Too much emphasis on pass rate
WHEN the minister of basic education announces the matric percentage pass rate, there is a thunderous ovation. The minister's facial expression creates the impression that she has done a sterling and excellent job.
My concern is that an improved pass rate is not necessarily an indication that learning has taken place. To pass is not necessarily a sign or evidence of applied or reflective competencies or knowledge.
As concerned adults, we should ask:
- After "passing" matric, what is the matriculant's vision for the future?
- Did the matriculant do well enough to follow a meaningful career after matric?
- Will the matric pass rate excitement continue even after matric?
- Is matric the limit or pinnacle in learning?
- Will tertiary institutions accept the matriculant's aptitude level regarding subject choice?
As a nation, it is our moral mandate to promote, create and influence the psyche and attitude of life-long learning to our children at very early stages, junior and intermediary levels, of their schooling life. We don't have to wait until they write Grade 12 final examinations to display enthusiasm and interest.
Another concern about the obsession with this matric percentage pass rate is the mindset that it can create when it comes to studying methods. This is because some pupils wait till the last moment (towards the end of the year) and start to cram information, and still manage to pass the Grade 12 final examination. This is a quick-fix approach under pressure and unfortunately will never work at tertiary learning institutions.
There the emphasis is that learning and commitment must start on the first day of lectures. Failure to do so will result in the student being unable to cope with the amount of work to be learnt.
Consequently, this results in the bulk of students dropping out.
In some instances we get a situation where Grade 12 pupils have not even established their career direction. They are so much absorbed with their names appearing in the newspaper as having passed matric and take their "pass" to tertiary institutions with no idea as to what they are going to enrol for.
Of another devastating concern for the nation and the economy is to establish an informed rationale why and who decided to introduce the issue of dropping the pass rate for some Grade 12 subjects. In some circles, there is a notion that lowering the pass rate was introduced to elevate and enhance the percentage pass rate of Grade 12.
If effective learning took place from foundation through to intermediary levels, by the time the pupils reached Grade 12, they could be in a position to do well. This would then reduce the obsession and the pressure to pass matric at all costs and as such Grade 12 would be a continuation of learning.
Why is the nation not putting emphasis on doing well through effective learning in all grades instead of this irrational obsession with Grade 12? The other question we must ask is whether or not the current yield of teachers and the curriculum are well capacitated to effect real and reflective learning at all grades and level progression going towards Grade 12.
The overall quality, in terms of skills, knowledge and reflective competencies of matriculants, is still cause for concern. Passing matric does not necessarily guarantee a doorway to great and effective market opportunities.
This unfortunate situation is as a result of the current impression that business/markets have about the quality of the matric pass. They are interested in matriculants who can display evidence of applied competencies.
It is most unfortunate that not only matric but, the entire education curriculum from foundation phase through intermediary up until matric, does not provide reflective knowledge and skills abilities. Shouldn't we be focusing on embracing an educational curriculum that promotes holistic and insightful pupils?
Another aspect that may arise from the very inadequacies of our educational system could be the competency quality of our teachers in equipping pupils with modern day learning outcomes. To address this, the country may have to look at a two-pronged approach: up-skilling the current teachers with learning and development interventions that meet modern day market, social and personal dynamics, and re-looking at the curriculum of the teacher training institutions.
Are these institutions relevant in equipping teachers with the contemporary skills, knowledge and abilities to meet up-to-date life-long learning outcomes?
Let us put our minds together and construct a triangular collaborative team to influence an educational curriculum that will equip our children with holistic skills, knowledge and attitude. This team will entail the government (education), business (economy) and society.
Julian Ngcangca, Port Elizabeth
