How do teachers become inspired and inspiring teachers themselves?

THE matric exam is serious business, as it should be.

The standard of knowledge and skills of our youth shapes the future, so society has vested interests in both.

For more than a century the publication of the annual matric results has accordingly provoked national debate and soul-searching.

Every year it feels as if it is all new - but there are some hardy perennials.

First, there are the rituals that mimic the rites of passage for matriculants: the build-up to the examination, publication of results, outcry, allocation of blame for whether results are up or down, interventions by experts, the establishment of departmental task teams or inquiries and a gradual dissipation of interest as other newsworthy issues take centre stage.

Second, there are the scandals associated with matric. There are enduring scandals of maladministration, cheating and suspected mark-fixing.

Third, the results themselves are the object of scrutiny, suspicion and furious debate every year.

The 10% increase in the pass rate from 1993 to 1994 did not provoke much comment. But similar, even smaller rises during the tenure of education ministers Kader Asmal and Angie Motshekga, aroused intense suspicion.

The spectacular rise in Mpumalanga's results in one year and manifest administrative foul-ups over several years led to more inquiries, the despatch of national teams to sort out their systems and eventual media silence as the problems were solved.

Maths and science results are an ongoing bugbear. In 2008 the number of maths passes went up so high that an incredulous public demanded an investigation. In 2011 they were so low the department promised one.

Fourth, blame for the scandals and the results (whether up or down, believed or not) have chopped and changed.

At the end of apartheid progressive forces blamed the system and the system blamed progressive forces.

Since outcomes-based education has gone the emphasis has shifted to the low matric pass requirement. A low pass requirement is as old as matric itself.

Up to 1931 candidates could qualify for matric in one of two ways, depending on the examining body: either by obtaining at least 30% in six subjects and 1320 marks in the aggregate or passing five academic or six practical subjects at 40%. In 1931 the pass mark requirement of 33.3% was introduced. A candidate could pass some subjects at 33.3% and others at 40%.

When statistics began to be kept from 1954 of the results of black candidates, the same rules applied, though pupils were prepared differently for the exams.

Statistical moderation of results are another ongoing controversial topic in matric discussions.

Controversies dating back to when they were first introduced are recorded in EG Malherbe's second volume of Education in South Africa.

There is likely to be an inquiry into the low pass requirement as there might be into maths literacy.

We must ask whether changing these will affect the basic underlying problem or not.

Will we be fixing symptoms rather than causes?

Remember that maths literacy emerged as a result of public criticism of the prevailing maths higher and standard grade. Opinion-makers pushed for change. And change there was. Maths and maths literacy replaced maths higher and standard grade.

Neither higher and standard grade nor maths and maths literacy were a complete solution to the underlying problem of shortages of maths and science teachers - or teachers who know their subject and how to teach it.

The latter, incidentally, is a global problem and not a uniquely South African one. Even Germany and the US have shortages in this area.

So there might be two inquiries, more proposed curriculum changes, followed by renewed criticism of too much change, or of the change itself, and then another inquiry.

This year the debate and discussion will no doubt also find a place for infrastructure, textbooks and teachers.

No less a person than Nobel prize winner JM Coetzee recently argued that teaching can be a rewarding profession for our top graduates.

Stepping up recruitment into teaching of motivated and well-qualified students who know their subjects continues to be a priority among many systemic initiatives.

All our graduates are potential teachers - but very few choose teaching.

How do we inspire them to go into teaching?

How do teachers become inspired and inspiring teachers themselves?

What role does teacher education play in creating knowledgeable and inspiring teachers?

We need to hear much more about these things.

• Linda Chisholm is an adviser in the Ministry of Basic Education. She writes in her personal capacity.