Why education is in a financial fix

GODFREY KLEINHANS WRITES:

The Education Sector is the most important sector in any country.

Any form of development is impossible without it and it is a very effective tool to fight ignorance and poverty. It should be well resourced, well nursed and well cared for. But, in return, it should meet the expectations of a nation.

The Namibian Government did wonderful work in the post-colonial era. The Apartheid Education System based on segregation and inequality was replaced with a system directed by a modern human-rights-based Constitution.

Universal Primary Education was adopted and access to Secondary Education improved. Teachers were trained and those already in service went through in-service training sessions. Significant funds in Development Budgets provided for the construction of the much needed facilities.



SUSTAINABILITY

Spending of this nature was imperative. But, all this came at a price: unrealistic portions of GDP (and therefore annual budgets) had to be allocated to education to pay for these improvements.

Spending of this nature is admirable but it is always to the detriment of other social government programmes such as Health and Social Welfare.

I can remember that expert consultants warned that spending on education in Namibia was not sustainable. The portion of GDP given to education had to decrease.

And, while there are indicators that the system is doing well in some areas, there is none which indicates overall good performance. Some regions (and schools) just cannot get out of the rot!

A couple of weeks ago I argued in a letter to your newspaper that there is no evidence that the spending of huge amounts on Subsistence and Travel impacts positively on the quality of education. Most of the readers know that I was personally attacked and ridiculed.

The advice of education economists was never really heeded. New policies were adopted, which further ballooned the education budget.

• Pre-schooling became the business of government.

• The School Development Fund (compulsory at most schools) was scrapped and a subsidy system was implemented; secondary education included.

• A subsidy system for private schools (Art 20.4 schools) was implemented.



THE CONSTITUTION

The Education Ministry was never constitutionally compelled to initiate these changes. The Constitution still states, (I am unaware of any changes):

"Primary Education (and not Secondary Education) shall be COMPULSORY­ AND FREE", and "Any person or persons shall have the right to establish private schools" BUT AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE.

I must make it clear that I am not against these developments; they just seem to me not consistent with the Constitution. And the Constitution prescribes and provides what the PEOPLE CAN DEMAND.

Now, many years later, the paw-paw hits the fan.



CRISIS

The "crisis" is now seen as a temporary "scenario" and parents are requested to make a contribution to education. Playing around with parents' emotions and sentiments about education is now part of the game. These suggestions are rather penny wise and pound foolish.

Most school principals know that collecting school fees (when schools still had the so-called right to do so) was not a walk in the park. Now it has been scrapped.

A very small number of parents will heed the call of the Minister and her Permanent Secretary. The amount collected will certainly not make up for the loss in subsidy. No, this kite will definitely not fly.

My greatest concern is how the schools in the poor neighbourhoods will deal with down-ward trends in education funding. It does not take a genius to realize that these communities will take the biggest blow.

It reminds me of what Jonathan Kozol (1991) said in his book Savage Inequalities: “All children ought to be allowed a stake in the enormous richness of America. Whether they were born to poor white Appalachians or wealthy Texans, to poor black people in the Bronx or to rich people in Manhasset or Winnetka, they are all quite wonderful and innocent when they are small. We soil them needlessly.”

The Ministry can/should consider:

• Making pre-schooling the business of the communities again. Such communities could be subsidized.

• Scrapping subsidies for Private Schools with immediate effect.

• Reinstating the School Development Fund, at least for secondary schools.

• Improved ways for parents to contribute to primary education.

• Improving and extending the implementation of Multi-Grade Teaching and Double-Shift Schooling.

• The use of Itinerary Teachers.

• Certain levies.

• Combining schools which are located near to each other.

However, changes should not be made without proper consultations and negotiations with the school communities. Negotiations should not be left for the School Boards alone but communities should insist on the institution of the Education Fora. These institutions can play a huge role in rational education provision.