MICHAEL MORRIS: GNU dynamics prove decisive over education bill - Business Day

In a society justifiably obsessed with granting power to the people, it is remarkable how often scant attention is paid to what the people actually want. You could pick any aspect of public administration and find an example of a legitimate public interest being ignored or even undermined. But there are exceptions, and likely more than we might imagine.

In September 2024 the most significant is surely the apex policy-making instrument that is the government of national unity (GNU) itself, somewhat ungainly though it may be, and not wholly predictable, but unarguably a reflection of popular choice. 

The consequences are salutary. Early last week South Africans detected — to start with — a worrying dissonance in the statements of the leaders of the main GNU partners, with President Cyril Ramaphosa in seemingly triumphalist tone declaring that come what may he would sign the Basic Education Laws Amendment Bill unaltered by the week’s end, and DA leader John Steenhuisen responding that doing so in the face of the DA’s vigorous opposition would risk the survival of the GNU itself.

In the end the dynamics of the GNU (the popular will, in effect) rather than the ideological convictions of its constituent parts, proved decisive; Steenhuisen adjusted his tone, Ramaphosa conceded. The parties now have a three-month window to find common ground on the critical points of disagreement — the state’s role in determining the language and admissions policies of state schools. 

This seems a good thing, yet there’s something vaguely irrational about it. Of course language and admissions policies are important (chiefly, today, for high-performing schools).

But even if the provisions on language and admissions (and every other clause that has been objected to) were expunged entirely from the law, the hard truth is that the popular desire for quality schooling would not come even remotely near to being met. In this sense the law (which includes some sound features, in case that’s overlooked) is merely an irksome distraction.

I could not put it better than my senior colleague, Institute of Race Relations head of policy research Anthea Jeffery, did in her submission to the National Council of Provinces in January: “The main problem with the bill is also a far more complex and more pressing one. Basic education is in crisis in SA — and yet the bill does little to address this core issue. Instead, it distracts attention from the vital need for real reform by focusing on damaging and often unnecessary changes on matters largely peripheral to the main problems crying out for resolution.” 

Writing in the Daily Friend at the weekend, colleague Chris Patterson spelt out the dimensions of some of these “main problems”, including that SA is 75th out of 76 nations in maths and science tests; SA’s grade 5s rank 62 out of 64 in maths and science tests; 81% of grade 4 students cannot read for meaning, and 31.8% of grade 10s drop out before writing the National Senior Certificate. 

If a reformed Basic Education Laws Amendment law cannot address these grim numbers on its own, it is telling that strong parental involvement in schools is integral to better educational outcomes. A 2018 Institute of Race Relations study of 12 top-scoring township and suburban schools in Gauteng (with upwards of 90% matric pass rates) showed that whether the school was rich or poor, a key factor in its success was strong parental involvement in supporting the principal and teachers.

This might after all be where the negotiating on the Basic Education Laws Amendment should begin. 

Morris is head of media at the SA Institute of Race Relations

https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/opinion/columnists/2024-09-16-michael-morris-gnu-dynamics-prove-decisive-over-education-bill/