5
International Journal of Educational Development 22 (2002) 29–33 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijedudev Discussion Educational policy in South Africa: from opposition to governing and implementation Yusuf Sayed * Centre for International Education, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, Sussex BN1 9RG, UK Received 23 January 2001 The articles in the International Journal of Edu- cation Development’s Special Edition facilitate critical policy dialogue about educational change in South Africa. Educational change in South Africa is of special interest for many reasons. First, it provides, as Soudien and Gilmour (1999) point out, an analysis of large-scale reform in Africa. Second, it furnishes much needed critical commen- tary about educational policy change in South Africa during the first fiver years of democratic rule (1994–1999). Finally, the review highlights valuable lessons for countries engaged in similar processes of large-scale educational change. Not- ing the instructive value of the Special Edition, I wish to, in this response, highlight a few aspects of educational change which complement and further the analysis provided in the various articles. I consider, in particular, the notion of the ‘edu- cational policy gap’, different policy phases, and issues the articles raise for debate. I conclude by suggesting the need for ‘joined-up’ policy analyses in South Africa, more and different voices to be heard in educational policy dialogue. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-1273-877051; fax: +44- 1273-678568. E-mail address: [email protected] (Y. Sayed). 0738-0593/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII:S0738-0593(01)00008-6 1. Understanding the educational policy gap First, I consider the notion of the ‘policy gap’ which is a theme that surfaces in all the articles. The ‘policy gap’, understood as the mismatch between policy intention and policy practice and outcome, is constituted in different ways in the art- icles. Gilmour (1999) perceives the gap between the commitment to equality and equity in policy texts, and the realisation of these values in the field of practice. Soudien (1999) writes about the policy gap in relation to the implementation of the policy of teacher rationalisation. Carrim (1999) discusses the policy gap in relation to different understand- ings of educators where he distinguishes between homogeneous and differentiated and multiple identities of teachers. Nakabugo & Sieborger (1999) discuss the gap by examining assessment in the context of Curriculum 2005, while Motala (1999) examines it in relation to quality schooling with respect to pedagogy. The policy gap is a persuasive and seductive line of critique. It highlights the difficulty the new government faced between 1994 and 1999 in matching intention with outcome, and rhetoric with practice. However, the critiques raise two points worth noting. First, what exactly is being critiqued about the policy gap? Educational policies in South Africa have a very recent history and consequently their implementation and institutionalisation is far

Educational policy in South Africa: from opposition to governing and implementation

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

International Journal of Educational Development 22 (2002) 29–33www.elsevier.com/locate/ijedudev

Discussion

Educational policy in South Africa: from opposition togoverning and implementation

Yusuf Sayed*

Centre for International Education, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, Sussex BN1 9RG, UK

Received 23 January 2001

The articles in the International Journal of Edu-cation Development’s Special Edition facilitatecritical policy dialogue about educational changein South Africa. Educational change in SouthAfrica is of special interest for many reasons. First,it provides, as Soudien and Gilmour (1999) pointout, an analysis of large-scale reform in Africa.Second, it furnishes much needed critical commen-tary about educational policy change in SouthAfrica during the first fiver years of democraticrule (1994–1999). Finally, the review highlightsvaluable lessons for countries engaged in similarprocesses of large-scale educational change. Not-ing the instructive value of the Special Edition, Iwish to, in this response, highlight a few aspectsof educational change which complement andfurther the analysis provided in the various articles.I consider, in particular, the notion of the ‘edu-cational policy gap’, different policy phases, andissues the articles raise for debate. I conclude bysuggesting the need for ‘joined-up’ policy analysesin South Africa, more and different voices to beheard in educational policy dialogue.

* Corresponding author. Tel.:+44-1273-877051; fax:+44-1273-678568.

E-mail address: [email protected] (Y. Sayed).

0738-0593/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.PII: S0738 -0593(01 )00008-6

1. Understanding the educational policy gap

First, I consider the notion of the ‘policy gap’which is a theme that surfaces in all the articles.The ‘policy gap’, understood as the mismatchbetween policy intention and policy practice andoutcome, is constituted in different ways in the art-icles. Gilmour (1999) perceives the gap betweenthe commitment to equality and equity in policytexts, and the realisation of these values in the fieldof practice. Soudien (1999) writes about the policygap in relation to the implementation of the policyof teacher rationalisation. Carrim (1999) discussesthe policy gap in relation to different understand-ings of educators where he distinguishes betweenhomogeneous and differentiated and multipleidentities of teachers. Nakabugo & Sieborger(1999) discuss the gap by examining assessment inthe context of Curriculum 2005, while Motala(1999) examines it in relation to quality schoolingwith respect to pedagogy.

The policy gap is a persuasive and seductive lineof critique. It highlights the difficulty the newgovernment faced between 1994 and 1999 inmatching intention with outcome, and rhetoric withpractice. However, the critiques raise two pointsworth noting. First, what exactly is being critiquedabout the policy gap? Educational policies in SouthAfrica have a very recent history and consequentlytheir implementation and institutionalisation is far

30 Y. Sayed / International Journal of Educational Development 22 (2002) 29–33

from complete. In essence, what is often critiqued,is policy intention. Perhaps policy evaluation inSouth Africa needs to distinguish analyticallybetween conceptual critique and implementationcritique, a process which requires time. Second,from the perspective of the bureaucracy, edu-cational policy change has been about settingframeworks for change. The implementaion issueif it has been ignored (at least not foregrounded)has been a consequence of attempting to create aunified functioning system and creating the frame-works of change (Sayed, 1999). In other words,the immediate post-1994 priority of the Ministryof Education was to create a unified and effectivelyfunctioning system to create the necessary con-ditions for institutional change. The policy gapcannot be therefore divorced from an understand-ing of the contextual realities the new Ministryfound itself in after the elections of 1994.

Second, an examination of the policy gap needsto understand the nature of the bureaucracy in edu-cational change. The role of the bureaucracy hasnot received sufficient attention in contemporarypolicy analyses in South Africa and the articles inthis collection are no exception. The new bureauc-racy which assumed control over the education sys-tem in 1994 was an amalgam of the old ‘ techno-crats’ from the apartheid era and new senior levelappointments. The new appointments, who wereskilled in the politics of opposition and policydebate, were not sufficiently well versed in relationto system management. Moreover, since 1994,South Africa has adopted a policy approach whichhas been awesome in scope and coverage as thearticles in the review indicate. However, less atten-tion has been paid to the extent to which thebureaucracy could cope with the rate and pace ofchange. Samoff (1996) suggests that what waslacking in South Africa was a prioritisation ofchange, and a far greater emphasis on frameworks.The critical question that emerges in post-apartheideducational dialogue from this is the extent towhich this bureaucracy limits, conditions, andfacilitates change. This is in an area of researchthat will shed much light on the role of bureauc-racies in large scale educational change. It is animportant area of research in trying to understand

the dynamics of educational policy change inSouth Africa.

Third, an examination of the role of the bureauc-racy in processes of educational policy change alsoraises for discussion the functioning of parliamentand the new parliamentarians. A number of ques-tions warrant discussion and debate. To whatextent was the National Parliament and its Edu-cation Portfolio Committee1 a role player in edu-cational change? What support was provided toparliamentarians with respect to educational legis-lative change? In what way did parliamentariansmediate the dynamic of educational policy change?These are a few examples of questions which high-light aspects of educational policy change in SouthAfrica which require critical commentary andanalyses.

The above three aspects of educational policychange with respect to the policy gap cannot beunderstood without contextualising the discussionin terms of the different policy phases between1994 and 1999. The immediate (post 1994) prioritywas what can be characterised as streamlining thefunctioning of the new system and simultaneouslyovercoming the inheritance of the apartheid sys-tem. The priority was thus to adjust to the newrealities in respect of previous agreements such asthe Sunset Clause2 and ensuring that the new sys-tem was up and running in respect of basic infras-tructural resources.

The second phase was a flurry of policy fora,discussions, and texts, that attempted to lay out avision for the new system. Samoff (1996) critiquesthis phase by suggesting that it was framework-orientated with a lack of prioritisation and choice.Perhaps this is true, but this phase was crucial ingenerating a hegemonic discourse for changewhich could bring about trust and binding policybehaviour. It was not out of keeping with the richly

1 The Education Portfolio Committee is a multiparty struc-ture of the National Parliamentary Assembly charged concernedwith educational legislation.

2 The Sunset Clause refers to an agreement made during themultiparty negotiations preceeding the 1994 elections. Theagreement specifies and limits the way in which the newgovernment that was established after the 1994 elections could(re)staff the civil service.

31Y. Sayed / International Journal of Educational Development 22 (2002) 29–33

evocative metaphor of the ‘Rainbow Nation’ whichstrove for unity in a context of deep division, sus-picion, fear, and anxiety. Thus, it may not havegenerated robust and implementable action but itcreated the possibilities for such, and captured theeuphoria associated with the dismantling of theapartheid education system.

The third unfinished phase is concerned with thesobering realities of making change happen inpractical terms in sites where it is most manifestand effective, such as schools. It is about payingattention to understanding more accurately thedynamic of implementing and institutionalisingchange. This is the phase and context within whichall the review articles are written and their underly-ing message is that of anxiety and worry about thelack of understanding of the process of makingchange work at the micro level.

2. Asking slightly different questions

I have thus far examined the notion of the policygap which we see as the thread in all the articles.I now turn my attention to some of the questionsposed in the articles and consider what is askedand what could be asked.

Kallaway (1999) asks why South Africa haschosen to ignore the experiences of other parts ofAfrica in rural education, and why this has beenthe neglected aspect of the policy story. Correlativequestions to this, and one that will help to answerhis questions are: what has South Africa borrowed,from whom, why, and what has been modified andadapted in the process. In this, the focus of thepolicy borrowing from the North is of criticalimportance. What is required, however, are richand nuanced analyses which consider themediating mechanisms, structures and agentsinvolved in the borrowing, and the professionalbiographies of the ‘ technical overseas expert’ . Lestit be understood that policy borrowing is a ‘badthing’ , it should be noted that the timing of SouthAfrica’s large scale attempts at educational reformsallows it the space to know what works, and whatdoes not, in other contexts. For example, Infor-mation Technology (IT), being last in the policygame is not necessarily a bad thing.

But ‘policy borrowing’ raises sharply the ques-tion Motala (1999) poses, that is, whether there isa specific and defensible South African notion ofquality? The question she poses in her article onquality asks what forms of knowledge, and whose,are validated in policy discourses in South Africa.Further, the question of quality also requires atten-tion to two related aspects: the emergence of the‘quality movement’ as a key defining moment incontemporary educational change (Sayed, 1997,Bottery, 1999), and different conceptions of qualityand its measurement of different educational con-stituencies in the South African context.

At the level of understanding implementation,Carrim (1999), Soudien (1999), and Nakabugo &Sieborger (1999), all focus on the ways in whichteachers respond to change. Teachers’ perceptions,identities, and skill and competencies, cruciallymediate the implementation of institutionalisationof mandated policy change. The account could,however, be elaborated, as Carrim suggests, byunderstanding their insertion in democratic civilsociety spaces, and their relationship with diverseconstituencies including parents and communities.The legitimacy of mandated policy change and itstake-up (or take-off) crucially connects to publicperception and action, whether in favour and/oragainst.

Equity, equality, and justice are important valuesunderpinning educational change in South Africa.Gilmour (1999) raises the treatment of these con-cepts in educational policy discourses in SouthAfrican education. However, there are competingvalues and priorities including non-racism, non-sexism, participation, democracy, and trans-parency. The difficulty for the public, and policyanalysts is to understand the relationship betweenthese values. The diverse values that underpin edu-cational policy change in South Africa are, asNational Policy Investigation (NEPI 1993)3 pointout, potentially in competition and tension, andproduce likely differing actions and outcomes. The

3 The National Education Policy Investigation was a policyforum initiated by the National Education Committee in 1991responsible for generating progressive educational policyoptions for a post-apartheid society. There were twelve researchgroups covering all aspects of education.

32 Y. Sayed / International Journal of Educational Development 22 (2002) 29–33

important questions that emerge are: who and onwhat basis are decisions made about prioritisationof different value outcomes and action; to whatextent can all these values be mutually satisfied;and what is the optimal level of satisfizing? Thisassumes consensus about the meanings of thesevalues. Perhaps, more importantly, it assumesagreement about the policy operationalisation ofthese values.

3. Moving towards ‘joined-up’ policy analyses

An underexplored aspect of the articles in theSpecial Edition is the articulation (or non-articulation) between the education terrain andother spheres. While there has been some commen-tary on the relationship between educational policyand macro-economic strategy (see Chisholm et al.,1998), analyses of the policy continuity (anddiscontinuity) between education and other socialservice spheres such as health and housing havebeen somewhat lacking. What is needed in edu-cational analysis is what the Labour Governmentin the UK refers to as ‘ joined-up’ policy. To usethe term, what is required are ‘ joined-up policyanalyses’ which examine the mutual interactionand potentially contradictory articulation betweendifferent social service spheres.

To illustrate the above point we provide two pol-icy examples which require joined-up analysis.First, the moves towards greater community par-ticipation, control, and ownership of schools canbe usefully examined in relation to the promotionof the community clinics by the health sector andthe restructuring of local government. Second, thespread of the HIV/AIDS virus can best be under-stood by analyses that transverse traditional bound-aries which integrate policy analysts working indiverse areas. In other words, the issue ofHIV/AIDS requires people from health, social ser-vices, and education working together to identifycommon problems and solutions. This is the lessonthe North-West province learnt in its approach todealing with the problem.

The articles in the Special Edition contribute, aswe have noted earlier, to voicing critical commen-tary on the nature of educational policy change in

South Africa. The articles, however, reflect mainlythe voices of university-based academics and thenonly from a specific university sector. To enhancethe critical commentary contained in the articles inthe Special Edition, there is a need to voice sub-merged discourse and views from many differentinstitutions and sites. The vibrancy of the post-apartheid educational dialogues necessitates mul-tiple voicing that moves beyond those with the pol-icy resources. In enabling diverse and multipleconstituencies in policy dialogue, South Africa canbegin to engage in critical debate about edu-cational transformation.

References

Bottery, M. 1999. The notion of Quality in Education. Paperpresented to the British Educational Management andAdministration Equity, Values, and Leadership Conference,Manchester, 17–19 September.

Chisholm, L., Marope, P., Dumba-Safali, S., Makwati, J., 1998.Educational Policy Developments, September 1997 to Janu-ary 1998. Wits EPU Quarterly Review of Education andTraining in South Africa 5 (2).

Carrim, N. 1999. From Teachers to Educators: HomogenisingTendencies in Contemporary South African EducationalReforms. International Journal of Education DevelopmentSpecial Edition.

Gilmour, D. 1999. Intention or in Tension: Recent EducationReforms in South Africa. International Journal of EducationDevelopment Special Edition.

Kallaway, P. 1999. The need for attention to Rural education.International Journal of Education Development SpecialEdition.

Motala, S. 1999. Quality and Indicators of Quality in SouthAfrican Education: A Critical Appraisal. International Jour-nal of Education Development Special Edition.

Nakabugo, M.G., Sieborger, R. 1999. Curriculum reform andteaching in South Africa: Making a ‘paradigm shift’? Inter-national Journal of Education Development Special Edition.

Samoff, J., 1996. Which Priorities and Strategies for Education.International Journal of Education Development 16, 249–271.

Sayed, Y., 1997. The concept of quality in education: A viewfrom South Africa. In: Watson, K., Modgil, S., Modgil, C.(Eds.), Educational Dilemmas: Debate and Diversity: Vol.4. Cassell, London.

Sayed, Y. 1999. Changing Patterns of Educational ManagementDevelopment in South African Education: a CriticalReview. Paper read at the British Education Management &Administration Society (BEMAS) Values, Equity, andLeadership Conference, Manchester, 17–19 September1999.

33Y. Sayed / International Journal of Educational Development 22 (2002) 29–33

Soudien, C., Gilmour, D. 1999. Introduction. International Jour-nal of Education Development Special Edition.

Soudien, C. 1999. Teacher Responses to Rationalisation: Trans-

formation and Adaptation in the Western Cape, SouthAfrica. International Journal of Education DevelopmentSpecial Edition.