Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Yes, Mmusi, but all begins with reconfiguring the South African curriculum

19 January 2022 | Story Dr Bekithemba Dube | Photo Supplied

Opinion article by Dr Bekithemba Dube, Senior Lecturer: School of Education Studies and Programme Head: Foundation and Intermediate Phase, University of the Free State.

Mmusi Maimane’s view on the need to increase the South African pass rate from 30% to 50% has received mixed response from various stakeholders. Among them are the teachers’ organisations, including the National Professional Teachers’ Organisation of South Africa (Naptosa) and the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union (Sadtu). These two organisations stated that Maimane was using the country’s education system as a “national campaign for his political ambitions” (City Press, 10 Jan 2022). In response to the teachers’ unions, Maimane noted that “Teacher unions have always rejected the idea of continuous teacher assessments. Our argument is that we need to ask better of our teachers so that they are not passing pupils at 30%. So, of course the unions are going to try and defend their position because it will reflect badly on some of their members, which is not a reflection of all their members.” The conversations between the teachers’ organisations and Mmusi Maimane indicate ambivalence about the reciprocal relations between politics and education. The conversations also highlight how political influence can either build or destroy an education system. A basic observation of moving subject pass rate from 30% to 50% (depending on how one interprets it) generates conflict rather than a collective approach to addressing the pressing curriculum issues in South Africa. This article, informed by post-colonial theories, and more particularly the concept of the third space (first space being Maimane, second space being teachers’ unions, and third space where I believe the two should operate from to reconfigure relevant curriculum in South Africa), seeks to unpack the two conversations in relation to pass/subject rate in South Africa in the international context and to zero in on an argument for the need to configure the curriculum with best practice.

Unpacking Maimane’s comments

Unpacking Maimane’s comments, he raises five issues in his argument for moving subject pass rate from 30% to 50%, namely the country’s developmental aspiration; motivated, qualified, and ambitious teachers; global economy; and finally, better pay for teachers. Summing up his observation, he notes that “education is the way out of this economic mess. The 4IR economy requires specified hard skills. Our teachers are the frontline workers in the quest for economic prosperity. We must reward good teachers. We must remove bad teachers and attract new talent”. The premise of his thinking touches on crucial elements that are pertinent for the South African child in relation to the global competitors and economic emancipation. There is a sense from his sentiment that educating a child is not only for South Africa, but that this child should be equally competitive with his or her peers in the global market. Thus, telling the world that our subject pass rate is 30% is a mockery of our education system. It brings a false sense among learners that if one gets 30% for a subject, he or she has passed the subject, but a combination of all subjects with 30% cannot make one secure university placement. Thus, the critical question to which the Department of Basic Education should respond is what the rationale is behind a 30% subject pass? What does this 30% reflect on South African education compared to international standards? What harm is there to move from a 30% to 50% pass rate? Once these questions have been answered, perhaps new conversations can emerge, and the discussions will come from an informed position.

Interestingly, the unions’ response to Maimane’s comments is premised on an inadequate explanation of what exactly is meant by 30%. The response does not address other issues raised by Maimane, such as development of the country, motivated, qualified, and ambitious, global economy, and surprisingly, the issue of salaries. However, Maimane’s sentiments are seen as coming from someone with a dying political life and using education as political oxygen for survival. What if Maimane’s comments were from someone belonging to the ANC, and not the DA or EFF – would it have gone this far? Again, why is the response targeted at his person and political affiliation rather than contextualising his argument in light of global trends of academic excellence in the quest to improve economic zones? What is the difficulty or harm in moving from 30% to 50% subject/overall pass rate? The response to these questions will be of interest in shaping educational conversations in South Africa. While the unions are entitled to their positions as representatives of teachers, it is prudent to also see the damage that a 30% subject pass rate or overall pass rate is causing to learners, such as failure to access university and compete with their international counterparts.

30% is a reflection of a failed curriculum practice

Cognisant of the foregoing, moving into the third space as suggested above is critical. This is a place where all people involved in the issue meet at a neutral space to juxtapose the trajectories of education. To begin the conversation in the third space, an acknowledgement is necessary that education is key to any development, and a compromise on this has an everlasting impact on national building. Once this is understood, the educational stakeholders can enter into honest conversations about the relevance of 30%, as none of us as parents would be happy with a 30% subject pass rate. From my angle, the 30% is a reflection of a failed curriculum practice, not only in South Africa, but in most African countries with nationalised education systems. Narrowing this to South Africa while also applicable to other African countries, is an indication that we have detained learners for 12 years, and to please learners and parents, we comfort them with a 30% subject pass rate. Third space allows us to interrogate such a practice in order to map best practices for our children, economy, and contribution to humanity through education. To me, 30% is an indication that some learners are not supposed to be doing the curriculum that is forced on them in schools. The CAPS document as a ‘one-size-fits-all’ curriculum is no longer relevant, rather a fluid and contextualised CAPS is now required. The latter speaks of a curriculum that does not seek to channel learners through one avenue, such as passing Grade 12 and going to university. There is a need for a curriculum that does not detain learners in subjects in which they have no interest or are not capable of doing. Rather, various courses – not subjects – should be introduced alongside the main curriculum practices. Critical courses, which are in short supply in South Africa, should be taught as early as Grade 7 as a course where a learner can be awarded a diploma for a critical skill of their choice. This means bringing some TVET courses to basic education, such as building, welding, civil engineering, manufacturing, entrepreneurship, software engineering, among other courses. This would allow learners to get recognised qualifications along with their Grade 12 results, cognisant that some learners with passion and good skills in some courses mentioned above may not have access to TVET colleges and universities because of a 30% subject pass rate. The foregoing requires a revamp of the education system so that after 12 years of basic education, learners have something practical to show rather than having all learners moving in one direction and getting nothing at the end of Grade 12. I am of the view that an increase from 30% to 50% is indispensable, desirable, and doable and above all, that TVET courses should be taught from Grade 7 to 12, so that learners with an interest in practical subjects have recognised courses for their livelihood, even if they do not perform very well in Grade 12.

News Archive

Getting out of the dark

2015-04-28

Photo: Leonie Bolleurs

Since 2008, the University of the Free State has been busy with the planning and implementation of projects to reduce the impact of load shedding. To date, the cost of these projects has run to R6 million. They have been done primarily to ensure that the academic programme does not suffer damage as a result of the increasing interruptions in the power supply that are continuing this year.

The university’s greatest concern has been the provision of emergency power to the lecture halls and laboratories.

Thus far, 35 generators are servicing 55 buildings on the three campuses of the UFS. This includes 26 generators on the Bloemfontein Campus, eight on the Qwaqwa Campus in the Eastern Free State, and one generator on the South Campus in Bloemfontein. The generators are already in service, and are maintained in working order.

Since 2010, the university has also ensured that all newly-built academic buildings are equipped with emergency power supplies.

On the South Campus in Bloemfontein, the new lecture-hall building and the computer laboratory are equipped with emergency power, while the installation of emergency generators in other buildings is under way. The majority of the buildings on the Qwaqwa Campus in the Eastern Free State are equipped with emergency power supplies.

In the meantime, the UFS management has approved a further R11 million for the installation of additional generators on the three campuses. A further R1.5 million has also been approved for the purchase of two mobile generators.

To extend the work already done, the main task will be the installation of more generators on the Bloemfontein Campus to ensure that lecture halls with emergency power will be available for the centrally-arranged timetables, and to ensure that more of the critical laboratories will be provided with emergency power.

There are still some important buildings and halls on the Bloemfontein Campus that must be supplied with emergency power. However, it is a costly process and must be brought into operation gradually. The further implementation of emergency power depends on the delivery of equipment. The university is also investigating alternative solutions for power provisioning, including solar power.

Generators with spare capacity are optimally deployed to satisfy the lower needs of the campus, including the Odeion, the ANNEX at Microbiology, the Stabilis ANNEX, the Agriculture Building, the UV-Sasol library, and the Francois Retief Building.

In addition, the UFS is busy on all campuses, coupling area lighting, including

street lights and pedestrian walkways, to existing generators. Procedures for the operation of mechanical equipment, such as entrance gates, lifts, and so on, are currently being dealt with on all campuses. Continuous power sources for certain ICT equipment will be installed on all campuses to protect it against power surges.

Staff and students can also equip themselves with the necessary knowledge to manage load shedding in their specific areas of work and study. It is always helpful to know who to contact. The following list with guidelines and contact numbers has been compiled to assist you:

1. In an emergency, call Protection Services. This line will continue to operate, regardless of whether the power is on or off.
2. Avoid using lifts just before planned load shedding. Some lifts have emergency power packs which will bring the lift to the nearest floor and open the doors. If you still get stuck in a lift during a power outage, use your cellphone to call Protection Services. While you're waiting, stay calm and be patient.
3. If the access control systems in your building stop working after load shedding, contact Protection Services.
4. The students and staff members who are most at risk during load shedding are those in wheelchairs or with other mobility limitations. As far as possible, plan ahead to avoid being stuck on a floor or in a room that is difficult to access when load shedding is imminent. Please contact Protection Services if you need assistance.
5. During a fire, alarms WILL go off. Alarms are not power driven, but battery driven. For assistance, contact Protection Services.
6. The main UFS Switchboard (Bloemfontein Campus +27(0)51 401 9111 and Qwaqwa Campus +27(0)58 718 5000) will continue to operate during load shedding.

Contact details of Protection Services:

Bloemfontein Campus: +27(0)51 401 2634/2911
Qwaqwa Campus: +27(0)58 508 5460/5175
South Campus: +27(0)51 5051217

Communication and Brand Management will make information available on the UFS web, Facebook page, Twitter, Blackboard and the intranet. Get the load shedding schedule from Eskom’s webpage (http://loadshedding.eskom.co.za/). The Bloemfontein Campus falls in group 4 and the South Campus falls in group 2 in Centlec’s load shedding schedule.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept