Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
18 October 2024 | Story Dr Solomon Chibaya | Photo Supplied
Dr Solomon Chibaya
Dr Solomon Chibaya is a lecturer in the Department of Education Management, Policy, and Comparative Education at the University of the Free State (UFS).


Opinion article by Dr Solomon Chibaya, lecturer in the Department of Education Management, Policy, and Comparative Education, University of the Free State.


On Friday, 13 September 2024 President Cyril Ramaphosa signed the Basic Education Laws Amendment Bill into law but put a pause on two clauses. The two clauses he put on ice, flanked by representatives of his ANC party, were the contentious admissions and language policies. The abject absence of the other members of the ‘coalition’ or ‘GNU’ was evident during the signing and signifies a sense of unhappiness, especially from the Democratic Alliance. Now that the BELAB has been passed into law (except for the highly contested clauses), it has replaced the South African Schools Act (1996) (SASA), which was established post-apartheid to democratise the education system.

 

What problems does it set out to solve?

The BELAB, drafted as early as 2013, sought to enhance the quality of education in South Africa and had significant implications for school governance. Part of the improvement required democratic participation and the progress of mother tongue instruction in a transformative manner. This includes how the school governing bodies (SGBs), composed of parents, educators and non-educator staff members, continue their partnership with the Department of Basic Education at provincial and national levels in school governance. The SGB represents the school and the community in the quest for quality education.

Beyond the aspirations for democratic participation in schools, the proposed Basic Education Amendment Bill made provisions for arbitration and mediation to resolve the conflict between the SGBs and the Department of Basic Education. The media and literature are awash with court cases highlighting the conflict between these two partners of a tripartite partnership due to disputes that seemed only to be resolved by litigation. The disadvantages of such litigations include large sums of money and time spent in litigation and further harm to the child whose best interest both parties vow to have. The provisions for arbitration and mediation are believed to help avert litigations as a choice for conflict resolution. They align with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996.

South Africa’s quest to undo the imbalances of the past is envisioned in the new education law; during the apartheid era, the apartheid regime monopolised the governance of schools in a way that ostracised parents. What perpetuated from such a context was the disenfranchising of parents regarding school governance, and they became unenchanted with school involvement, a lethargy that is taking a long time to wear off. Though the advent of SGBs sought to increase the participation of parents through legislating their participation through roles specified in the SASA 84 (1996), echoed in the new law, the policy does not translate into practice. Some SGBs have failed to take up their critical roles in determining the school budgets, language policy, discipline and appointment of new staff, among other roles. The new law now emphasises the control of the head of the department over these issues, especially in the contested clauses.

The irony is that the power that once was given to parents to govern is now usurped. The parents in some SGBs have failed to govern, and yet others have done so successfully. The ones that have done successfully feel they are being punished for the ones that failed to do so. While the SGB’s consultation with the HOD for approval is in line with the arbitration and mediation espoused by the BELA act, a spin-off of cooperative governance related to democratic aspirations, it deviates from the autonomy of the governing body that had seemed to prevail in recent history. A challenge one can foresee in the new law is that the cooperation of parties with unequal powers and motives may throw a spanner in the works of cooperative governance.

 

Why are the two clauses so controversial?

The language policy is a contentious issue, in which most comments in different media on the BELAB seem to dwell on this issue. On one side, there are those who feel some SGBs have the power to keep some learners out of their schools using the language policy, and on another side are SGBs who feel the quality of education in their schools may be compromised by the quest for equality in language integration. The BELAB encourages the language policy to be broader and inclusive. In schools with small numbers, their SGBs seek to protect that space as it is and pride themselves on the prevalence of such conditions.

According to the BELAB, compulsory school attendance will start at Grade R. This is a welcome change in some quarters as it allows early access to education for children. However, to the SGBs, this may present many changes. In schools that are already overcrowded, under-resourced and have a shortage of teachers, this change in the admission policy would add more pressure to these schools. Even schools that are well-endowed with resources must make changes to accommodate changes to the admission policy, which comes with governing challenges such as resource management and distribution. However, according to the National Development Plan (NDP), basic education is vital in building the foundation for lifelong learning and striking a balance may be what needs to be achieved.

 

The state of basic education 30 years into democracy

The state of basic education in South Africa over the past 30 years has been marked by significant progress, challenges, and ongoing reforms. It was only natural that legislation was to be part of the ongoing reform. Since the end of apartheid in 1994, the South African government has made efforts to redress the inequalities of the past and improve access to quality education. However, the education system continues to face several persistent issues.

The outcry from communities highlights the prevalence of the apartheid legacy, which is expressed through inequality. There is still a world of difference in availability of resources between schools serving black communities (despite an increase in funding) and the former Model C schools. One would have wanted to see amendments to the legislation that provide a legal framework that eases some of these issues. Of course, it is not about legislating the challenges away but about designing a legal framework that addresses the inequalities regarding resources and access to them in schools.

Another challenge in South African Basic Education is that of performance gaps. Internationally, South Africa consistently performs poorly in assessments such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). This has been an embarrassment to the nation over the past 30 years as the returns do not match the investment in education. Countries that spend less than South Africa have learners doing better in foundational literacy and numeracy skills. The matric pass rate has gradually increased over the last 30 years; however, the concern is that they pass with low marks, limiting their opportunities for higher education and employment. A possible solution through the BELAB is to catch the children early, compulsory education from Grade R. This is now law.

Social issues, especially those that creep in from the communities around schools, affect the operations of schools. The school culture is influenced by many things, including the community in which it is located. Some of the challenges that schools have faced include violence, crime, and bullying, which have become a concern in certain regions, affecting the learning environment. The definition and procedures in relation to misconduct have been reviewed, but they mainly emphasise the rights of children. Unions will most probably be up in arms to protect their members, and parents will also be suing for the protection of their children.

News Archive

Conference: Expanded ARV treatment
2005-03-02

VENUE: University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa
DATE: 30 March 2005 - 1 April 2005

  • ARV Programme as on 24Feb Download Word document
     
  • Programme Special events Download Word document


    Official web site www.fshealth.gov.za/subsites/arvc

     


    Rationale for the Conference
    At the time of the planned Conference, much ground would have been covered, both in the Free State and in South Africa, in respect of the expanded public sector ARV treatment programme in respect of research, experiences in practice, training of staff, treatment of patients, lessons learned, successes and failures, etc. The time would then be quite opportune to share these in a systematic manner with other provinces and countries, as well as with the large variety of stakeholders and role players in the ARV and related domains, be they academics and researchers, policy makers and service/facility managers, the variety of caregivers, and the community organisations and affected patients.

The Conference and current research
The proposed Conference is, firstly, directly linked to the current research on the public sector roll-out of ARV treatment in the Free State conducted by several research institutions (e.g. CIET, CHSR&D, UCT Lung Institute). Secondly, the Conference could and would serve as a forum for other research groups in the country and further a field to report and share knowledge and experiences on ARV treatment and related initiatives. Lastly, the Conference will stage a golden opportunity for researchers and scientists, on the one hand, and policy makers, managers, and caregivers (as knowledge users), on the other hand, to engage in cross-disciplinary discourse on this mutual and topical theme.

Theme of Conference
Expanded ARV treatment in the Free State: sharing experiences

Focus
The focus is primarily on public sector ARV treatment in the Free State, but also initiatives/activities/perspectives of relevance to the Free State elsewhere in the country at large and further a field, as well as relevant ARV initiatives in the public, private, NGO and FBO sectors. Bear in mind, however, that ARV treatment is but part of a much more comprehensive approach to HIV and AIDS. The Conference will, therefore, not narrowly focus on the ARV treatment programme only. The broader context, other relevant dimensions, and a comprehensive approach to the challenges of HIV, AIDS and TB are of equal importance.

The purpose of the Conference
Enhance meaningful exchange, mutual understanding and collaboration among researchers, scientists, policy makers, managers and practitioners in the field of ARV treatment and related fields.

Share experiences in the various spheres of ARV treatment and related spheres (policy, management, practice, research, training, public-private-civil society sectors).

Record, reflect and report on the establishment of the ARV treatment programme in the Free State, and in within the context of the comprehensive HIV/AIDS programme.

Disseminate important research results on ARV treatment and related themes to health policy makers, managers, practitioners, communities and to the research community.

Stimulate discourse among various disciplines and various stakeholders/role players involved in ARV treatment and related programmes.

Sensitise and acquaint researchers to the requirements of policy makers, managers and practitioners in respect of ARV treatment and related fields.

Facilitate the implementation of research results in ARV treatment policy, programmes and practice.

Dissemination of Conference-related information
Information generated during the Conference could feed into policy, management and practice of ARV treatment, the training accompanying such programme, and the existing body of knowledge. After the Conference the information will be disseminated via the Internet and by scientific and popular publications.

Date and duration
Set for 30 & 31 March & 1 April 2005; to commence at 09:00 on the first day (30 March) and to end at 16:30 (1 April) the third day.

Format and scope of Conference
Alternating plenary, parallel sessions and debates focused on topical issues and interest groups. The Conference will strive to be maximally interactive and participative.

Themes and topics to cover:

  • Policy, management and health services/practice (various levels and contexts – clinical treatment, information, IT systems, pharmacy, laboratories, nutrition)
     
  • Research covering all relevant disciplines and diverse dimensions of ARV treatment and related themes
  • Training and evaluation of training
  • Patients, communities and civil society organisations
  • Public, private, NGO, FBO initiatives and partnerships

Emphasis will be on the Free State, however, with of significant involvement from other provinces, SADC countries, and countries further a field. The thrust will be to export lessons and experiences from the Free State, but also to import lessons and experiences from other provinces, countries and sectors.

Presenters
Key presenters from the Free State, other provinces, South Africa, from the private, FBO and NGO sectors, and from several other countries

Delegates
About half of the delegates will be Free State stakeholders and role players (all levels and all contexts). The other half will be role players and stakeholders in the ARV and related fields from other provinces, the national level, and other countries, as well as from the private, public and non-governmental sectors.

Focused workshops
Provision will be made for half-a-day or one-day workshop initiatives on the third day (1 April 2005).

Enquiries
For more information please contact:

Prof Dingie van Rensburg
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development
University of the Free State
PO Box 339
Bloenfontein
SOUTH AFRICA
9300

Contact:
Carin van Vuuren
Conference Organiser
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development
University of the Free State
P.O.Box 339
Bloemfontein
South Africa
9300
Tel +27 (0) 51 401 2181
Fax +27 (0) 51 4480370
Cell 0832932890
e-mail: arvconference.hum@mail.uovs.ac.za

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