Generic pic of blackboard and chalk Generic pic of blackboard and chalk
Western Cape Education MEC Debbie Schäfer has made some proposals to the Basic Education minister.
Cape Town - In the light of our concerns regarding the progression system, and Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga’s recent public acknowledgement that this system is problematic, I met her to discuss it. For some time now we have been concerned about the impact of the national progression policy on education.
It has become apparent that this policy, although well-intentioned, has a number of unintended consequences for our pupils and teachers, which are bad for education.
This policy provides that, even though pupils do not achieve the required outcomes, they are pushed through to the next grade in order that they are not kept in a phase for more than four years.
It is something that has some educational merit, in that we do not wish to have classes that are overinflated with overage pupils, as this can also bring its own problems.
What we have found, though, is that some of our progressed pupils are either simply not being assisted to attain the requisite standards or are not able to, and when they get older, they do not apply themselves because they know they will be progressed to the next grade whether they pass or not.
This last one is a particularly perverse incentive.
The result of applying this rigidly is that pupils are leaving school early, as they cannot cope, or are staying in school with no hope of passing matric. This also affects their self-worth.
On delving into this issue it became apparent that many of the problems are as a result of the regulations promulgated following the implementation of this policy.
The policy itself largely provides a lot more flexibility for pupils to be held back if they are not going to manage the next grade.
When the regulations were passed, this flexibility was removed, and it was provided that no pupils may be kept in a phase for longer than four years.
It is also apparent that the intention of the policy clearly contemplates additional assistance for pupils who do not meet the required outcomes.
It is not intended to simply push pupils up to another grade.
Obviously additional assistance costs money, and this is extremely difficult in constrained financial circumstances. However, we simply must do this to give our children a solid education.
I made some proposals to Motshekga, the most significant being:
* That she repeal the regulations relating to progression, and allow us to work within the more flexible policy.
* That we need more remedial teaching, especially in the foundation phase, so that by the time children reach Grade 4 they would have attained the required levels of literacy and numeracy.
* We need to carry on expanding alternative opportunities for pupils who cannot perform in a normal academic stream, such as our Schools of Skills and increase opportunities for technical schools.
I found Motshekga extremely receptive to my suggestions, many of which she had been considering.
Obviously funding is a concern.
I urge Motshekga, in an effort to save money for much needed additional and remedial assistance, not to proceed any further after this year with the ANAs for grades 1 to 9, but to stick to testing in grades 3, 6 and 9 as we have done up to now.
I do not believe that testing at a national level every year is necessary.
I also urge Motshekga to make the ANAs more credible, in which case we can review our decision to conduct systemic tests as well.
I am hopeful that these progression regulations will shortly be scrapped, and we can concentrate on improving the quality of our education rather than simply moving children through a system that is not preparing them for life.
* Statement by Western Cape Education MEC Debbie Schäfer.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.
Cape Times
