Districts’ Monitoring, Support and Improvement: Deputy Minister & Department of Basic Education briefing

NCOP Education and Technology, Sports, Arts and Culture

21 September 2016
Chairperson: Ms L Zwane (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Deputy Minister of Basic Education stated that the issue of districts and their role was important in the delivery of quality education. The Department had made a commitment to meet all district directors on a quarterly basis across the country, and had complied with this undertaking. This had contributed directly to the stability of the Department, and had added effect to the meaning of co-operative governance, where it was recognised that all spheres of government were interrelated and had ao responsibility to work co-operatively and in collaboration. This was a good demonstration and had taken away the element of competition between provinces. The additional benefits were that colleagues had an opportunity to network, and the evolution of a professional community of practice among the directors had been remarkable. A critical element was the relationship between districts and the professional teacher development. What the Department had done was to recognise the reality with regard to the professional development of educators. For example, there was no university in the Northern Cape or Limpopo, so educators would go to universities that were far away just to gain professional development. The Department had then embarked on a programme of establishing teacher resource centres across the country, and there were now 147 teacher resource centres in South Africa. Every district in the country had at least one centre, which meant there were spaces to further develop teachers. There were also district managers who were directly responsible for the capacity programmes available at these centres to ensure development.

In its presentation, the Department stated that education districts played a central role in ensuring that all learners had access to quality education. They were often, especially in rural areas, the only vehicle for initiating, testing, driving and sustaining systemic reforms. The National Development Plan (NDP): Vision 2030, stated that districts had a responsibility to “provide targeted support to improve practices within schools.” It was also vital to ensure their support was not generic. The districts needed to ensure communication and information sharing between authorities and schools. The NDP also made a strong point on the need for districts to have the requisite skills and capabilities to provide the necessary support. Currently, education districts differed in size, capabilities and resourcing. The work of the DBE over the past four years had focused on ensuring that each district was able to operate at the required levels.

The key focus areas in the DBE’s work towards effective districts were firstly to establish a clear policy environment for the work of districts, and to provide norms and standards as appropriate. Secondly, it had focused on ensuring that all districts were manned by the right people in the right roles, as over time they had picked up that some people may have not been the right people for the roles, and that was an area the Department was working on. Thirdly, it looked at ensuring that each district had a minimum resource package and tools of the trade, so that people were able to do the work. Fourthly, it was defining and monitoring standard operations for supporting schools and managing districts. Lastly, the Department had created a platform for the sharing of best practices amongst district directors.

A major concern currently was the slow filling of critical vacancies in many districts and provinces. This was an area that the DBE monitored quarterly and urged provinces to fill posts. When looking at how provinces assessed their hires, one found that all generally used competency assessments for directors and in the hire of CES’s.

An area that had also been an issue for the districts was about them having the necessary tools of the trade to enable them to do the required work. Feedback from the monitoring of the availability of these resources had shown that some provinces and districts were worse off than others, rendering any effective support to schools by these offices almost impossible. The DBE had developed and adopted a Minimum Resource Package (MRP)/ Basic Tools of Trade for district officials. This had been approved by HEDCOM and had led to a significant improvement in the Northern Cape, Limpopo and the Western Cape, which had used this pack to ensure that all officers had the resources. The Department looked at the offices’ information communication technology (ICT), where there were a lot of districts that did not have basic resources -- desktop computers, internet access or access to telephone lines, fax machines, printers and photocopiers. These had been set as the minimum resource package that provinces and districts were using to resource their provinces.

During the discussion, Members asked about the geographical size of districts, the high number of acting heads of departments, the performance of the Eastern Cape, the low visits to certain provinces and the lack of basic infrastructure at schools. In addition, they about the norms and standards for schools and how the Department planned to expand on the good things and eliminate the bad things. 

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks

The Chairperson said the purpose of the engagement was for the Department of Basic Education (DBE) to brief the Committee on its work and support of districts, with the understanding that if systems of education were going to be effective and coordinated, then districts had to be very strong. Committee oversight visits had shown that districts with stronger leadership and management were those that normally did well. Districts were there to improve the teaching and learning practices in schools. They had to be there for two-way communication between the districts and the schools. There had to be hard working and committed circuit inspectorates that gave support to schools. There also needed to be hard working subject advisors who were given to schools to ensure that they finished their curriculum in good time and conducted assessments in alignment with the norms and standards, and improved the quality of education.

There were 81 districts in South Africa, and the Committee wanted to assess the impact of the Department in ensuring that those areas in rural settings were receiving the service and were being supported. While in KwaZulu-Natal, the Chairperson had met with the official responsible for district support, and had gone around with her. It had been good to see that she was able to answer questions posed to her clearly and truthfully. There had also been targeted areas in those districts that had not performed well previously to ensure that the curriculum was covered not just for Grade 12, but for all grades, as this was important. Those districts without effective leadership were not performing well, and there was a need for decisive action to allocate and appoint district leadership, and to fill vacant positions.

Deputy Minister’s opening comments

Mr Enver Surty, Deputy Minister, DBE, said the issue of districts and their role was important in the delivery of quality education. The Minister of Basic Education, who was in Zimbabwe for a Southern African Development Community (SADC) meeting, had to be congratulated for recognising the important role that districts played, and the role of district directors, in the efficient and effective delivery of quality education. She had resolved from the beginning that the DBE should meet all district directors on a quarterly basis across the country, and the Department had complied with that undertaking. What was interesting was that 50% of the agenda for those meetings came from the DBE and the other half was from the district directors, so they were able to speak on issues they wanted to address.

This had contributed directly to the stability of the Department, and had added effect to the meaning of co-operative governance, where it was recognised that all spheres of government were interrelated and had ao responsibility to work co-operatively and in collaboration. This was a good demonstration and had taken away the element of competition between provinces. The additional benefits were that colleagues had an opportunity to network, and the evolution of a professional community of practice among the directors had been remarkable. The DBE had seen them share ideas and reflect on best practices, which had directly contributed to the strengthening of districts. It also enabled the Ministry and the Department to better understand the perspective of districts, so that not only Heads of Departments (HODs) had an opportunity to share their views with the Heads of Education Departments Committee (HEDCOM) or through the Council of Education Ministers (CEM) meetings, but the district directors themselves were able to give different nuances on the challenges and accomplishments of districts.

A critical element was the relationship between districts and the professional teacher development. What the Department had done was to recognise the reality with regard to the professional development of educators. For example, there was no university in the Northern Cape or Limpopo, so educators would go to universities that were far away just to gain professional development. The Department had then embarked on a programme of establishing teacher resource centres across the country, and there were now 147 teacher resource centres in South Africa. Every district in the country had at least one centre, which meant there were spaces to further develop teachers. There were also district managers who were directly responsible for the capacity programmes available at these centres to ensure development.

There was also the importance of data. The Department had recommended that the programmes should be data driven, not just focussing on the Matric, but data across the system. When looking at the performance of districts last year, six of the ten well-performing districts had come from Gauteng, and four from the Western Cape. Each one of those well-performing districts used data to assess and identify problems and then determined what nature of support was needed, looking at the deficits and then making the appropriate interventions. Information Communication Technology (ICT) had become a very important component both in terms of outreach to schools and also how districts were able to manage their oversight, support and monitoring of schools within their area of responsibility.

There was also another element that was often overlooked; how does one create an environment within a unitary state where one could say all spoke the same language when referring to district directors and circuits, and all had the same and shared understanding of those elements. Ms Palesa Tyobeka, Deputy Director General, DBE, had assisted in the development of a framework of what rural education should look like.

The issue of quality education was closely linked to the curriculum -- how learners responded to assessment tasks set out in the curriculum, which would determine performance and achievement. The Department had developed an instrument called the Learner Unit Record Information and Tracking System (LURITS), which enabled it to track learners. At this point, it had covered more than 10.9 million learners. However, one could not speak of data without speaking about the web-based approach and getting data in real-time from concerned areas of education. The Department was also working hard to create a web-based platform where there would be an ability to do oversight and curriculum coverage at any point in time at any school.

Referring to the nature of the partnerships the DBE had created, he said it had worked with the National Education Collaboration Trust (NECT), which had identified eight underperforming districts in the country where they would work. This organisation had covered over 4 000 schools, but would be working towards full district coverage in the coming year.

DBE Presentation: Districts Monitoring, Support and Improvement

Ms Palesa Tyobeka, Deputy Director General: Planning and Delivery Oversight Unit, DBE, said education districts played a central role in ensuring that all learners had access to quality education. They were often, especially in rural areas, the only vehicle for initiating, testing, driving and sustaining systemic reforms. The National Development Plan (NDP): Vision 2030, stated that districts had a responsibility to “provide targeted support to improve practices within schools.” It was also vital to ensure their support was not generic. The districts needed to ensure communication and information sharing between authorities and schools. The NDP also made a strong point on the need for districts to have the requisite skills and capabilities to provide the necessary support. Currently, education districts differed in size, capabilities and resourcing. The work of the DBE over the past four years had focused on ensuring that each district was able to operate at the required levels.

The key focus areas in the DBE’s work towards effective districts were firstly to establish a clear policy environment for the work of districts, and to provide norms and standards as appropriate. Secondly, it had focused on ensuring that all districts were manned by the right people in the right roles, as over time they had picked up that some people may have not been the right people for the roles, and that was an area the Department was working on. Thirdly, it looked at ensuring that each district had a minimum resource package and tools of the trade, so that people were able to do the work. Fourthly, it was defining and monitoring standard operations for supporting schools and managing districts. Lastly, the Department had created a platform for the sharing of best practices amongst district directors.

The policy context had been very important to put in place, The Minister of Basic Education had gazetted the policy on the organisation, roles and responsibilities of education districts on 3 April 2013. This policy had been determined in terms of the National Education Policy Act (NEPA), which empowered the Minister to “determine national policy for the planning, provision, financing, staffing, coordination, management, governance, monitoring, evaluation and well-being of the education system”, which included the  districts. The policy laid the groundwork for a uniform system of district organisation and support in all 81 districts across the nine provinces. The policy also provided for the alignment of district and circuit boundaries with municipal and wards or sub-council areas, as appropriate. These boundaries were to make educational sense and not exceed the maximum size expressed in terms of the number of schools in a district or a circuit. There were norms of between 250 and 300 schools per district and between 25 and 30 schools per circuit. The policy also outlined the four main roles that districts had to execute, with due priority given to schools most in need of their services: planning, support, oversight and accountability, and public engagement.

The norms fell short of looking at the staffing of districts and in recognition of that, the Council of Education Ministers (CEM) had approved the minimum norms and standards for the staffing of districts. These norms were aspirational, and would guide the full staffing of districts in the next three to five years, based on provincial budgets. The overriding intention was to ensure that each district had the capacity to bring effective professional, management and administrative services to educational institutions in order to help them improve the quality of teaching and learning. The staffing norms had been developed to ensure a uniform system for minimum district staffing, organisation and support across the country, to ensure equity in the system.  The minimum district staffing norms covered:

  • District management posts.
  • Curriculum support and delivery.
  • Institutional management, governance and support.
  • District learner support.
  • Examination and assessment.
  • Human resource management.
  • Finance and auxiliary services.
  • Circuit posts.

Ms Tyobeka presented a table that indicated the national picture for districts, where the norm was an average of 317 schools per district. There was an average number of 26 schools per circuit, with an average of 12 347 learners per circuit. There were still provinces which were major outliers, and the Department was working to rectify that. Limpopo had 814 schools per district, which was huge. The Eastern Cape had too many districts for the number of schools that they had. The DBE had worked at the gazetting of the policy with the two districts, and had received agreement for the Minister of Education in Limpopo to split the districts, from the five into ten. In the Eastern Cape, a decision had been made to move from 23 districts to 12. Gauteng, for instance, together with the Free State, had the least number of schools per district. Gauteng had 174 schools, with their biggest district having 275 schools, with an average of 15 schools per circuit. This explains the performance advantage that provinces like Gauteng had, because they were able to support all schools.

There was also the issue of recruiting the right people, where one would find that some places did not have the right people doing the right job, or where there had been recruitment of the wrong people leading districts and circuits, or even being subject advisors. Most provinces prescribed to the recruitment procedures, where a district director must go through a competency assessment. Seven of the provinces adhered to that, with the exception of the Eastern Cape and the Free State. The Department was working with the provinces to ensure that all hires were put through the assessment. Gauteng and the Western Cape had gone beyond the policy and used competence assessments for the appointments of Chief Education Specialists (CES), or district directors and circuit managers. The Department wanted to introduce that system across the board for subject advisors and circuit managers.

A major concern currently was the slow filling of critical vacancies in many districts and provinces. This was an area that the DBE monitored quarterly and urged provinces to fill posts. When looking at how provinces assessed their hires, one found that all generally used competency assessments for directors and in the hire of CES’s.

With regard to the filling of prioritised posts, the CEM had prioritised certain posts at their lekgotla in June 2015. District and circuit managers, and some subject advisors -- especially for subjects like mathematics and English -- were being monitored. There were 21 acting directors across the country, with the highest number being in the Eastern Cape, but the EC was now reducing their districts to 12, which was why they had not filled some of those posts. Looking at circuit manager posts, there were huge vacancies in the EC and KwaZulu-Natal, which had advertised their posts.

An area that had also been an issue for the districts was about them having the necessary tools of the trade to enable them to do the required work. Feedback from the monitoring of the availability of these resources had shown that some provinces and districts were worse off than others, rendering any effective support to schools by these offices almost impossible. The DBE had developed and adopted a Minimum Resource Package (MRP)/ Basic Tools of Trade for district officials. This had been approved by HEDCOM and had led to a significant improvement in the Northern Cape, Limpopo and the Western Cape, which had used this pack to ensure that all officers had the resources. The Department looked at the offices’ information communication technology (ICT), where there were a lot of districts that did not have basic resources -- desktop computers, internet access or access to telephone lines, fax machines, printers and photocopiers. These had been set as the minimum resource package that provinces and districts were using to resource their provinces.

The next area of focus was to build the capacity of the people who had been wrong appointments, but were already in the system. It was the responsibility of the Department to get them up to speed. There were three main areas of capacity building. One was building the capacity around data management, data processing and utilisation for district directors and data managers. An initial sample of 30 of the 81 districts had been identified to take part in the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) funded training programme, which was facilitated and accredited by the University of Stellenbosch. The programme targeted two officials in each of the identified districts i.e. the district director and the district data specialist. The Department was in conversation with Stellenbosch and UNICEF to continue with the programme and avail it to all districts. The second area was that the DBE, working in collaboration with the Education, Training and Development Practices (ETDP) Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) had implemented a capacity-building programme for personal assistants and/secretaries to district directors. The course was facilitated and accredited by the University of Pretoria. The third area was the induction and orientation programme for newly appointed district directors and circuit managers. This was being driven through the National School of Government, as it looked at more generic public management issues and specific standard operating routines relevant to district and circuit functions and responsibilities.

The DBE also monitored what districts were doing. This was reported through an annual survey on the support that districts give to schools and the level of satisfaction of school principals on the support they receive from education districts. The sample of schools for the 2015 survey had been drawn randomly using information from the 2015 Snap Survey data – a mixture of small, medium and large schools from both rural and urban contexts. The study had focused on two main issues. One was the number of school visits by district officials, namely district directors, district management and governance support teams, circuit managers (institutional management, development and support officials), district learner support teams and district curriculum support teams. The other was the rating of the district support received by schools in the fields of curriculum and assessment support, management and governance support, and learner support services. School principals were requested to rate the support they received from district offices in the 2015 academic year on a four-point scale, where four was very useful, three was useful, two was somewhat useful, and one was not useful. 63 primary schools and 63 secondary schools per province had been selected for participation, totalling 1 134 schools across the country, or 126 schools per province. For reporting purposes, all schools that rated the support as very useful and useful were deemed as schools that were satisfied with the support they received from district offices in 2015, and all those that rated the support as somewhat useful and not useful were deemed as schools that were not satisfied with the support they received from district offices.

There had been a fairly high response rate, with the poorest response coming from the Eastern Cape because the province had been busy with a furniture audit and therefore could not cover all the schools while the two projects were running concurrently. In the Free State, which was the second lowest, there had been challenges around teacher unions which did not want the Department to go into the schools. Overall, most of the visits to schools across the country had been for curriculum support, as well as institutional management and governance support. These two went together, because in a dysfunctional school, one could not have effective teaching. Visits which had been focused on learner support were the lowest across the country, which was a concern for the Department, as this was its focus. The top performing provinces tended to visit schools more often, with Gauteng and Western Cape showing an even balance between curriculum and institutional and governance support. Poorer performing provinces tended to show the opposite.

Ms Tyobeka presented the national picture around school visits:

District Director Visits

Gauteng had the highest percentage, at 22%, while some of the provinces that the Department was concerned with were the EC (1%) and KwaZulu-Natal (3%). The Free State was at 6%, but they had strengthened their ICT and therefore did not need to be on the ground at all times and were able to support from where they were.

Curriculum Support and Assessment

Schools rated support in the following areas: provision of curriculum materials and assessment support, in particular around issues of administering school-based assessments (all grades) and the availability and utilisation of Annual National Assessment (ANA)/National Senior Certificate (NSC) examination diagnostic reports. They looked at issues of support and monitoring of curriculum coverage, monitoring utilisation of teaching resources, such as workbooks and other learner/teacher support material (LTSM); on-site support for teachers; accessibility and availability of district subject specialists for advice; and promoting ICT in education.

District Curriculum Team Visits

Gauteng obtained the highest score for curriculum team visits, at 20%.  There were low levels of support for the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo. Nationally, the provincial education departments that scored lowest in this aspect were also underperforming in the 2015 NSC, except for the Free State. There was evidence that showed that if schools were supported, then performance increased.

On-site support for teachers

Ms Tyobeka said this referred to the level of satisfaction from teachers, and there had been good ratings from the Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, North West and Western Cape, which were also the well performing provinces. The top performing provinces again topped the satisfaction rating in this area, with Gauteng at 77.8%, Free State at 73.4 and North West at 71.6%, while poorer performing provinces showed the opposite, with KZN at 35% and Limpopo at 57.6%.

Promoting ICT in education

The data showed that the Department was still not doing well in terms of ICT and ICT support. KwaZulu-Natal indicated the support was ‘not useful’, followed by Limpopo, and these were the provinces the Department was concerned with. What was interesting was that the satisfaction level in terms of ICT in the Western Cape was higher than in Gauteng, which could be explained by the fact that the Western Cape had started earlier with its ICT support than Gauteng.

Providing support on Human Resource, filling of all vacant posts and dealing with grievance matters

The province concerning the Department was the Eastern Cape, where they had a high ‘somewhat useful’ indicator. Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal also had their problems. Provinces like Gauteng and the Western Cape had high satisfaction levels which went up to the 90s. The filling of posts was being managed by policy, and the fiscal timeline and grievances were being addressed.

Keeping proper school records and databases

The Deputy Minister had been very firm on the need to develop this system, the issue of data and how provinces implemented the system the Department had introduced. It was evident that there was real movement across the provinces to ensure proper school recording. The Western Cape was not always committed to the introduction of the South African School Administration and Management System (SA-SAMS), but progress was being made in this area.

School infrastructure maintenance in line with South African Schools Act (SASA)

There was a growing need to monitor the maintenance of infrastructure, and the Department had looked at whether there was support and training to enable people to do this. It was evident that nationally the Department was not doing well. This issue was important, because it allowed the Department to be proactive in maintaining schools.

Supporting Representative Council of Learners (RCL) where applicable

The Department believed that by working closely with student leaders, they could to minimise some of the uprisings that were happening, such as in Vuwani, where they had seen that they had not invested in making students part of the system. Provinces that were doing well were the North West, Mpumalanga and the Free State. This was an area that the Department was bringing the the fore, so learners could feel like they owned the school.

Supporting the holding of regular stakeholder meetings

Functional schools do well in the holding of regular school management team (SMT), staff, school governing body (SGB) and parents’ meetings. The Department believes that this was an area it could improve on, particularly in Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal.

Supporting the establishment of school-based support teams (SBSTs)

This was linked to the support of learners, because these SBSTs dealt with the issue of remediation for learners who needed referrals. This was part of the policy of inclusion, and ensuring that these teams were supported and functional. This programme was not doing well in Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal.

Minister’s meetings with districts

A major part of the DBE’s support to districts had been the creation of a forum for all 81 districts, for provincial senior managers responsible for districts to meet for two days in every quarter. This forum, established by the Minister of Basic Education in 2012, was led by the Minister and Deputy Minister of Education, supported by all the Directors and Deputy Directors General of the DBE. The primary focus of this forum had been to reflect together on the sector performances and identify where strengthening was needed, to plan together for improved learning outcomes in particular grades and subjects, and to share provincial/district-level best practices.  The Minister had led 19 of these meetings since 2012. The key benefit had been the national focus on improved learning outcomes by all.

Ms Tyobeka concluded that districts were central to the performance of the system and critical to the provision of quality education for all learners in the system. In recognition of this the DBE, working with and through provinces, had created a national momentum to ensure a deliberate response to address the inequitable distribution of opportunities for some learners, irrespective of their geographical location.  The results of both quarterly and annual monitoring surveys were presented at HEDCOM and CEM for their attention. These were also used to strengthen DBE support to districts.  Focused attention to understanding issues around district capacities and processes to ensure improved capacity to support schools, was the overriding focus of district monitoring, support and improvement.

Discussion

The Chairperson said the Committee was happy with the work done, and the interventions presented had been informed by scientific research.

Mr D Stock (ANC, Northern Cape) drew attention to the Department’s highlighting of the critical role of the districts in the smooth implementation of the Department’s programmes. With regard to district sizes, he was also very concerned as he was worried that the Northern Cape had the biggest geographical size, but had the smallest population. The last time they had been in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal for oversight visits, part of the issues and challenges had been the high number of acting heads of departments. As much as this was a provincial responsibly, there needed to be some intervention coming from the national office to address the instability, especially in the Eastern Cape. With regard to visits by district directors, Gauteng was the most visited -- what was the reason for that? On the other hand, the rural provinces were the ones with the lowest level of visits -- how was the Department going to deal with those disparities?

Ms P Samka-Mququ (ANC, Eastern Cape) said she was worried about the performance of the Eastern Cape. In the presentation, it had been highlighted that there were low visits in the province and the province was always last in everything. Why was that the case? Was it because of the topography of the province, or was there another factor? The state of infrastructure, especially in Mbizana, was very bad. Why were the poorer provinces always performing the worst? Also, there needed to be more focus on the foundation phases, as much as there was for the higher grades.

Ms T Mpambo-Sibhukwana (DA, Western Cape) said that there needed to be a focus on getting the right people for the jobs. Monitoring of the schools meant that subject advisors had to travel, but when one was in Lady Frere, the roads proved that there was no collaboration between the DBE and the Department of Transport. This limited the freedom of movement, as the roads were not in a good condition. Subject advisors also had to travel vast distances, which limited their mobility. There needed to be a strengthening of the monitoring of infrastructure in rural provinces. With regard to tablets and broadband, what was the situation in rural areas? On the monitoring of principals, there needed to be a lessening of the power that the SA Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU) had in the Eastern Cape, especially in respect of the employment of teachers. What powers did the Department have over the school’s governing body?  

Ms T Mampuru (ANC, Limpopo) said during a debriefing with the MEC, he had indicated that the tools of trade were doing well. When giving tools of trade -- for example, laptops and computers -- was it possible for the circuit managers to go to the schools? When merging grades across schools, what factors were in place, such as providing more teachers for the school, and dealing with special issues? During an oversight visit, a high school did not have water, and the principal had said it was against the norms and standards to take money and purchase water for cooking and cleaning. In Limpopo, it had been said that there would be ten districts, and there was an issue currently of appointing a district manager, and the current person was still acting. There must be a plan in place for appointing managers, especially with the separation of districts in Limpopo. With district learner support, one of the schools visited had been Masemola High School, where they were complaining about the lack parental support and non-attendance by SGBs. There were also complaints about teenage pregnancy where, in a year, one could find 30 to 50 pregnant learners ranging from 14 to18 years old. There was also a school where the building was dilapidated to such an extent, that they could not hang up notices. Could there be a rotation plan for circuit managers, as there was a new circuit manager in Drakenbergs, between Limpopo and Mpumalanga, who was performing very well and the results were starting to improve. The manager was able to visit schools and make follow-ups on his own.

Ms L Dlamini (ANC, Mpumalanga) asked at what level the national department visited schools. During the provincial week, the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) had focused on health and education, and at  a school called Isifiso Sethu Primary School in Standerton, the infrastructure situation had not been right. There had been a shack which served as an administration block and the deputy principal’s office, and it blocked the whole school.  The response of the HOD had been that they had to wait for norms and standards, but there was no indication of when these would be finalized. What were these norms and standards? In the Eastern Cape, there had been issues with administration and there had not been much improvement, meaning that even the national Department was failing with its intervention there. The districts had complained about the provincial office. The number of schools per circuit was a problem -- the policy says there should be between 250 and 300 schools, but there was an average of 800. What was the problem in addressing this? She did not agree with the need to reduce to number of districts in the province. There needed to be a look at the power of the unions within the provinces. In Limpopo, there was a school with a new looking block in front, but behind that building there was a terrible looking school. The sanitation was a real issue as well, and the toilets were being used by the learners as a place to smoke. They had spoken with the MEC and he had promised to follow up on that.

Mr C Hattingh (DA, North West) said that from his perspective, there were top performing provinces, the low performing provinces and then there was the middle, from which there was some migration up and down and vice versa. There were, however, inconsistencies in the performance of the spending of infrastructure grants, reporting to the DBE and reaction to Department initiatives, further training and capacity building. In the top group, there seemed to be common denominators that made them better, and in the bottom groups there were also some common denominators that made them not perform. How could the Department expand on the good things and eliminate the bad things. What could be done to share strategies and strengthen the strong points?      

The Chairperson asked if there was a summary of what was included in the tool of trade package. Were there enough cars, computers and work space for the officials that were working in the districts? Secondly, in the development of the 147 teacher resource centres, was there effective monitoring to ensure that they were effectively used to improve the performance of teachers at the classroom level? regarding the issue of the Free State teacher unions being against the Department being present, were there no agreements made between the Department and the unions for the implementation of the programme? There were two provinces which were not using the competency assessments to employ the district directors -- was there a reason why they were not coming to the party?

She referred to the issue of health officials that were supposed to be working in special Schools. The Committee had visited Vulekani in KwaZulu-Natal, where the learners were confined to wheel chairs. The learners were mentally retarded and needed very strict and regular attention from medical specialists, but there were no medical practitioners at that school. What was the arrangement between the Department and other departments that offered special services? There was some correlation between the schools that were visited more by officials, and the level of performance, although it was understood that one could not copy Gauteng or the Western Cape in terms of their topography and resources. There would need to be a directing of a lot of resources to the rural provinces to try and equal those other two provinces. Were the resources being deployed to those poor provinces being effectively used to improve the quality of education?

DBE’s response

The Deputy Minister responded to the questions from the Members, and started by recognising the provincial perspective that was adopted by the Members of the NCOP. The commitment of the DBE was to the best interests of the learner, irrespective of where the learner was provincially based. For example, the principal beneficiary with the eradication of mud schools and unsafe structures had been the Eastern Cape, as all the other provinces had had their mud schools completely removed. The Eastern Cape had received more than 100 schools, and the second beneficiary had been the Western Cape, where the reality was if one went to Atlantis and to Heideveld, one would have that phenomenon as well. The Western Cape had been the beneficiary of 22 schools, with another three in the pipeline.

The other reality was that there had been only 22 years of democracy, which was not too long, and the country had inherited a disproportionate system in the country. Therefore it was very difficult to compare Gauteng to KwaZulu-Natal, or the Western Cape to Limpopo. The one was rural in nature, the other urban. The huge advantage in terms of capital infrastructure, resources and economic development and growth, played into the realities of education. Therefore one needed to look at the socio-economic context and realities in terms of development. For example, the Northern Cape was the largest province, but it had to lowest population, and Gauteng was the smallest province, but had the largest learner population.

These were the realities that the Department had to contend with.

Education was a concurrent competency, which meant one had a national Department that oversaw everything, but provinces received about 97% of the budget allocation, and that control lay with the MECs. What the national office does with the minimum resources available to them is to oversee and support provinces, especially where there are definite needs. If a district director says he has to travel 700 km to get authority for a pen, that person should not be a district director, because that is absurd. In the context of ICT and where connectivity existed, the Eastern Cape was under 32% four year ago. It was now at 96% connectively for administrative purposes. This meant that ICT could be utilized to get the necessary authority, without having to travel 700 km.

These realities were also about difficulties on how to teach and reach things. There were two examples of how to teach and reach. If one went to the Cape Flats in the Western Cape, one would find that  gangsterism was more rife and pronounced than in any other province, which meant learning and teaching in those environments was difficult and some intervention was needed. The Minister had spoken to the Minister of Police to ensure that special attention was given to those areas in the Western Cape and Gauteng, which was also becoming a real problem in this regard. There was an element of identifying needs at a particular school and responding to them in a particular way.

He responded to the issue raised by the Chairperson in regard to health. In the Western Cape, there had been litigation in terms of which the court had found that not enough policy had been developed to cater for learners with severe mental deficiencies. They were now on the verge of declaring a policy that dealt with that particular aspect, so the concerns raised by the Chairperson would be addressed by that policy, which would clearly state to responsibilities of the DBE versus those of the Health Department and what kind of capacity and services had to be provided and what kind of resources must be made available. There was a policy being finalised and it would be adopted soon.

Similarly, rural education must be looked at through a different lens. There had been a round table meeting specifically to look at rural education, looking at issues of equity, socio-economic and poverty indices, et cetera. There had been discussion about the realities of teacher retention, the issue of integration, access to roads and education provision -- all these realities had to be dealt with at the round table, and a number of recommendations had emerged from there.

The issues with regard to the lack of response from the Eastern Cape and Free State were very important. The Department was doing an audit of furniture, and had had to audit more than 5 000 schools in the Eastern Cape to find out if there was suitable furniture for every learner according to their ages. The Department was currently at 98.5% completion of the task, where there had been an audit and a double check. More than 75 000 units of furniture, through the intervention of the national Department, had been provided to the Eastern Cape, and there were another 150 000 units that were in the process of delivery.

There had been a problem in the Free State. The Department had good relationships with all the unions, but what may be the case at national level may not be the same at provincial level, where there may be specific problems. For example, in KwaZulu-Natal, there had been issues around the stipends for practitioners. The unions had wanted to know why all other provinces were receiving around R5 000, but in KwaZulu-Natal it was between R2 500 and R3 000. It was less about the unions themselves, but more about the ability to engage with them and ensure information sharing.

With regard to teacher resource centres, 70 of them had very sophisticated connectivity and another 20 had connectively, but not at the same level of sophistication. Within the next year, all would have broadband and super connectivity. Each one of the office managers at those centres had been trained, as it was important for the centres to become a resource tool for teachers in enabling them to integrate ICT into the curriculum. The nature of a library had changed dramatically, and this was where one collected one’s data. The tools of the trade might be there, but the ability to utilize them became critical.

On the issue of competency, district directors and senior managers had to be tested and must have the required competency. Where provinces did not comply, the national office would make a political intervention, as that was non-negotiable, as principals too should be tested. It was not only about qualification, but also about skills and experience, and therefore the new legislation would allow people to be tested.

Addressing Mr Hattingh’s comments, she said that in the past four years one would have found that Gauteng was a top performer, followed in the year thereafter by the Free State, and in the year after that by Gauteng, and in the next year, the Western Cape. At the top there was the Free State, North West, Gauteng and the Western Cape, with Mpumalanga coming close. At the bottom, one would find Limpopo and the Eastern Cape. That was the reality, which was also due to the number of homelands those provinces had and how they had to merge them, and what impact those mergers continued to have even today. The North West had one homeland, whereas Limpopo had five. There were districts that performed well in Limpopo, where in Venda there were schools that perform well in mathematics and science -- even better than the former Model-C schools. One supported those districts and also looked at what they were doing right and how to transfer those best practices to other districts. The orientation was to look at how to strengthen districts. There had never been a job description for a circuit manager, but now there was a policy that described the function of what a circuit manager did. Subject advisors were usually targeted for high schools and not for primary schools, but that paradigm had been changed.

Ms Tyobeka said she was the one who coordinated the support. KwaZulu-Natal had issues with the post-provisioning norms, and the national Department would go there with its teams to assist. The Eastern Cape may say they had a problem with their infrastructure, so national office would then take its infrastructure team and  go and assist in that particular area. This was the kind of support being provided. What was critical was that when there was intervention, resources were made available to the department.

With regard to bridging the ICT technology divide, the Department had digitized 94 subjects that were interactive. Workbooks were being digitized and were also interactive. They had now moved forward, but the biggest challenge was connectivity.

The issue of norms and standards was very critical. It was important to understand that there were three sources of income for infrastructure. There was the Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) programme, which was a national programme for the replacement of schools built wholly out of mud and unsafe materials. Then there was the  infrastructure grant which was provided to each province, of which 20% was allocated for maintenance. Limpopo and the Eastern Cape were not doing well in regard to maintenance, and Gauteng had overspent because of its sanitation demands, with the Western Cape almost on par.

In terms of the Division of Revenue Act (DoRA), seven of the nine provinces allocated funds towards infrastructure. In the Eastern Cape, there were around 103 state of the art schools that had been built, and each was full resourced. There were still around 200 schools that had to be rebuilt. The major problems in the Eastern Cape were the 1 200-odd non-viable schools that had fewer than 135 learners. If those schools were merged, then that number became 300 or 350. In some instances, there were schools within 1 km of each other. Steps needed to be taken before mergers and rationalisation could take place, however, which was why the Department had produced a guide to form part of the legislation.

The issue of circuits and the number of schools had arisen, and it was very complex. One had to look at areas in terms of growth, development and infrastructure, and in terms of its population. A circuit worked well in terms of proximity to each other, how close/far they were in terms of population density, where in one province the population in 50 schools could equate to the population of 10 schools in another province. Those were the realities that informed the composition of circuits.

Ms Tyobeka said she and her team looked at the guidelines and determined what is appropriate for each province and each district degrading the composition of circuits as the Department could not just align itself to the municipal boundaries to determine education districts.

With regards to the schools mentioned by Ms Dlamini, it should be remembered that provinces have more ability to handle the day-to-day running and the Norms and Standards are there to determine which schools have been planned for construction, but provinces are responsible for maintenance and their own education infrastructure grants. The Department is working with provinces to ensure that they all follow the policy on competency assessments when these vacant posts are filled, then only then would there be efficient and effective monitoring of schools, especially in the low preforming provinces. The post-provisioning norms are also in place to ensure that teacher allocations are along the legislative lines and guidelines.

Mr Surty asked to be excused and Ms Tyobeka continued with the responses

Ms Tyobeka said the Department was aware of the issues in the Eastern Cape and Limpopo and her team had spent more time in those provinces than any other. Whenever there are issues, the Department did not mind going to those areas and giving its expertise to the provincial office as well as districts and circuits. The Committee needed to remember that the National office could only fully step in and take over provinces if there was an active intervention and the province was not performing. As the Deputy Minister has stated, the National office could only do so much with the limited resources it had, but would continue to look for ways to make the system work and ensure the delivery of quality education for all learners.

Mr Surty returned and noted that the meeting had run overtime. The Department wanted to ensure that Members left with a broad sense of what it was doing and would always avail itself to the Committee to answer any questions it had.

The Chairperson thanked the DBE delegation for their presence and indicated that the meeting had gone over by 10 minutes. She said there were meetings and debates that Members needed to prepare for and a sitting at 14h00 in the House.

The meeting was adjourned.

 

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: