After Christmas each year, the main media hype – unless anything untoward occurs here or on the   international scene – is all about the Matric results. There are a number of reasons for this, not least of which is the assumption that a well-educated workforce is absolutely necessary for economic development. And if the Matric results are the critical indicator of the education system, then good or improved matric results portend a bright economic future for the country, and vice versa.

Well, not so, according to Ha-Joon Chang, author of the provocative little publication 23 things they don’t tell you about capitalism (Penguin, 2011). Born in South Korea, Chang is a specialist in development economics and Reader in Political Economy at Cambridge University. A regular contributor to the Guardian since 2008, he has been vocal about the failures of our economic system.

The connection, it is argued, between education and economic success is that better educated people are more productive – as can be seen by the fact that they earn higher salaries. It seems logical then to assume that ‘an economy with more educated people will be more productive’, and that countries where there are fewer highly educated people will be less productive. Those who subscribe to this formula refer to the fact that the wealthy OECD countries have a longer school duration average than the poorer Sub-Saharan African countries, and that the countries which have achieved ‘miracle’ economic turnarounds (e.g. Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore) have extremely high literacy and enrolment rates and are ranked highest in the internationally standardized tests such as the TIMMS and PISA.

This viewpoint is frequently articulated in South Africa: We are constantly reminded of our low ranking in literacy and numeracy tests by comparison with the rest of the world and even with our African counterparts, and the dire impact this has on our economy.

But Chang argues that the link between education and economic success is tenuous and simplistic. In so doing, he debunks Tony Blair’s famous summary of his government’s top three priorities during his party’s 1997 election campaign, namely ‘Education education, education’.

‘There is,’ Chang claims, ‘remarkably little evidence showing that more education leads to greater national prosperity.’ He goes on to present very cogent and convincing facts and figures which show that there are countries with a lower level of education which perform better economically than those with a higher level, and vice versa

This is evident both at the the level of the so-called ‘miracle economies’ and the lowest-performing economies, as well as those in between these extremes. An example of the first category cited is that of Argentina and South Korea. In1960, Korea’s literacy rate was 71%, compared to Argentina’s 91%. Yet Korea’s economic growth has been much higher: in 1960, its per capita income was only just more than one-fifth of Argentina’s; today it is three times higher.

In the second category, Chang shows that, despite increases in the literacy rate between 1960 and 2004 in Sub-Saharan Africa, the per capita income declined in this region during that period, which shows, he says, that ‘investing more in education is no guarantee of better economic performance’.

Similarly, as regards those that fall between the two extreme cases, he points out that the data reveals that there is ‘very little evidence to support the view that increased education leads to higher economic growth’.

What are the reasons for this lack of correlation? Firstly, many of the subjects which are studied at school have no direct link to worker productivity – history, art or literature, for example.  Secondly, even those that do impact more on productivity – such as Maths or Science – contain much that is not relevant in the workplace. This explains why Norway, one of the richest countries in the world. can lag behind poorer countries such as Slovenia in international standardized Maths tests – what was tested there was not relevant to the workplace.

Chang points out that the same applies to higher education. Switzerland, for example, though one of the richest and most industrialised nations, has the lowest by far university enrolment rate amongst rich countries (half the OECD rate).

Education obviously does play some role in promoting economic development; but its role is far less pivotal than is normally assumed. Chang suggests instead that there are various political and economic strategies that governments do or do not adopt which serve to distinguish more clearly between rich countries from poorer ones, particularly those that create opportunities for work and provide a support system which enables people to cope when things go wrong. This entails, he says, a mixture of free-market economics and a welfare state, and he cites the Scandanavian countries as prime examples of this. It is this, he says, rather than their excellent education systems, which have enabled them to become among the richest countries in the world.

Does this mean, then, that expenditure on education is a waste of money? Were Pink Floyd right about the children needing no education? Obviously not. In order for a country to progress economically, its workforce needs to be literate and to possess certain kinds of knowledge and skills. And even subjects such as history and literature which may be regarded as a waste of time from a strictly economic point of view, are important as they ‘enrich people’s lives and makes them good citizens’. Says Chang: ‘Even though this justification for educational spending is increasingly under attack in an age in which everything is supposed to justify its existence in terms of its contribution to productivity growth, it remains a very important – in my view, the most important – reason to invest in education.’

So the hype about the matric exam results is justified; but it should be for the right reason, and not be regarded as the key or only indicator of the prospects for economic growth in the country.

Dr Malcolm Venter is a retired Cape Town high school headmaster, part-time university lecturer, editor and provincial                 executive officer of an educational public benefit organisation.

Written by B.A. Birch

Educators across the US are on red alert as students begin to gain access to sophisticated gadgets that help them cheat. Going as far as to digitally insert answers into soft drink labels, kids are finding new ways to deceive educators and exam boards, writes Greg Toppo at USA Today.

“There’s an epidemic of cheating,” says Robert Bramucci, vice chancellor for technology and learning services at South Orange Community College District. “We’re not catching them. We’re not even sure it’s going on.”

There are companies thriving on providing these kits for students. One, called Spycheatstuff.com, allows students to mail-order a kit that turns a cellphone or iPod into a hands-free personal cheating device featuring tiny wireless earbuds that allow a test-taker to discreetly “phone a friend” during a test and get answers remotely without putting down the pencil, writes Toppo.

A new study by Common Sense Media has found that more than 35% of teens ages 13 to 17 with cellphones have used the devices to cheat.

52% of those polled admitted to some form of cheating involving the Internet.

Earlier this year, Omar Shahid Khan, 21, an Orange County student, pleaded guilty to stealing Advanced Placement tests and altering college transcripts. Khan is said to have hacked into the school’s grading system by installing spyware on school computers.

“This is about the pressures that kids are feeling in school,” says Jill Madenberg, a Great Neck, N.Y., college consultant. “The pressure to do well, the pressure to get into a good college… It’s literally all over the country — it’s an epidemic of sorts.”

Experts have been keen to point out that these technological advances aren’t increasing the number of cheating cases, they’re just making it harder to detect.

“The naïve folk belief is that cheating never used to be a problem,” Bramucci says. “It’s always been a problem.”

As a former high school guidance counselor, Madenberg believes that the recent Long Island SAT scandal will act as a positive catalyst for students to discuss the pressures they feel.

“There’s no question that people are beginning to look at that,” she says.

This article was originally published on Education News.

Holy Cross Primary in Cape Town is a school without a playground.

The school has 600 learners and a staff of 16, as well as about 6,000 square-metres of unusable land in front of the school. The biggest problem is that the land is littered with rubble, glass and rubbish. There remains little other space for the children to use, and as a result, they spend their lunch breaks playing in the road.

Quirk, a digital marketing and branding agency, is located metres away from Holy Cross and decided to bring the learners a little 2012 cheer on their return to school this year.

“Think back to your school years, and imagine that at every lunch break you would have to file out into the street for a bit of R&R. Not an ideal thought, is it?” wrote Marc Coppin of Quirk on the company’s blog.

As it turns out, Quirk wasn’t the first to notice this situation, and there have been many attempts at cleaning the field. Unfortunately, that particular piece of land is tied up in political red tape, with the presence of land claim rights halting any attempts at improvement.

‘Well, bugger that’, said Quirk Cape Town, collectively, ‘we’ll do something about it, anyway.’

And so they did. More than 100 employees of Quirk made their way down to the field in December 2011, armed with black bags, steel rakes and garden gloves. During the course of the day they managed to clear almost four tons of rubble and have planted and fertilised grass across the field in an attempt to restore it to a condition that is suitable for children.

If more local businesses volunteered just a tiny amount of time and resources to a nearby school, we’d see a very different mindset emerge on businesses supporting education in South Africa. We can’t keep ignoring the poor state of our schools for much longer. My hope is that South African business will support education in a bigger and more hands-on way, much like the caring people at Quirk. You never know – in a few years you might just be employing a child from one of those schools … so make their education count.

Thank you Quirk!

Teachers, principals, and academics from the basic education sector responded enthusiastically to a call to participate in a national discussion on basic education that will be held in Durban from 2 – 4 April 2012. Ms Mary Metcalfe, chairperson of this event, says she is very excited and encouraged by this response, which reflects the commitment from teaches and academics towards improving basic education in the country.

“We received over 350 abstracts of presentations from teachers, principals, academics, government, non-government organisations, and the corporate sector. It is very encouraging to see the creative and innovative ideas coming from teachers and principals at the coal-face of basic education. These abstracts will be peer-reviewed by experts from the education sector, and we hope to include at least 200 of these presentations in the programme for the SA Basic Education Conference in Durban from 2 – 4 April 2012.” Ms Metcalfe said.

The conference programme will be structured to include both an academic and a practice stream. The purpose of this conference is to provide a platform where academics and practitioners can share their experiences, stimulate debate, collaborate on solutions, and identify best practices that will contribute to quality basic education.

Ms Metcalfe says they are fully aware of the realities and constraints that exist throughout the education sector. “There are many pockets of excellence where teachers, principals, and school communities embraced these challenges and achieved success against all odds. We want to share in these examples and stimulate others to adopt an innovative and creative approach to provide quality education to all.”

The 3-day conference will include daily plenary sessions where invited experts will address delegates. The rest of the programme comprises three sub themes, namely:

• Teaching, learning, and assessment
• Management and leadership in schools and district
• Systemic approaches to policy and planning

“A sound education system depends on much more than teachers and facilities. The involvement of entire school communities comprising parents, businesses, and non-government organisations is the glue that keeps various role-players together. We are looking forward to welcome representatives of these sectors at our conference,” Ms Metcalfe said.

It is the first time that a conference of this scope and nature is being held in South Africa. The Foundation for Professional Development is the organiser of this event and the intention is to hold a SA Basic Education Conference every second year.

Visit www.education-conference.co.za for more information about the SA Basic Education Conference.

Statement by Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga following the Council Of Education Ministers’ Meeting (CEM), 18 November 2011, Pretoria

Appointment of Principals and the Role of School Governing Bodies (SGBs)

The appointment procedure for school-based educators is the same regardless of the post level at which the educator is appointed. Any appointment to an educator post at the public school may only be made on the recommendation of the SGB. This poses some challenges when dealing with the appointment of principals and had often given rise to protracted legal battles between SGBs and provincial heads of education departments. Council is currently considering the following:

• Whether the current education legislation should be amended to enable heads of education departments to appoint school principals in certain categories of schools and for SGBs to be allowed to appoint principals after approval by the head of education against a set of criteria qualifying them to do so; and
• Whether prospective principals should undergo competency tests prior to appointment.

All principals will be expected to enter into performance agreements with their provincial heads of department from 2012. This is to strengthen accountability of principals in the system and to ensure that suitable candidates with the appropriate competencies and skill sets are appointed to lead our schools.

The following is the response of the National Professional Professional Teachers’ Organisation of South Africa:

MEDIA STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE PRESIDENT OF NAPTOSA, MR ESRAH RAMASEHLA, IN PRETORIA ON TUESDAY 21 NOVEMBER 2011

APPOINTMENT OF SCHOOL PRINCIPALS

Mr. Esrah Ramasehla, president of NAPTOSA (National Professional Teachers’ Organisation of South Africa) said in Pretoria today that Minister Motshekga is absolutely correct in stating that good leadership in the person of the principal is essential for schools to function as they should.  Several comprehensive studies have shown this and the evidence is irrefutable.  The question, said Mr. Ramasehla is not whether or not a school needs a good principal…it is about how one goes about ensuring that good principals are appointed and this is where NAPTOSA’s position may be different from the proposals suggested by the Minister.

The issues that NAPTOSA wishes to raise relate to the following:

• At least one province (Gauteng) is already using competency tests and it would be very useful to do tracer studies to see whether the writing of competency tests has, indeed, had an impact on the quality of leadership in schools and whether such schools are functioning more effectively.

NAPTOSA is concerned that the writing of competency tests are perceived to make a difference in and of themselves.  Too often the mindset of provincial and district officials is that, somehow, the writing of the tests themselves make a difference Obviously this is not the case, said Mr. Ramasehla.

Much depends on what is being measured in such tests…and who decides what it is that should be measured.  This raises questions about what kind of competencies would need to be tested to provide evidence of the knowledge and skills that would be required in order for a principal to be effective.  Such tests cannot de developed in a vacuum and hence NAPTOSA’s questions about who would develop the tests.  Would some research not be a prerequisite, if the decision is to follow this route?

Also, said Mr. Ramasehla how would the competency tests reveal information that is different from the kinds of questions that could be asked in an interview?

• Capacity of SGB’s to make appointments

Clearly, some SGBs are more experienced, are better informed and have the capacity to make sensible recommendations regarding the appointment of a principal, said Mr. Ramasehla.  For other SGBs, it would be difficult.

Any decisions about which SGBs are competent, and which are not, would be extremely complex.  These are not decisions that can be based on the level of disadvantage alone (poverty levels, quintiles or the rural/urban divide) as there are many very disadvantaged schools that are extremely well run because the SGBs are involved in the school and have made good decisions.  Equally, said Mr. Ramasehla, there are many schools in Quintiles 4 and 5 that are not well run.

NAPTOSA is concerned about the basis or criteria on which decisions will be made and possible (incorrect) assumptions about which SGBs are competent to recommend the appointment of a principal.  NAPTOSA anticipates that the categorising of SGBs in this respect may result in unnecessary delays and even legal challenges from the affected schools, said Mr. Ramasehla.

• Competence of departmental officials

Whilst SGBs make recommendations, it is the provincial departments that have always reserved the right to change the recommendations submitted by the SGBs.  Clearly and in spite of these powers, not all the decisions by both the SGBs and the provincial departments have resulted in the appointments of competent principals.  If all the decisions had been good decisions, the education system would not be in the predicament it finds itself with regard to the quality of leadership schools, said Mr. Ramasehla.

Before making decisions about who (the SGB or departments?) are more competent toappoint principals it would be valuable to gather relevant data about the correlationbetween who made the final decision about the appointment of a principal and the effectiveness of that principal.

The analysis of such data should be used to inform any decisions about who is best

placed to make the appointments, said Mr. Ramasehla.

• Undue influence

Union affiliations has bedevilled the appointment of principals for many years now, said Mr. Ramasehla.  The number of disputes that are declared by individuals with strong union affiliations are evidence of this.  Can it be assumed that, in these cases, an SGB has made a recommendation with which a union is not happy and that departments have, in the past, been forced to change this decision as a result of pressure from a union?

The question that arises is whether it is SGBs or the departments that are subjected to pressure from unions?…and whether the departmental officials can be regarded as being more independent and objective than the SGBs.  There are no guarantees that departmental appointments would be any better than those recommended by SGBs.

• Criteria for the appointment of principals

NAPTOSA questions both the relevance and effectiveness of the current criteria for the appointment of principals as well as the effectiveness and consistency with which they are applied.  This aspect of the process by which principals are appointed perhaps needs to be subjected to a thorough investigation and review, said Mr. Ramasehla.

NAPTOSA is not convinced that the drastic measures that are being suggested would, of themselves, bring about the desired outcome.  There are many variables, said Mr. Ramasehla, and any changes to current practices must be informed by consideration of the impact of a range of variables.  The criteria, and the consistency which they are applied must also be considered, said Mr. Ramasehla.

NAPTOSA is committed to ensuring that the best persons are appointed to lead and manage schools, said Mr. Ramasehla.  Finding ways of ensuring that this happens is critical and in this respect NAPTOSA supports the emphasis that Minister Motshekga is currently placing on this issue. It is, however, important not to make assumptions about what needs to be done and how it needs to be done, said Mr. Ramasehla.  Importantly, the provincial departments and officials also need to be held accountable for schools that are either dysfunctional or that are performing below reasonable expectations…and not only the principals.  District and head office officials also have performance contracts and it is not clear whether they have contributed in any significant way to improving education because of the performance contracts. In spite of these agreements, they are not being held accountable.

It has been noted that there are some provincial departments of education which are going beyond their brief and authority in adding to the CAPS and in making things mandatory which are not.  This is contrary to the spirit of the CAPS and the instruction of the Minister of Basic Education to allow for flexibility.

One of the reasons for drafting a new curriculum was that provinces had added ‘layers’ over the years, making additional demands, and insisting on certain procedures and practices which were optional.  Two examples in particular have come to light:

• Insisting that schools follow the sequencing set out in the weekly planners.  The CAPS clearly states that this is only a suggestion.  Where schools are floundering, it may be advisable for them to use this as their teaching programme; but to demand that all schools do so is to insult the professional integrity of the teacher.
• Insisting that schools use standardised tests rather than their own.  These are designed to help struggling schools and teachers, not those who can cope on their own.

So teachers in those provinces must not allow the officials to put a cap on the CAPS!

In recent times, there have been calls to halt the publication of Matric results in the press.  It is argued that the results are private, not public, information; and that candidates who learn that they have failed by this means (rather than from their schools, where there are people on hand to counsel) often react very badly, in some cases by committing suicide.

This viewpoint is not entirely new, except that in the past the issue at stake was whether the results should be published with indications of the classes of passes. At the time, I was one of those who opposed the inclusion of this information.

My reasons were – and still remain – as follows:

Firstly, it leads to competition between schools. While competition can be healthy, it often results in bad practices at schools. For example:

• Spoonfeeding – which means that learners are not taught to think, something which hampers them in life generally and at tertiary level. Furthermore, universities keep records of the performance of students and this affects their selection of candidates.
• Narrowing subject choices of top candidates – for example, top candidates are discouraged (even barred) from taking History, as they are less likely to obtain an A here than in certain other subjects.
• Discouraging top candidates from participating in extra-murals and in Olympiads.
• Selecting enrolments on the basis of academic performance (which is not allowed).
• Inflating failure rates in Grades 10 and 11 – in recent years, more in Grade 10 as the failure rate there is not scrutinised as closely as in Grade 11.
• Placing huge pressure on potential top candidates.

In general, this means placing the reputation of the school above the interests of the matrics.

Secondly, the public makes uninformed comparisons between schools:

• They count up the number of top candidates without taking into account the context of the school or the total number of candidates.
• It leads to ill-feeling (recently voiced by Brian Isaacs) about the prominence which ‘good’ schools receive, emphasising the racial divide (despite some well-performing schools amongst the disadvantaged schools).

The practices do not necessarily affect all schools; but they do affect many, and the temptation is always there to follow them.

My own opinion is that they should not be published; but if they are, they should be merely a list of those who have passed.

 These are just as few of the queries we have recently answered for schools:

• What if a divorced father will not sign the application for exemption from school fees?
• How do we handle conflict between the SGB and the principal?
• How do we deal with the situation where an SGB-employed teacher is appointed to a WCED post at our school and now earns less because his/her years in the employ of the SGB are not recognised?
• How do we go about trying to ‘transfer’ an SGB-employed teacher into a newly granted WCED post, especially considering that preference has to be given to bursary-holders and newcomers to the profession?
• What do we do if the department forces us to accept a learner who we have rejected for enrolment?
• Can you please comment on our draft employment contract?
• Can you please help us draw up a code of conduct that ensures that we are in a good position if we are challenged on any issue??

The current subscription rate varies from province to province.

CONTACT DETAILS (FOR PROVINCIAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS):

Eastern Cape:                                   Ph/Fax: 083 627 4666    Email: rayrig@xsinet.co.za

Gauteng:                                            Ph: 011 678 0035 / 082 330 6565    Email: gbf@uiplay.com

KZN:                                                    Tel: 084 403 7886      Email: bennison@telkomsa.net

Western & Northern Cape:         Tel: 083 375 1066    Fax: 086 689 1393     Email: malcolmventer@gbf.org.za

Hats off to Pravin Gordhan for his medium-term budget. In particular, I was impressed with his statement that “Further steps will be taken to reduce administrative costs and unnecessary duplication of capacity”.

I wish to suggest that this can be achieved in a way that I am sure is not currently envisaged by the Minister but would go a long way to doing so. And here I am referring the duplication between politicians and public servants. This is obviously a necessary duplication, but not to the extent that we have at present. The problem is that there is not a clear distinction in the roles of the two parties. Surely the politician is there to see that the will of the people is carried out, and the public servant is there to carry out that will. But this is not what happens in practice, at both national and provincial level.

If I may present an example from the field with which I am most familiar, namely education. At national level, we have a handsomely-paid Director-General (along with a host of other officials) for Basic Education and one for a Higher Education.  If they were really competent and doing their work, we would not need a Minister to do their work for them. As it is, Blade Nzimande manages to hold the post of a Minister along with his post as Secretary-General of the SACP, which clearly shows that his ministerial post is not a full post (which I believe is applicable to most). The answer would be to re-combine these posts, thus effecting a huge saving. The same could apply elsewhere, where cabinet posts (even if not totally related) could be combined.

The same applies at provincial level. In the Western Cape, for example, we have a highly competent Superintendent-General of Education, yet we have the MEC running around after learner latecomers. Surely he could leave this to the SG to take action through district officials?

And there’s more. By combining posts, there would also be a considerable reduction in the number of support staff – one would need only one (well-paid) spokesperson and far fewer administrative staff.  Add to this fewer hotel stays and flights overseas, and one would have gone a long way to providing money for effective delivery and creating additional jobs.

Here are the departmental exam papers and memos for Life Sciences and Lewenswetenskappe for Grade 12 for 2011. They are a great revision tool to prepare for the upcoming exams. Good Luck!

Life Sciences:

Life Sciences Grade 12 Paper 1 March 2011

Life Sciences Grade 12 Paper 2 March 2011

Life Sciences Grade 12 Paper 1 March 2011 – Memo

Life Sciences Grade 12 Paper 2 March 2011 – Memo

Life Sciences Exemplar Papers:

Life Sciences Grade 12 Exemplar Paper 1 June 2011

Life Sciences Grade 12 Exemplar Paper 1 June 2011 – Memo

Lewenswetenskappe:

Lewenswetenskappe Graad 12 Vraestel 1 Maart 2011

Lewenswetenskappe Graad 12 Vraestel 2 Maart 2011

Lewenswetenskappe Graad 12 Vraestel 1 Maart 2011 – Memo

Lewenswetenskappe Graad 12 Vraestel 2 Maart 2011 – Memo

Lewenswetenskappe Voorbeeld Eksamenvraestelle:

Lewenswetenskappe Graad 12 Voorbeeld Eksamenvraestel 1 Junie 2011

Lewenswetenskappe Graad 12 Voorbeeld Eksamenvraestel 1 Junie 2011 – Memo