THE school year has started amid uncertainty and scepticism about the 2010 matric results. Apart from Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga being defensive about the sudden improvement, we are yet to see any empirical report on how this phenomenal achievement was attained.
Sorry, "pupils worked hard" just doesn't cut it.
Umalusi, the quality assurance agency, admits that there were statistical moderations to the outcome of the exams and that such moderations are normal.
But what they refuse to answer are questions relating to how these adjustments were made and what the 2010 matric pass rate would have been without such adjustments.
Their reaction to any attempt to find answers has varied from ducking and diving - I speak from experience because when I invited them on my radio programme earlier this week for a discussion, not a confrontation, I was told they are travelling until Wednesday.
Yesterday, I was told they are travelling until next week.
When they are not travelling, they provide condescending responses to legitimate questions. Umalusi said last week the process was confidential and "highly complex, technical and qualitative".
So, basically Umalusi will not explain the methodology because you and I are too stupid to understand and it is in the national interest for them not to be transparent.
Little do they realise that by obfuscating in this manner they have inadvertently confirmed that the true picture is not so glorious.
It is normal for people to run away when they have bad news or in this case cannot give a scientific and plausible explanation for the good news.
I do not claim to know what the actual pass rate is but I question why Umalusi and the government feel they have a right to make decisions on our behalf and not even communicate why such decisions were made.
These are crucial results of an education system that is being funded by our taxes, yet the powers that be have anointed themselves the sole custodians of any information relating to those results.
As citizens of this country we are effectively being told by Umalusi and the government "this is what you need to know, accept it and shut up".
I do not understand why Motshekga felt the need to use the occasion of the ANC's 99th anniversary, where she was speaking in her capacity as chairperson of the Women's League, to address what she perceives to be her critics.
My advice to Motshekga is to stop being paranoid.
People who question something are not your critics. The minister needs to realise that we are her partners.
In our different ways we are all custodians of this education system and we want this government to succeed in stabilising our education and producing matriculants who can stand their own against the best in the world.
Our country can only get better and be globally competitive if the education system is able to churn out graduates who are competent and efficient.
A question is not a weapon of attack and Umalusi and the department should be delighted that they live in a country where ordinary citizens, academics, the media and analysts care enough to ask questions.
Umalusi and the minister have answered some questions but they are yet to address the fundamental aspects that pertain to the nature of the adjustments, the specific subjects affected, the margin of the adjustment and the reasons.
If the method is complicated, we appreciate their kindness but they must not worry because someone in this massive country is bound to understand and explain to those of us who lack the intelligence and insight to navigate these complex things.
I have no doubt the minister's heart is in the right place. I am mindful that she and her predecessors inherited a dysfunctional and unequal education system.
But the ANC government's experimentation with moribund and useless education policies exacerbated the problem, especially for the poor, black learner. The last thing we need is to apply solutions that do not help our children.
We cannot afford the secrecy that is shrouding the 2010 results. If we are open and transparent, we have a greater chance of using our collective strengths to create a new dawn for future generations.
Secrecy over matric results is suspect
THE school year has started amid uncertainty and scepticism about the 2010 matric results. Apart from Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga being defensive about the sudden improvement, we are yet to see any empirical report on how this phenomenal achievement was attained.
Sorry, "pupils worked hard" just doesn't cut it.
Umalusi, the quality assurance agency, admits that there were statistical moderations to the outcome of the exams and that such moderations are normal.
But what they refuse to answer are questions relating to how these adjustments were made and what the 2010 matric pass rate would have been without such adjustments.
Their reaction to any attempt to find answers has varied from ducking and diving - I speak from experience because when I invited them on my radio programme earlier this week for a discussion, not a confrontation, I was told they are travelling until Wednesday.
Yesterday, I was told they are travelling until next week.
When they are not travelling, they provide condescending responses to legitimate questions. Umalusi said last week the process was confidential and "highly complex, technical and qualitative".
So, basically Umalusi will not explain the methodology because you and I are too stupid to understand and it is in the national interest for them not to be transparent.
Little do they realise that by obfuscating in this manner they have inadvertently confirmed that the true picture is not so glorious.
It is normal for people to run away when they have bad news or in this case cannot give a scientific and plausible explanation for the good news.
I do not claim to know what the actual pass rate is but I question why Umalusi and the government feel they have a right to make decisions on our behalf and not even communicate why such decisions were made.
These are crucial results of an education system that is being funded by our taxes, yet the powers that be have anointed themselves the sole custodians of any information relating to those results.
As citizens of this country we are effectively being told by Umalusi and the government "this is what you need to know, accept it and shut up".
I do not understand why Motshekga felt the need to use the occasion of the ANC's 99th anniversary, where she was speaking in her capacity as chairperson of the Women's League, to address what she perceives to be her critics.
My advice to Motshekga is to stop being paranoid.
People who question something are not your critics. The minister needs to realise that we are her partners.
In our different ways we are all custodians of this education system and we want this government to succeed in stabilising our education and producing matriculants who can stand their own against the best in the world.
Our country can only get better and be globally competitive if the education system is able to churn out graduates who are competent and efficient.
A question is not a weapon of attack and Umalusi and the department should be delighted that they live in a country where ordinary citizens, academics, the media and analysts care enough to ask questions.
Umalusi and the minister have answered some questions but they are yet to address the fundamental aspects that pertain to the nature of the adjustments, the specific subjects affected, the margin of the adjustment and the reasons.
If the method is complicated, we appreciate their kindness but they must not worry because someone in this massive country is bound to understand and explain to those of us who lack the intelligence and insight to navigate these complex things.
I have no doubt the minister's heart is in the right place. I am mindful that she and her predecessors inherited a dysfunctional and unequal education system.
But the ANC government's experimentation with moribund and useless education policies exacerbated the problem, especially for the poor, black learner. The last thing we need is to apply solutions that do not help our children.
We cannot afford the secrecy that is shrouding the 2010 results. If we are open and transparent, we have a greater chance of using our collective strengths to create a new dawn for future generations.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos