Schools celebrate mediocrity

Tshwarelo Hosia | Monday April 18, 2022 06:00

Only a handful of schools boast significant academic achievement while many schools sadly continue to celebrate mediocrity and minute incremental changes. This can only mean one thing: that hitherto far too many students remain unserved.

That the elephant in the room remains unscathed is a reminder of the limitations of the measures in place. The system cannot break new ground as long there are no attempts to rock the boat and adopt radical changes. When schools in the USA faced a similar predicament of falling short of achieving their purpose of existence, the Legislature stepped in. The result was the passing of the ' No Child Left Behind (NLB) piece of legislation, which brought about sweeping changes aimed at reshaping the education landscape.

The Act clearly spelt out the turnaround road map, leaving schools with no shadow of doubt as to what was expected of them. It is interesting to note that the Act was predicated on a desire to place in the forefront the interests of children. No child was allowed to attend a school that did not seem to be catering for his or her interests.

Acting in the best interests of students, the NLB Act held schools accountable for their academic progress and well being while also imposing heavy sanctions on schools that fell short of achieving clearly defined yearly targets. Effectively, the Act declared a total warfare on academic under achievement and injected some sense of urgency. Schools were required to shape up or ship out.

Under achieving schools faced the possibility of closure and in the event of closure, students would be redistributed to high achieving schools. While the Act took care of learners, it attracted heavy criticism for putting the jobs of staff on the line. Under the law, a school principal and half of his staff could be relieved of their duties for failing students.

While the law had its own flaws, it also offered goodies, which are worth noting.

The one thing our system can learn from the USA experience was that a special budget provision was made to cater for the turnaround process. On the local scene, the system is yet to see the need to develop special funding to cater for school turnaround initiatives. Besides, budget allocations to schools come with stringent rules as to how and where the monies should be spent. Schools are yet to have the autonomy they certainly deserve to channel funds to key priorities.

The financial environment is based on the one size fits all principle and this does not give schools sufficient room to address their peculiar circumstances. This is a grey area requiring swift attention. There is a need to revise the system of running schools through fixed and watertight prescriptions from the central and regional offices. Local empowerment is vital.

Sub regions, which are much more closer to schools, need a little more powers over staff deployments, hiring and firing. As things stand as Professor Jaap Kuiper observed, sub regions operate more like postal services where schools deposit their issues. They can do better if they can graduate from conveyer belt role they are currently playing. Yes, general guidelines from the central office are still necessary but schools and sub regions should be permitted to effect changes to suit their own circumstances. Can our system take a leaf from the USA system of closing schools that are not serving the purpose for which they were intended? Why not? Schools are not created for ornamental reasons.

They exist to change livelihoods. If they fail students, then they should lose the right to exist. Period. However, in this country, it may be difficult to try that route. One of the biggest landmarks in a village in Botswana is a school.

A school is a source of pride any village and shutting schools may not sit well with many people. Besides, transferring students to the next village could bring in its train a lot of inconveniences, which may include financial strain and of course loss of pride. Another viable route that can be explored is bringing the concept of public private partnership. When a public school is failing to achieve its mandate, government can let it go.

A school can be outsourced to the private sector.

The private sector known for its sense of urgency and efficiency should be offered an opportunity to take over chronically low performing schools and government could ensure access by assisting in paying tuition fees for learners from poverty stricken backgrounds. After all, private schools continue to outshine public schools and this is the more reason why the private sector take over of public schools can be a panacea to problems bedevilling public schools. Only bold measures can help us secure the future of our children and children's children.