SECONDARY EDUCATION: THE DA'S SIX-POINT-PLAN TO IMPROVE THE MATRIC PASS RATE


Last week, the MEC for education in Gauteng and the national department of education threatened to close down dysfunctional schools and axe their principals after these schools performed dismally in the 2006 matric exams.

Closing schools is no solution, and the government itself recognised this when it withdrew this threat after a storm of protest. But it is very clear that some decisive, bold and resolute action is needed to get those schools that failed their children working again.

This action must involve more than bully-boy tactics once a year, when the cameras are focused on education, and abandoning these learners to their fate for the rest of the year. This, unfortunately, has been the pattern of government interventions over the past few years.

The DA proposes a rescue package of six steps, to be implemented over a three year period, that we believe will transform dysfunctional schools into effective and successful institutions.

These six steps will be directed at getting to the root of the problems affecting each particular school, and then setting up measurable targets for improvement for educators and principals, with consequences for failing to meet these targets, and finally ensuring that the learning environment at these schools is safe and secure.

In 2006 there were 139 schools where fewer than 20% of the learners passed grade 12. These are the worst schools in the country, and the tens of thousands of learners who attended these schools have quite clearly been failed by the system. These 20% schools are the focus of the DA’s six point rescue package.

Firstly, the DA proposes the creation of a task team which will be charged with visiting every school that obtained a pass rate of less than 20% and conducting a thorough investigation into all the circumstances at that school.

This task team will have the authority to interview everyone connected with the school and to take any necessary steps to investigate the school’s functioning, including attending lessons, making impromptu visits, and talking privately to parents and learners.

The task team should produce a report on the key reasons for each school’s poor performance. It would also make recommendations as to how these shortcomings can be addressed over the next three years, and determine whether there are grounds for disciplinary action against anyone involved in the school for non-performance.

The national minister would be responsible for, over the next three years, monitoring the implementation of the recommendations.

Secondly, principals need to be held accountable for their results. As a general rule, principals in good schools must be left alone to do their job. But, at the same time, it is imperative that principals who are not succeeding in delivering good results be given the tools and incentives to do better.

In this special category of 20% schools, provincial MECs must give principals a three year deadline in which to meet realistic, individualised performance targets, and make it clear to them that failure to meet these targets will result in removal from office.

In addition, a school management diploma must be a requirement for appointment as a principal in any 20% school.

Thirdly, educator appointments in 20% schools must be subject to rigorous external review. Ideally, all schools should have the capacity to employ whomever they think will serve the educational needs of that community best.

However, in schools that perform badly, it is likely that poor selection of educators is a factor. For 20% schools, the provincial department of education must be required to examine the credentials of educators whom these schools employ to ensure that they actually fulfil the requirements of the school.

Incumbents who do not meet these criteria must be given the option of obtaining the necessary qualifications and skills within a three year period, or face being redeployed to positions more appropriate to their skills.

Fourthly, each of the 20% schools needs to be allocated a mentor, using retired or current principals on a part-time basis. These mentors would help schools to put administrative systems in place, manage finances, establish disciplinary systems and improve the school environment. The mentors would, in conjunction with the provincial MEC and the school’s principal, compile detailed three-year improvement plans.

Fifthly, it must be recognised that no one can learn when their safety is threatened. The station commander at each police station within which these 20% schools fall must be tasked with providing a security report on the school. This report must be presented to the provincial MEC and the headmaster, and it should identify the main security problems and propose a six-month plan to address these problems.

Sixthly, the task team set up to investigate the reasons for poor performance must also look for lessons from successful schools.

There are many schools which need to be congratulated for their performance in last year’s matric exams. Despite appalling conditions and dire poverty in the community, they succeeded in obtaining passes for most or all of their pupils. We need to ask what allows some schools to perform the miracles they do, and we need to find out what lessons from these schools can be applied to less successful schools.

Download supporting documents (Saving Dysfunctional Schools.doc)