The uncomfortable question of South Africa’s school pass rate sparks a deeper call to overhaul an overcrowded, one-size-fits-all system and stream learners earlier into practical, employment-focused pathways, writes Mark Barnes.
- For more financial news, go to the News24 Business front page.
Recently, South Africa’s Cabinet met to consider the 30% pass mark, and agreed not to change it (in essence – it’s much more complex than that).
I’ve been pondering this question for some time and posted the following on X: “If you get 30% right and 70% wrong, how can that be a pass?”
My post generated more than 140 000 impressions and quite an overwhelming number of direct message responses – enough to persuade me to put pen to paper, partly to explore the issues raised, but also to introduce perhaps a different way to think about the problem … and some early thoughts on a solution.
The responses were not all flattering or even agreeable, to say the least. Many points were valid, some insightful, and most were certainly worth debating.
- Our schools are already crowded, and we have to keep moving learners through the school system to avoid making it even worse. We can’t have 21-year-olds still at school.
- If it were possible to teach everyone in their mother tongue, the results would certainly improve – but we now have 12 official languages so it is impractical. (But perhaps it would be worth the effort and expense to expand beyond English and Afrikaans to at least include isiZulu and isiXhosa. This would bring the coverage up to about 60% of the population, instead of the only 20% covered by English and Afrikaans. Of course, we also have to consider which languages are most useful, after education, in the workplace – but that’s also changing, as it should.
- The 30% pass rate (and the differential/qualified matric certificates it produces) isn’t something new. Similar structures were in place before democracy, but there were more jobs available to match the different levels of matric passes, many of which were provided by the government in cases when entry into tertiary education wasn’t possible.
- The debate should not centre only on one pass mark. A points system is applied to get into tertiary education institutions that requires at least 40% in a home language and 50% in four other subjects – permitting only two subjects to be recognised as passes at the 30% level.
It’s complex and certainly not optimal, however you dissect it, but many of the arguments are well-made in the interest of a more effective system that tailors circumstances to opportunities, or the lack thereof.
We should, however, never see the lowering of standards as a solution to education, or anything else, for that matter. It occurs to me, by simple observation rather than in-depth analysis, that there are significantly more distinctions awarded in matric nowadays than there were back in 1973, when I matriculated.
In those days, one distinction, particularly in one of the sciences or mathematics (although I’d say it's harder to get a distinction in, say, a language), was an achievement enough to have you practically paraded down the main street of a platteland dorpie, appointed mayor, or certainly to be considered weird by the majority of your classmates.
Today, if you don’t get 6+ distinctions (in some circles), you may as well not pitch up and certainly shouldn’t bother to apply to get into university to study a degree that will get you a job, and not just a piece of paper.
The number of PhDs awarded is also increasing, as is the breadth of acceptable thesis topics (I’m being kind). Are we at risk of the title “Dr” becoming more important than the content of the doctorate?
However, you choose to analyse it, education is due for a rethink. The fundamental purposes of education remain to impart knowledge, understanding and skills. That in itself will forever be valuable to society, even before we get into the debates about economic sustainability and national competitiveness required to compete in a global marketplace.
Strategic design
Learners must be prepared for the workplace – for their own sakes and for the broader prosperity of the country.
In that sense, strategic thinking for education design should be driven by demand, not supply. There is little point if the products of our education system, at whatever level, are not able to proceed into gainful employment.
Fixed direct investment opportunities will be retarded to the extent that sufficient skills are not being “grown” to execute the projects.
These are long-term aspirations, and a long-term, funded plan is required. We have to recognise (and celebrate) the different talents, aptitudes, and capabilities of our children at the earliest opportunity to fast-track them into careers in fields in which they have demonstrated natural ability and enthusiasm, rather than force them through the one-size-fits-all secondary and tertiary education systems currently on offer.
Screening and streaming may have to start even earlier, at, say, 8 to 10 years old, when options for deviating from the “standard” curriculum are already introduced.
Mistakes will be made, and it would be wrong to force children prematurely into what could amount to just another system of tunnels if everything is not carefully thought through and properly managed.
However, once satisfactory levels of numeracy, literacy and comprehension have been demonstrated, choices must be available.
Institutions of tertiary learning must extend way beyond the academic focus of universities and into more practical, employable qualification outcomes.
We need more TVET colleges and other tertiary institutions as specific and bespoke as the learners coming out of a new, streamed education process will deliver.
We need more artisans, nurses, technicians, builders, electricians, chefs, game wardens, farming experts … we need more “capable doers”. Doers get jobs.
Most of all, we need more and better-qualified teachers, and they need to engage with the experience in commerce that will employ their students one day.
We need to pay higher salaries to teachers and provide incentives based on evidence of the competent products of their various systems.
All of this will take time to change and a lot of money to implement. I can’t think of a more pressing or virtuous investment.
Mark Barnes has over 40 years of experience in leadership positions in finance and markets in the private sector, and more recently as CEO of the SA Post Office.
News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.
3989
