Panday’s solution benefits only elite

I REFER to Kamal Panday’s letter “Reopening risk outweighs the benefit” (Daily News, June 1).

I can’t disagree more with his statement that “children and teachers stay at home and learning goes on”, and his reference to Prof Sewlall’s suggestion that “online teaching is a viable alternative”.

I’m not sure he really understands the effect of his statement. In South Africa, 60% of pupils attend schools that are categorised as semi-rural and rural. These schools have no running water or proper ablution blocks, which civil society is still fighting for 26 years after democracy.

It must be noted that pupils attending rural schools have very limited access to any kind of technology that will enable them to access lessons online. Don’t forget that many of these pupils have language barriers and other educational needs that need to be satisfied. Parents themselves have limited knowledge on the ever changing curriculum in South Africa.

My school services pupils from the low-cost housing projects and informal settlements. Many of them have very limited access to basics, let alone modern technology.

Panday makes reference to Education Incorporated. Who are they servicing? Yes, those that have the financial means and technology will have access to online lessons and will forge ahead academically.

I shudder to think what his input to alleviate the current crisis would have been if he was still holding office as part of the education portfolio committee.

The current schooling crisis must be viewed from the ground rather than through rose-tinted glasses.

In my opinion, the year can be saved with all parties applying their minds together for the betterment of the children. RAJESH BUDRAM | Verulam