STRUGGLING TO MAKE THE GRADE

Costly, politically expedient interventions will not fix SA’S dysfunctional education system; we must tackle the root causes of the problem

Without addressing the weak foundations at the primary and secondary school levels, the government’s flagship policy of free tertiary education is likely to deliver disappointing results. At worst, it will prove downright wasteful.

This is one of the hard-hitting conclusions in a new International Monetary Fund (IMF) working paper, “Struggling to Make the Grade: A Review of the Causes and Consequences of the Weak Outcomes of SA’S Education System”.

The authors, the IMF’S senior resident representative in SA, Montfort Mlachila, and Wits PHD student Tlhalefang Moeletsi, note that the government has had limited success in addressing the problems in education.

The paper, which reflects their views and not those of the IMF, aims to provide a data-driven, evidence-based approach to inform the national debate as to what works and what doesn’t when it comes to improving education.

They find that there is broad consensus internationally as to which interventions work best: pedagogical interventions that improve the way work is taught; individualised, longterm teacher training; and accountabilityboosting measures, such as teacher performance incentives.

In the SA context, the researchers conclude that improved teacher training, better school management and greater teacher accountability will likely have the greatest effect on educational performance in the long term.

In the short run, they suggest good-quality textbooks be made available and homework be assigned more frequently.

The paper starts from the premise that inadequate funding is not the main cause of SA’S poor-quality education; how that money is spent is the central issue.

SA spends about 20% of the national budget and 6% of GDP on education, exceeding that of many Sub-saharan African (SSA) countries, as well as the OECD average of 5.2%. However, many SSA countries achieve far better educational outcomes than SA does.

In fact, in terms of the relationship between the amount spent per pupil and pupils’ performance in maths, science and reading, SA is just about the most inefficient country in the world, and certainly much worse than countries with similar levels of wealth.

“The central message is that throwing money at education problems does not unconditionally lead to better outcomes,” says Mlachila. “There is always a need to complement input-based policies and interventions (like better school sanitation and the provision of electronic tablets) with initiatives to enhance school management, increase teacher accountability, and improve pedagogy through continuous training and mentoring.”

Unfortunately, political economy considerations usually favour input-based policy measures, the authors say, because they are visible and can be more easily “captured” by politicians, “who love ribbon-cutting”.

This finding has serious implications for SA’S free tertiary education initiative — a classic example of a highly visible, politically expedient intervention, and one that is adding R20bn annually to SA’S education budget.

The authors argue that while providing free university tuition should improve enrolment and attendance, the payoff “is likely to be limited at best, and wasteful at worst” unless SA addresses the weak foundations at primary and secondary school — which result in more than a quarter of university and college students dropping out in their first year.

“This is not to say that there are not many academically qualified but poor students in tertiary education who deserve help; no doubt this is crucial for this segment of the population. But a large proportion of the tertiary education population come from middle-class and well-off households. They can largely afford the fees outright, or they can repay the loans after getting their degrees,” says Mlachila.

The authors accept that the causes of SA’S poor quality of education are complex and multifaceted, and that legacy factors rooted in apartheid are a significant part of the problem.

Today, the education system is still bimodal: the poorest 75%-80% of pupils