Pres. Cyril Ramaphosa signed the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Bill into law on 13 September, but put two clauses on ice. These are the contentious admissions and language policies.
He was flanked by ANC party representatives. The abject absence of the other members of the coalition or Government of National Unity (GNU) at the signing ceremony signifies a sense of unhappiness, especially within the DA.
Now that the Bela Bill has been passed into law (except for the two clauses), it has replaced the South African Schools Act (Sasa) of 1996, which was established post-apartheid to democratise the education system.
Drafted as early as 2013, it sought to enhance the quality of education and had significant implications for school governance.
Part of the improvement required democratic participation and the progress of mother tongue instruction in a transformative manner.
This includes how the school governing bodies (SGBs) – composed of parents, educators, and non-educator staff members – continue their partnership with the Department of Basic Education (DBE) at provincial and national levels in school governance. The SGB represents the school and the community in the quest for quality education.
Beyond the aspirations for democratic participation in schools, the proposed Bela Bill made provisions for arbitration and mediation to resolve the conflict between the SGBs and the department.
The media and literature are awash with court cases highlighting the conflict between these two partners of a tripartite partnership due to disputes that seemed only to be resolved by litigation.
The disadvantages of litigation include large sums of money, time spent in litigation, and further harm to the child whose best interest both parties vow to have in mind.
The provisions for arbitration and mediation are believed to help avert litigation as a choice for conflict resolution. They align with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996).
Why are the two clauses so controversial? The language policy is a contentious issue, in which most comments in different media on the Bela Bill seem to dwell on this issue.
On one side, there are those who feel some SGBs have the power to keep some learners out of their schools by using the language policy. On the other side are SGBs who feel the quality of education in their schools may be compromised by the quest for equality in language integration.
The Act encourages the language policy to be broader and inclusive.
In schools with small numbers, their SGBs seek to protect that space as it is and pride themselves on the prevalence of such conditions.
According to the Act, compulsory school attendance will start at Gr. R level – a change welcome in some quarters as it allows early access for children.
However, to the SGBs this may present many changes in schools that are already overcrowded, under-resourced, and have a shortage of teachers. This change in the admission policy would add more pressure to these schools.
Even schools that are resourceful must accommodate changes to the admission policy, which comes with governing challenges such as resource management and distribution. According to the National Development Plan (NDP), basic education is vital in building the foundation for lifelong learning, and striking a balance may be what needs to be achieved.
- Dr Solomon Chibaya is a lecturer in the department of education management, policy and comparative education at the University of the Free State (UFS).
