Nic Spaull's Presentation: 2013 Matric Results in Retrospect

Matric 2013: In Retrospect Overview and selected highlights of Matric 2013

www.NicSpaull.com/research UJ – Kagiso Trust Education Conversation 19 Feb 2014

Matric results 2013 1.

Conceptual overview of SA education system

2.

Matric 2013 – the good, the bad and the ugly

3.

Focus on mathematics

4.

Focus on dropout

5.

Focus on higher education

6.

Conclusion

• • •

High productivity jobs and incomes (17%)

1 7 %

Mainly professional, managerial & skilled jobs Requires graduates, good quality matric or good vocational skills Historically mainly white

Type

Labour Market

University/ FET • • • •

SemiSkilled (31%)

•

cf. Servaas van der Berg – QLFS 2011

Minority (20%) Big demand for good schools despite fees Some scholarships/bursaries

Low quality secondary school

Low quality primary school

Unemployed (Broad - 33%)

-

High SES background +ECD

Low SES background

Often manual or low skill Unskilled jobs Limited or low quality (19%) education Minimum wage can exceed productivity

Attainment

•

High quality primary school

-

Low productivity jobs & incomes

•

Type of institution (FET or University) Quality of institution Type of qualification (diploma, degree etc.)

Field of study (Engineering, Arts etc.)

Some motivated, lucky or talented students make the transition

Quality

• Vocational training • Affirmative action

High quality secondary school

Unequal society Majority (80%)

0%

80 (1931) 78 (1933) 76 (1935) 74 (1937) 72 (1939) 70 (1941) 68 (1943) 66 (1945) 64 (1947) 62 (1949) 60 (1951) 58 (1953) 56 (1955) 54 (1957) 52 (1959) 50 (1961) 48 (1963) 46 (1965) 44 (1967) 42 (1969) 40 (1971) 38 (1973) 36 (1975) 34 (1977) 32 (1979) 30 (1981) 28 (1983) 26 (1985) 24 (1987) 22 (1989) 20 (1991)

Qualifications by age (birth cohort), 2011 (Van der Berg, 2013) Degree

100%

10%

Some tertiary

90%

80%

Matric

70%

60%

50%

40%

Some secondary schooling Primary completed

30%

20%

Some primary

No schooling

Basic overview of matric 2013 The good…

• Matric pass rate increased to 78% • Bachelor pass rate increased to 31% • More students passing mathematics The bad…

• Some questioning quality of matric pass • Public starting to ask questions about why uni’s are using NBTs • Concerns over “culling” and whether this lead to increases in NWP and FST The ugly…

• Grade 812 dropout is 2x as high (50%) in Q1 rel to Q5 (25%) • A white child is 7 times more likely than a black child to obtain a Maths D+ and 38 times as likely to get an A- aggregate (using earlier matric data)

Focus on mathematics – things are improving • Number of students taking mathematics (as opposed to mathslit) has declined since 2008, but proportion passing has risen – Not necessarily a bad thing since many of those students shouldn’t have been taking mathematics in the first place 60%56%

53%

50%

49%

45%

44%

43%

24%

25%

2012

2013

40% 30%26%

24%

23%

2009

2010

20%

21%

Proportion taking maths Proportion passing maths

10% 0% 2008

2011

Source: Taylor (2014)

What proportion of matrics take and pass mathematics?

• Important statistic is the number passing which was declining from 2008  2011 but has increased between 2011  2013 350000

70%

300000

60%

250000

50%

200000

40%

150000

30%

100000

20%

50000

10%

0

0% 2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Numbers wrote maths Number passed maths Maths pass rate

Source: Taylor (2014)

Matric mathematics statistics (Taylor 2014) Numbers wrote Number passed Proportion Maths pass rate maths maths taking maths

Proportion passing maths

2008

298821

136503

45.70%

56.10%

25.60%

2009

290407

133505

46.00%

52.60%

24.20%

2010

263034

124749

47.40%

48.80%

23.20%

2011

224635

104033

46.30%

45.30%

21.00%

2012

225874

121970

54.00%

44.19%

23.86%

2013

241509

142666

59.10%

42.96%

25.38%

Source: Taylor (2014) NOTE: All of the above is under the proviso that that quality of the mathematics exam has remained constant over the period. If not then we can’t say much.

Focus on dropout

Of 100 students that started school in 2002

16%

24%

49%

Do not reach matric Fail matric 2013 Pass matric 2013 Pass with university endorsement 2013

11% • 550,000 students drop out before matric • 99% do not get a non-matric qualification (Gustafsson, 2011: p11) • What happens to them? 50% youth unemployment.

Proportion of a cohort of students that do not survive to grade 12, fail matric, pass matric, and pass matric with a Bachelor's pass in each province in 2011

Mpumalanga

KwaZulu-Natal

12%

Gauteng

Western Cape

13%

24%

23% 37%

Non-survival to Grade 12 Fail matric 2011 Pass matric 2011 Pass with Bachelors 2011

26%

39%

43% 26%

29%

14%

27%

Limpopo

Northern Cape

40%

North West

Free State

10%

12%

36%

11%

18%

22%

13% 19%

23%

29%

13%

52% 9%

19%

21%

5%

11%

13%

43%

27%

Eastern Cape

12%

61%

69%

Dropout between Gr8 and Gr12 2013 Matric passes by quintile Matric pass rate by quintile

Matric passes as % of Grade 8 (2009)

Bachelor passes as % of Grade 8 (2009)

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

75%

73%

70%

49%

10% Quintile 1

68% 42%

37%

36% 15% Quintile 2

92%

82%

12% Quintile 3

39% 17%

Quintile 4

Quintile 5

•

Of 100 Gr8 quintile 1 students in 2009, 36 passed matric and 10 qualified for university

•

Of 100 Gr8 quintile 5 students in 2009, 68 passed matric and 39 qualified for university

•

“Contrary to what some would like the nation and the public to believe that our results hide inequalities, the facts and evidence show that the two top provinces (Free State and North West) are rural and poor.” (Motshekga, 2014)

When does grade repetition happen?

Focus on higher education

Are matriculants prepared for higher education? "It is widely accepted that student underpreparedness is the dominant learning-related cause of the poor performance patterns in higher education. It follows that it is the school sector that is most commonly held responsible. However, if higher education is to rely on improvement in schooling to deal with the systemic faults affecting it, there needs to be a rigorous assessment of the prospects of sufficient improvement being achieved within that sector. While the Task Team believes that the level of dysfunction in schooling must continue to be a primary focus of corrective effort, it has concluded that the overwhelming weight of evidence from current analyses of the school sector is that there is effectively no prospect that it will be able, in the foreseeable future, to produce the numbers of well-prepared matriculants that higher education requires.“ - CHE (2013) ”Proposal for undergraduate curriculum reform” http:// www.che.ac.za/announcements/task-team-report-extended-curriculum-released  Why are universities using the National Benchmarking Tests (NBTs) now when they didn’t use them 10 years ago? Why for admission? Presumably these tests are better able to distinguish between students that will and won’t be able to succeed at university

Higher education in perspective

When speaking about higher education it’s important to remember that this is only a very small proportion of the population

Source: DBE (2013) Internal Efficiency of the schooling System

Gustafsson, 2011 – When & how WP • “What do the magnitudes from Figure 4 mean in terms of the holding of qualifications? In particular, what widely recognised qualifications do the 60% of youths who do not obtain a Matric hold? …Only around 1% of youths hold no Matric but do hold some other non-school certificate or diploma issued by, for instance, an FET college” (Gustafsson, 2011: p.11)

10%

How does SA fair internationally?

•

Gustafsson (2011) “The when and how of leaving school”

Dropout and weak performance in matric is essentially a function of low-quality of education in earlier grades and accumulated learning deficits

Insurmountable learning deficits: 0.3 SD South African Learning Trajectories by National Socioeconomic Quintiles Based on NSES (2007/8/9) for grades 3, 4 and 5, SACMEQ (2007) for grade 6 and TIMSS (2011) for grade 9) 13 12 11 10

Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Q1-4 Trajectory Q5 Trajectory

Effective grade

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Actual grade (and data source)

NSES question 42

NSES followed about 15000 students (266 schools) and tested them in Grade 3 (2007), Grade 4 (2008) and Grade 5 (2009).

Grade 3 maths curriculum: “Can perform calculations using appropriate symbols to solve problems involving: division of at least 2-digit by 1-digit numbers�

100% 90% 35%

80% 70%

59%

57%

57%

55%

60%

13%

50% 40%

14% 13%

14%

14%

15%

20%

13%

10%

12%

12%

10%

16%

19%

17%

17%

30%

0%

At the end of Grade 5 most (55%+) quintile 1-4 students cannot answer this simple Grade-3-level problem.

39%

Still wrong in Gr5 Correct in Gr5 Correct in Gr4 Correct in Gr3

Take home points…

1. What does it mean to the economy?

–

Low quality of education continues to condemn majority of black children to an underclass where poverty & unempl. are the norm

2. What should we continue doing and what should we change?

–

Continue with ANAs and workbooks (keep CAPS, obviously)

–

Draw public attention to primary schooling (root of the problem)

–

More public acknowledgement of dropout. Measure throughput not just pass rates

–

Aim should NOT be for 100% of students to reach and pass matric. Need for an effective vocational system (something we don’t have)

3. What does the certificate mean to matriculants/higher-ed?

–

Matric is a necessary but not sufficient condition for employment (increasingly insufficient). What is the purpose of matric?

4. Are we moving in the right direction?

–

Yes-ish. Need a better commitment to SUBSTANCE not just FORM

–

Too much focus on “illustrating improvement” as opposed to actually getting down to it. ANAs a good example – really useful & imp but absolutely (unequivocally) cannot be used to show changes over time yet this is what the DBE is doing

Further reading 1. DBE (2013) The internal efficiency of the school system: Report on selected aspects of access to education, grade repetition and learner performance. Available: http://www.education.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Jaaol0vqeR4%3d&tabid=36

2. Gustafsson, M. (2013) The when and how of leaving school: The policy implications of new evidence on secondary schooling in South Africa. Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers 09/11. Available: http:// www.ekon.sun.ac.za/wpapers/2011/wp092011

Thank you

Presentation available at www.nicspaull.com/research

Figure 13: Matric pass rates as a percentage of Grade 2 enrolments 10 years earlier for selected provinces – see Taylor (2012: p. 9)

EC

GP

KN

LP

WC

70% 60%

50%

40% 30%

20%

10%

0% Gr12 in 2004 (Gr2 in 1994)Gr12 in 2006 (Gr2 in 1996)Gr12 in 2011 (Gr2 in 2001)

Important distinctions

Increased resources “on-theground�

Improved student outcomes

Often these 3 are spoken about interchangeably

“Only when schools have both the incentive

to respond to an accountability system as well as the capacity to do so will there be an improvement in student outcomes.� (p22)

Conclusion 1. Ensuring that public funding is actually pro-poor and also that it actually reaches the poor.

2. Understanding whether the motivation is for human dignity reasons or improving learning outcomes.

3. Ensuring that additional resources are allocated based on evidence rather than anecdote.

4. The need for BOTH accountability AND capacity.

Binding constraints approach

“The left hand barrel has horizontal wooden slabs, while the right hand side barrel has vertical slabs. The volume in the first barrel depends on the sum of the width of all slabs. Increasing the width of any slab will increase the volume of the barrel. So a strategy on improving anything you can, when you can, while you can, would be effective. The volume in the second barrel is determined by the length of the shortest slab. Two implications of the second barrel are that the impact of a change in a slab on the volume of the barrel depends on whether it is the binding constraint or not. If not, the impact is zero. If it is the binding constraint, the impact will depend on the distance between the shortest slab and the next shortest slab� (Hausmann, Klinger, & Wagner, 2008, p. 17).

Basic Literacy and Numeracy (Gr 6) • What proportion of South African grade 6 children were functionally literate and functionally numerate?

• Functionally illiterate: a functionally illiterate learner cannot read a short and simple text and extract meaning.

• Functionally innumerate: a functionally innumerate learner cannot translate graphical information into fractions or interpret everyday units of measurement.

SACMEQ III (Spaull & Taylor, 2012)

100% 570% 180% 910% 1285% 90% 2581% 80% 70% 4356% 5254% 6096% 5811% 60% 4547% 50% 40% 30% 3884% 3136% 1884% 1814% 20% 2672% 10% 1190% 1430% 1110% 1090% 200% 0% Za mbi a

Les otho

2505% 1838% 5202%

3677% 3372%

5017% 6169% 3030%

5049% 5445%

1708% 1264% 298% 132% 1470% 763% 1050% 770% 730% 510%

South Afri ca

Literacy

Nami bia

Kenya

Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red hi gher order readi ng s ki l l s (Levels 6-8) by grade 6 Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red bas i c readi ng s ki l l s (Level s 3-5) by grade 6 Enrol l ed but functi onal l y i l l i tera te (Level s 1-2) by grade 6

100% 53% 45% 254% 172% 196% 840% 966% 1042% 522% 1340% 90% 2850% 3397% 80% 4595% 5002% 5268% 70% 5032% 5816% 6359% 60% 7660% 7085% 50% 5907% 40% 5128% 30% 4420% 3716% 3446% 3928% 2448% 1129% 20% 768% 10% 1470% 1050% 1065% 1190% 1430% 730% 1110% 1090% 770% 510% 200% 0% Zambi a

Nami bia

Uganda Zi mba bwe Numeracy

Swazi l and

Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red hi gher order numera cy s kil l s (Level s 6-8) by gra de 6 Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red ba s i c numeracy ski l l s (Level s 3-5) by grade 6

SA primary school: Gr6 Literacy – SACMEQ III (2007)

Never enrolled 2%

Functionally illiterate 25%

Basic skills 46%

Higher order skills : 27%

Forthcoming paper with Stephen Taylor

Spending Spending by education departments, real (2005) Rand 2000/01 to 2010/11 120.0 100.0

ďƒ&#x; OSD

80.0

n ilo b R

60.0 40.0

National education spending Provincial education spending TOTAL Departmental Spending

20.0 .0

(Oxford Policy Management & Stellenbosch Economics, 2012)

Grade 6 Literacy 1%

SA Gr 6 Literacy 25%

5%

Kenya Gr 6 Literacy 7%

49% 46%

Public current expenditure 27%

per pupil: $1225

Additional resources is not the answer

39% Public current expenditure per pupil: $258

Accountability: teacher absenteeism (SACMEQ III – 2007 – 996 teachers) Non-strike teacher absenteeism SACMEQ III (2007) 25

4th/1 5

20

15 Days per year 10

19.24

5

5.68

7.18

7.73

8.19

9.04

9.28

9.57

10.32

10.54

10.73

12.15

13.6

13.76

14.47

0 Mauritius

Swaziland

Zanzibar

Malawi

Botswana

Lesotho

Uganda

Tanzania

Accountability: teacher absenteeism (SACMEQ III – 2007 – 996 teachers)

Non-strike Self-reported teacher absenteeism (days) SACMEQ III (2007) 25

Non-strike teacher absenteeism

15th/15

Teachers' strikes

20

0.05

15

11.58

0

Days per year 10

0 5

0

0.33

0 5.68

7.18

7.73

8.19

9.04

0

9.28

0.04

9.57

0.02

10.32

0

10.54

1.91

0.07

0.04

0 19.24

10.73

12.15

13.6

13.76

14.47

0 Mauritius

Swaziland

Zanzibar

Malawi

Botswana

Lesotho

Uganda

Tanzania

Ed

Benefits of education

H

S Ec

Health

Society    

Improved human rights Empowerment of women Reduced societal violence Promotion of a national (as opposed to regional or ethnic) identity  Increased social cohesion

   

Lower fertility Improved child health Preventative health care Demographic transition

$

Economy  Improvements in productivity  Economic growth  Reduction of intergenerational cycles of poverty  Reductions in inequality

Specific references: lower fertility (Glewwe, 2002), improved child health (Currie, 2009), reduced societal violence (Salmi, 2006), promotion of a national as opposed to a regional or ethnic - identity (Glewwe, 2002), improved human rights (Salmi, 2006), increased social cohesion (Heyneman, 2003), Economic growth – see any decent Macro textbook, specifically for cognitive skills see (Hanushek & Woessman 2008)

Accountability: teacher absenteeism • Teacher absenteeism is regularly found to be an issue in many studies • 2007: SACMEQ III conducted – 20 days average in 2007 • 2008: Khulisa Consortium audit – HSRC (2010) estimates that 20-24 days of regular instructional time were lost due to leave in 2008

• 2010: “An estimated 20 teaching days per teacher were lost during the 2010 teachers’ strike” (DBE, 2011: 18)

•

Importantly this does not include time lost where teachers were at school but not teaching scheduled lessons • A recent study observing 58 schools in the North West concluded that “Teachers did not teach 60% of the lessos they were scheduled to teach in North West” (Carnoy & Chisholm et al, 2012)

Accountability: teacher absenteeism (SACMEQ III – 2007 – 996 teachers)

Western Cape

Eastern Cape

Limpopo

KwaZulu-Natal

% absent > 1 week striking

32%

81%

97%

82%

% absent > 1 month (20 days)

22%

62%

48%

73%

% absent > 2 months (40 days)

5%

12%

0%

10%

1.3 days a week

SACMEQ III (Spaull & Taylor, 2012)

100% 570% 180% 910% 1285% 90% 2581% 80% 70% 4356% 5254% 6096% 5811% 60% 4547% 50% 40% 30% 3884% 3136% 1884% 1814% 20% 2672% 10% 1190% 1430% 1110% 1090% 200% 0% Za mbi a

Les otho

2505% 1838% 5202%

3677% 3372%

5017% 6169% 3030%

5049% 5445%

1708% 1264% 298% 132% 1470% 763% 1050% 770% 730% 510%

South Afri ca

Literacy

Nami bia

Kenya

Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red hi gher order readi ng s ki l l s (Levels 6-8) by grade 6 Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red bas i c readi ng s ki l l s (Level s 3-5) by grade 6 Enrol l ed but functi onal l y i l l i tera te (Level s 1-2) by grade 6

100% 53% 45% 254% 172% 196% 840% 966% 1042% 522% 1340% 90% 2850% 3397% 80% 4595% 5002% 5268% 70% 5032% 5816% 6359% 60% 7660% 7085% 50% 5907% 40% 5128% 30% 4420% 3716% 3446% 3928% 2448% 1129% 20% 768% 10% 1470% 1050% 1065% 1190% 1430% 730% 1110% 1090% 770% 510% 200% 0% Zambi a

Nami bia

Uganda Zi mba bwe Numeracy

Swazi l and

Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red hi gher order numera cy s kil l s (Level s 6-8) by gra de 6 Enrol l ed a nd a cqui red ba s i c numeracy ski l l s (Level s 3-5) by grade 6

Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase

Intermediate Phase

Senior Phase

Matric

FET Phase

Grade 10 (2 years earlier)

Grade 12

Those who pass matric

Pass matric with maths

Proportion of matrics taking mathematics

• Grade 12 – Various

1200000

60%

1000000

50%

800000

40%

600000

30%

400000

20%

200000

10%

Underperformance •

Of 100 students that enroll in grade 1 approximately 50 will make it to matric, 40 will pass and 12 will qualify for university

Inequality •

Subject combinations differ between rich and poor – differential access to higher education

•

Maths / Maths-lit case in point

•

Are more students taking maths literacy because THEY cannot do pure-maths, or because their TEACHERS cannot teach puremaths?

Number of students

____________________________________

0 Ma tri c 2008 (Gr 10 2006)

0% Ma tri c 2010 (Gr 10 2008)

Proportion of matrics (%)

• Roughly half the cohort

Insurmountable learning deficits Gradients of achievement in the EASTERN Cape and in Quintile 5 (National) 13 12

Desired goal

Performance below “on-track” line creates increasing gradient of expectation

12

11 10 9

8

a -tr n O

7

0 Gr1

Gr2

SACMEQ III Eastern Cape SACMEQ III Quintile 5

1

NSES EC NSES Quintile 5

Initial conditions

NSES EC NSES Quintile 5

3

Gr3

Gr4

Gr5

Gr6

line TIMSS 2011 Eastern Cape TIMSS 2011 Quintile 5

4

4

2

ac k -tr f f O

Projected matric performance: Eastern Cape Projected matric performance: Quintile 5

5

5

3

e lin k c

6

6

NSES EC NSES Quintile 5

Effective grade level

9

f e o ble n Zo oba ss pr im rogre p

Gr7

Actual grade

Gr8

Gr9

Gr10

Gr11

NB: Key assumption, 0.5 SD of national learning achievement is equivalent to one grade level of learning -agreement from TIMSS/PIRLS

Gr12

C.f. Lewin (2007: 8)

Spaull 2013

Spaull, 2013

Insurmountable learning deficits Gradients of achievement in the WESTERN Cape and in Quintile 5 (National) 13 12

Desired goal

Performance below “on-track” line creates increasing gradient of expectation

12

11

9

9

7 6

6 5

e lin

NSES WC NSES Quintile 5

SACMEQ III Western Cape SACMEQ III Quintile 5

Gr3

Gr4

Gr5

Gr6

3

Initial conditions

1 0 Gr1

Gr2

TIMSS 2011 Western Cape TIMSS 2011 Quintile 5

NSES WC NSES Quintile 5

2

k rac f-t

4

4 3

Of

5

ine

Projected matric performance: Western Cape Projected matric performance: Quintile 5

kl ac r t On

8

NSES WC NSES Quintile 5

Effective grade level

10

Gr7

Actual grade

Gr8

Gr9

Gr10

Gr11

NB: WC has relatively high % of Q5 schools thus it should be more convergent by construction.

Gr12

C.f. Lewin (2007: 8)

Spaull 2013

Spaull, 2013

No .e

Media sees only thisďƒ

ndo rse me nts Qu alit y?

What are the root causes of low and unequal achievement?

ct e j b Su

ice o h c

ut p gh u o r Th

MATRIC

Pre-MATRIC

e

Low

t pou dro 50%

rag e v o

ests r e t n i d e t Ves

Matric pass rate

ac c o un c ic Low t ab r L r & u ility T c t i f m w o e o n e L o ntio tur t as l a l u u c Low k k m i a t q s e u e ali t W y te itiv n g ac h o c ers y l r a e HUGE learning deficits‌ No

2 education systems not 1

2 education systems Dysfunctional Schools (75% of schools)

Functional Schools (25% of schools)

Weak accountability

Strong accountability

Incompetent school management

Good school management

Lack of culture of learning, discipline and order

Culture of learning, discipline and order

Inadequate LTSM

Adequate LTSM

Weak teacher content knowledge

Adequate teacher content knowledge

High teacher absenteeism (1 month/yr)

Low teacher absenteeism (2 week/yr)

Slow curriculum coverage, little homework or testing

Covers the curriculum, weekly homework, frequent testing

High repetition & dropout (Gr10-12)

Low repetition & dropout (Gr10-12)

Extremely weak learning: most students fail standardised tests

Adequate learner performance (primary and matric)

• Data: SACMEQ •

(Spaull, 2011)

.004 .002

• Grade 6 [2007]

0

Socioeconomic Status

Density

.006

.008

Two school systems not one?

0

200

400 600 Learner Reading Score

Poorest 25% Second wealthiest 25%

800 Second poorest 25% Wealthiest 25%

1000

Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase

Intermediate Phase

Senior Phase

FET Phase

• 433 schools, 19259 students ____________________________________

Underperformance •

29% of gr4 students did not reach the low international benchmark – they could not read

•

SA performs similarly to Botswana, but 3 years learning behind average Columbian Gr4

kdensity reading test score .001 .002 .003 .004

• Grade 4 – all 11 languages

0

prePIRLS 2011

.005

PIRLS 2006 – see Shepherd (2011)

0

200

•

•

Linguistic inequalities: Large differences by home language – Xitsonga, Tshivenda and Sepedi students particularly disadvantaged

PIRLS (2006) showed LARGE differences between African language schools and Eng/Afr schools

47

•

*Data now available for download

English/Afrikaans schools

53

53

Tshivenda

47

24

siSwati

0 0

76

0.25

Setswana

34

66

0.1

Sesotho

36

64

0.1

57

Sepedi

43

29

0.8

62

31

isiNdebele

0

71

38

isiXhosa

Howie et al (2011)

800

prePIRLS 2011 Benchmark Performance by Test Language

isiZulu

•

600

African language schools

Xitsonga

Inequality

400 reading test score

69

0.4 0.2

English

10

90

19

Afrikaans

12

88

15

South Africa

29

Did not reach High International Benchmark

71

6

Low International benchmark Advanced International benchmark

Intemediate International Benchmark

ďƒ In most government reports outcomes and inputs are not usually reported by quintile, only national averages ďƒ

Implications for reporting and modeling??

3 biggest challenges - SA 1.Failure to get the basics right • •

Children who cannot read, write and compute properly (Functionally illiterate/innumerate) after 6 years of formal full-time schooling Often teachers lack even the most basic knowledge

2.Equity in education • •

2 education systems – dysfunctional system operates at bottom of African countries, functional system operates at bottom of developed countries.

More resources is NOT the silver bullet – we are not using existing resources

3.Lack of accountability • • •

Little accountability to parents in majority of school system Little accountability between teachers and Department Teacher unions abusing power and acting unprofessionally

Way forward?

1. Acknowledge the extent of the problem •

Low quality education is one of the three largest crises facing our country (along with HIV/AIDS and unemployment). Need the political will and public support for widespread reform.

2. Focus on the basics • • • • •

Every child MUST master the basics of foundational numeracy and literacy these are the building blocks of further education – weak foundations = recipe for disaster Teachers need to be in school teaching (re-introduce inspectorate?)

Every teacher needs a minimum competency (basic) in the subjects they teach Every child (teacher) needs access to adequate learning (teaching) materials Use every school day and every school period – maximise instructional time

3. Increase information, accountability & transparency • • •

At ALL levels – DBE, district, school, classroom, learner Strengthen ANA Set realistic goals for improvement and hold people accountable

When faced with an exceedingly low and unequal quality of education do we….

A) Increase accountability {US model} –

Create a fool-proof highly specified, sequenced curriculum (CAPS/workbooks)

–

Measure learning better and more frequently (ANA)

–

Increase choice/information in a variety of ways

B) Improve the quality of teachers {Finnish model} –

Attract better candidates into teaching degrees  draw candidates from the top (rather than the bottom) of the matric distribution

–

Increase the competence of existing teachers (Capacitation)

–

Long term endeavor which requires sustained, committed, strategic, thoughtful leadership (something we don’t have)

C) All of the above {Utopian model} • Perhaps A while we set out on the costly and difficult journey of B??