU 91), Joseph Temlett (BAS.EDU 92), A Pepler
(2) (BAS.EDU 93), E De Vos (BAS.EDU 94), C O Van Der Rheede (BAS.EDU 95),
Shamilla Essaram (BAS.EDU 96), D Aird (BAS.EDU 97), Knysna Primary School
(BAS.EDU 98), John Knipe (BAS.EDU 99), John Broster (BAS.EDU 100), Funda Afrika
(BAS.EDU 101), Christian Education Deputies (BAS.EDU 102), C Flynn (BAS.EDU
103), Rabboni Christian School (BAS.EDU 104), Cape Town Studies and Tours
(BAS.EDU 105), Apostolic Resource Centre (BAS.EDU 106), Leading Home Education
Academy (BAS.EDU 107), Lize (BAS.EDU 108), J Baumgardt (BAS.EDU 109), Western
Cape Primary Science Programme Trust (BAS.EDU 110), Social Surveys Africa
(BAS.EDU 111), Delyse Kay (BAS.EDU 112), Ukufunda (BAS.EDU 113), Isandlwana
Technical High School (BAS.EDU 114), Florida School For Skills (BAS.EDU 115),
Mr A Makhubedu (BAS.EDU 116), Ros Walters (BAS.EDU 117), Mental Health and
Poverty Project (BAS.EDU 118), Hendrick Hahn (BAS.EDU 119), A M Suliman
(BAS.EDU 120), Mrs Lynch (BAS.EDU 121), SA Media (BAS.EDU 122), Richard
Northmote (BAS.EDU 123), Tshepang Kopano Academy (BAS.EDU 124), Sea Point High
School (BAS.EDU 125), Stutterheim High School (BAS.EDU 126), Fish Hoek Primary
School (BAS.EDU 127), Cheryl Charles (BAS.EDU 128), Pestalozzi Trust (BAS.EDU
129), Marius Jooste (BAS.EDU 130), Annalie Du Preez (BAS.EDU 131), Marna Bruwer
(BAS.EDU 132), South African Institute for Distance Education (BAS.EDU 133),
Julie Taylor (BAS.EDU 134), Mrs M Bester (BAS.EDU 135), Governors Alliance
(BAS.EDU 136), Parktown High School for Girls (BAS.EDU 137), Junior Achievement
South Africa (BAS.EDU 138), Izingane Zethu (BAS.EDU 139), Ntando Mlilo (BAS.EDU
140), Bryandale Primary School (BAS.EDU 141), Consortium for Refugees and
Migrants in South Africa (BAS.EDU 142), Education Support Services Trust
(BAS.EDU 143), Etienne (BAS.EDU 144), Lenasia Muslim School (BAS.EDU 145), G J
Kruger (BAS.EDU 146), Federation of Governing Bodies of South African Schools
(FEDSAS) (BAS.EDU 147), Mr Roger Graham (BAS.EDU 148), Hakim (BAS.EDU 149), Mrs
P Naicker (BAS.EDU 150), Metropolitan Raucall (BAS.EDU 151), Melody Robinson
(BAS.EDU 152), MIET Africa (BAS.EDU 153), Fairmount Secondary (BAS.EDU 154), Ms
J Seaman (BAS.EDU 155), Wittedrift High School (BAS.EDU 156), Livingstone
Primary School (BAS.EDU 157), Thandulwazi Saturday School (BAS.EDU 158),
University of Pretoria (BAS.EDU 159), Ms Anne Ward (BAS.EDU 160), Maths Centre
(BAS.EDU 161), School Management and Leadership (BAS.EDU 162), Dr Michael
Jarvis (BAS.EDU 163), Faithway Christian School (BAS.EDU 164), Verbeeks
Education Analyst and School Improvement Specialist (BAS.EDU 165), The Banking
Association of South Africa (BAS.EDU 166), Business Unity South Africa (BAS.EDU
167), St Andrews School (BAS.EDU 168), Transition Software (2) (BAS.EDU 169),
Mr Louise J Roodt (BAS.EDU 170), Crossmoor Secondary School (BAS.EDU 171), Ms
Sarie Mommsen (BAS.EDU 172), Mr Wayne Scullard (BAS.EDU 173), Robert Carruthers
School (BAS.EDU 174), Project Abroad (BAS.EDU 175), Meredale Primary School
(BAS.EDU 176), Lazarus Muthimba (BAS.EDU 177), Robin Hills Primary School
(BAS.EDU 178), Centre of Multigrade Education (BAS.EDU 179), Ms Ruth Motsatsi
(BAS.EDU 180), South African Teachers Union (SAOU) (BAS.EDU 181), Ngcono Petro
Magwagwa (BAS.EDU 182), Grahamstown Literacy Project (BAS.EDU 183), Victoria
Girls High School (BAS.EDU 184), Mulbarton Primary (BAS.EDU 185), Berea Primary
School (BAS.EDU 186), Highveld Primary School (BAS.EDU 187), Bishop Bavin St
George’s Preparatory School (BAS.EDU 188), Eric Dixie (BAS.EDU 189), Mr
Benjamin Hoorn (BAS.EDU 190), Metsimatsho Senior Secondary School (BAS.EDU
191), Centre for Education Policy Development (BAS.EDU 192), Kirstenhof Primary
School (BAS.EDU 193), The Way Christian School (BAS.EDU 194), Ms Madge Du Preez
(BAS.EDU 195), National Professional Teachers’ Organisation of South Africa
(NAPTOSA) (BAS.EDU 196), Johnny (BAS.EDU 197), Mr Johan Snyman (BAS.EDU 198),
Tarana Govender (BAS.EDU 199), Kragbron Primary School (BAS.EDU 200), Rhodes
University (BAS.EDU 201), Accelerated Christian Education South Africa (BAS.EDU
202), Eric Dixie (BAS.EDU 203), Save our Schools and Community (BAS.EDU 204),
Ms Jane Kockott (BAS.EDU 205), Mr R Sempe (BAS.EDU 206), K J Hendricks (BAS.EDU
207), J M Johnstone (BAS.EDU 208), Worried Parent (BAS.EDU 209), PH Moeketsi
Agricultural High School (BAS.EDU 210), Ms Joanne Brink (BAS.EDU 211), W K M
Mlisana (BAS.EDU 212), Port Shepstone Islamic School (BAS.EDU 213), Freddy
(BAS.EDU 214), Cape St Blaize Independent School (BAS.EDU 215), D van Der Spuy
(BAS.EDU 216), Faculty of Education (UWC) (BAS.EDU 217), Independent Schools
Association of Southern Africa (BAS.EDU 218), Abu Bakr Solomons (BAS.EDU 219),
Michelle Kaplan & Marlene Zwick (BAS.EDU 220), Alliance for Children’s
Entitlement to Social Security (BAS.EDU 221), Shikinya Africa Outreach
Solutions (BAS.EDU 222), Van Kervel School (BAS.EDU 223), Nqundu Combined
School (BAS.EDU 224), Westcliffe School of Skills (BAS.EDU 225), siyaJabula
siyaKhula (BAS.EDU 226)
[1] Department of Basic Education, 2009
[2] Cape Town Studies and
[3] For example, Metropolitan Raucall
submission
[4] Karyn Coetzer submission
[5] Metropolitan Raucall submission
[6] School Management and Leadership submission
quoting a respondent t0 its questionnaire.
[7] ibid
[8] Metropolitan Raucall submission
[9] Karyn Coetzer submission; SADTU submission;
SAOU submission
[10] For example, Faithway Christian Submission; SADTU submission
[11] Department of Basic Education, 2010a
[12] ibid
[13] UkuFunda submission;
[14] A perusal of the Life Orientation Learning
Area Statement indicates that Learning Outcome 2 and its assessment standards
require learners to show understanding and appreciation of diverse cultures.
This Learning outcome also places emphasis on learners’ demonstration of an
understanding and commitment to constitutional rights and responsibilities.
[15] For example, the SADTU submission.
[16] The Banking Association South Africa; Junior
Achievement Enterprises oral hearing
[17] Jooste, M submission
[18] ibid
[19] Suid-Afrikaanse
Onderwyserunie (SAOU) submission
[20] School Management and Leadership submission
quoting a respondent t0 its questionnaire.
[21]
[22] ibid
[23] School Management and Leadership submission quoting a respondent to its questionnaire.
[24] Department of Basic Education, 2010a
[25] Visser, C. (Textbook Development Institute) submission
[26] Ibid
[27] SADTU submission
[28] Visser, C. (Textbook Development Institute) submission
[29] ibid
[30] School Management and Leadership submission
quoting a respondent t0 its questionnaire.
[31] For example, Funda Afrika (incorporating
Ukuthula Projects) submission; Westcliff School of Skills submission
[32] Westcliff School of Skills submission; Committee
findings of a recent oversight visit to Schools of Skills
[33] For example, Cape Town Studies submission;
J Knipe submission; Muthimba, L. submission; SADTU submission
[34] Suid-Afrikaanse Onderwyserunie (SAOU) submission;
NAPTOSA submission
[35] Jooste, M. submission
[36] Ibid; NAPTOSA submission
[37] For example, Business Unity South Africa (BUSA)
submission
[38] Projects Abroad Human Rights Office submission
[39] For example, Suid-Afrikaanse Onderwyserunie
(SAOU) submission; NAPTOSA submission
[40]
[41] School Management and
Leadership submission
[42] Department of Basic Education, 2010b.
[43] For example, the NAPTOSA submission; Suid-Afrikaanse
Onderwyserunie (SAOU) submission
[44] For example, Suid-Afrikaanse Onderwyserunie
(SAOU) submission
[45] Funda Afrika submission
[46] MiET Africa
submission
[47] Statistics
[48] ibid
[49] Department of
Basic Education, 2010c
[50] Equal Education submission; Dr Yusuf Dadoo
Primary School submission
[51] Equal Education submission
[52] ibid
[53] For example,
Projects Abroad Human Rights Office submission
[54] Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the PC on Basic Education, 2010
[55] Social Surveys Africa submission
[56] School Management and
Leadership submission
[57] Projects Abroad
Human Rights Office submission
[58] Funda Afrika submission
[59] HSRC, 2008
[60]
[61] Nyathela, E.
submission
[62] Projects Abroad Human Rights Office
submission
[63] ibid
[64] Naidoo, A.(
[65] Hajane, S. submission
[66] SADTU submission
[67] Cape Town Studies and
[68]
[69] ibid
[70] Social Surveys Africa submission
[71] SADTU submission
[72] Ibid
[73] Suid-Afrikaanse
Onderwyserunie (SAOU) submission
[74] Ibid
[75] Janse van Vuren, M. submission
[76] Pretorius, M. submission
[77] Becker, C. submission
[78] Steyn, H.J. (
[79] Liebenberg, D.A. submission
[80] Smith, C.
submission
[81] Maths Centre submission
[82]
[83] UkuFunda submission
[84] Uys, C. (
[85] For example, Naidoo A submission
[86] FEDSAS submission
[87] For example,
[88] For example, the
Report of the Ministerial Committee: Schools that Work
[89] For example,
[90] Business Unity
South
[91] Mommsen, S. submission; Scullard, W. submission
[92] ibid
[93] Brown, D. (Senior Education Specialist) submission
[94] Makhubedu, A.
(Educator) submission
[95] Shayandima School of Tomorrow submission
[96] Funda Afrika oral hearing
[97] For example,
[98]School Management and Leadership submission
[99] For example, Mommsen, S. submission; Pillai, J.M. submission; SADTU submission
[100] SADTU submission
[101] SAOU submission
[102] Ibid
[103] Ibid
[104] Projects Abroad Human Rights Office submission
[105] Zuma, J. 2011
[106] NAPTOSA submission; School Management and
Leadership submission
[107] NAPTOSA submission
[108] Magwagwa, N.P. submission
[109]School Management and Leadership submission
[110] Department of
Basic Education, 2010d
[111] ibid
[112] For example,
Ward, A. submission
[113] Bannatyne, L.J.
submission
[114] Projects Abroad
Human Rights Office submission
[115] For example,
[116] Bannatyne, L.J.
submission