" B atY \ \

PAGE 1

CONTENTSPreface: De Lange

one year later Page 1

Introduction: Grappling with the

future of the educationsystem Page 2

How the main committee did its

homework Page 3

The ABC of CNE Page 4

Education of ‘equal quality' is not equal

education Page 5

Suiting education to the needs of the

economy Page 6

Moving Education forward to keep

society back Page 11

One umbrella, four-departments Page 12

Fewer rands for education makes no

sense Page 14

Things fall apart, butcan the centre hold? Page 18

Recognising the realissues Page 20

P n d u c m a b y tha N ation a l E d u ca tio n U n ion o f S o u th A frica* O B o i 1 S S 3 3 , O oom ton — 1 2 0 2 8 , J o h a n n n O u r g .

Preface: De Lange

one year laterA year has elapsed since the report of the main committee of the HSRC investigation into education was released in October 1981. Professor de Lange, the chairman of the committee, wrote at the time that the report provided “sufficient scope to accommodate this variety (of South African people) while at the same time ensur- ing equity in the provision of educational opportunities” .TTiis push for “separate but equal” education came to be seen as the reformist spirit of de Lange. r

Soon afterwards the government made known its initial response to the de Lange report, which was widely interpreted by the liberal press and the big business establishment as a rejection of the spirit of de Lange. For some, it may then seem ridiculous that NEUSA is publishing a critique so long after the “rejection” of de Lange by the government. To many, it seems that the commissioners involved in the report are now a group to be forgotten.

This is not the case and a critical understanding of the de Lange Report still remains crucial, for a number of reasons:• Changes are being made in SA education. While the government may have re

jected “the spirit of de Lange,” the initiatives in education, undertaken by both the government and private sector, reflect the basic thrust of the report.

• The report is the first attempt to develop a “new” educational ideology to replace that of Bantu education. The extent to which an ideology based on merit and ability can take hold in Apartheid society, of course, is questionable. Nevertheless, the attempt exists in de Lange.

• All the major splits and debates in educational circles have been around the kinds of educational reforms de Lange envisages: the liberal establishment, in Grahamstown in February 1982, overwhelmingly backed the de Lange reforms and urged their implementation as soon as possible. Tbe Volkskongres in Bloemfontein in March, opposed this stand by rejecting the major de Lange reforms. Outside of this immediate debate, progressive forces in South Africa have realised the need to understand government reforms in relation to clear principles for a non-radal and democratic education of the future, and have begun to work on these principles.

. Teachers organisations have largely adopted either the Volkskongres position or the de Lange position.

In the context of the crisis facing teachers in this countiy, this debate is stag- nant. A critical understanding of de Lange is important to assist teachers to conceive of a changed education in South Africa. The HSRC has recently launched two initiatives which make it clear that the original intentions of the report are not dead These are the de Lange Phase Two and the HSRC Investigation into manpower. *

De Lange Phase two is chaired by Professor de Lange, and a committee has been set up to co-ordinate priority research in education. Significantly the

d.efiDed on lhe basis of the RePrt of the Main Committee of the HSKC Investigation, which this publication analyses.c “Phase n ” entrenches the technical approach to education inSouth Africa. No recognition of the political basis of Apartheid education is recos- msed m any research proposals.

In effect, the proposals of de Lange “ Phase II” vindicate NEUSA’S critique of the de Lange enterprise as a whole: it will not change South African education in any fundamental sense.

PAGE 2

Introduction: Grappling with the future of the education system

The recommendations of the de Lange commission affect all those directly involved in education - teachers, students and parents. This publication analyses the findings and the context of the commission so as to help towards a clearer understanding of current state educational strategies. At the same time we hope to stimulate debate around these proposals with the aim of deciding what our demands are for a truly democratic education system.

Why de Lange?The last years have seen many gov

ernment commissions. The more important ones have been the Wiehahn into labour legislation, Riekert into influx control, Rabie into security legislation, Steyn into media, and of course the Presidents Council constitutional proposals. In all these cases the commissions have been a response to situations of crisis in key areas of SA’s peculiar social, political and economic make up. The reports of these commissions are planning documents. Their recommendations have frequently gone beyond what the government is willing or able to do, but they have nonetheless provided the government with proposals for overcoming the present crisis and suggesting ways to deal with the origins of those- crises in the longer term.

That our education system is in a state of crisis cannot be denied. It was dissatisfaction with the education system which sparked the countrywide uprising in June 1976. There was a nation wide boycott of black schools in 1980 and hardly a term goes by without open conflict on the black campuses. Despite the many demands which black students have made quite clearly and publi- cally for nearly six years, the response of the government to the growing education crisis was to appoint the de Lange Commission to make recommendations on a future education system.

PAGE 3

How the main committee did itsLet us begin our examination of the

report by looking at the people who sat on the main committee and who also chaired the various sub-committees of the commission.

The main committee appointed by the HSRC was made up of 26 members, headed by Professor de Lange of RAU. Fourteen of these members are employed in government departments, 9 by universities, 2 are representatives of government recognised teacher organisations, one representative of private enterprise employed by Anglo American and one teacher, also the only woman on the committee. Of the university representatives one was from an English speaking campus, 5 from Afrikaans campuses (controlled by the department of National Education) and 3 members from the bush colleges created by the government to serve so called Indians, coloured and Africans. Six members are officially classified black. The commission did not include a single recognised leader of the black community and not a single student.

It is quite clear from this composition that the committee was dominated by white male Afrikaners, most of them either directly or indirectly employed by the state.

One realises immediately that a report presented by these people would clearly serve their interests. They are in no way representative of those who are actually being educated and they are certainly not representative of the thousands of SA students who have shown their rejection of the present education system through boycotts and demonstrations.

Despite this obvious bias the HSRC makes a claim to being scientific in its research. By this it means that it is neutral and based on fact as opposed to opinions.

To achieve this scientific report each person on the main committee headed a sub-committee which investigated a particular topic.

The main report is a summary of over 20 000 pages of evidence which was gathered. It edits away all disagreement and all semblance of the reality of South African life in the name of science.

Breeders among top men o i /?/>*,, education probeMOST of the 24 members of the tion are senior professionals in <

Among them are the president of the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), the Government’s chief financial planner, the director of the Transvaal Education Department, the vice-chairman of the National Manpower Commission, the vice-principal of Potchef- stroom University, the director of the South African Institute for Educational Research, senior academics in Afrikaans and English universities, ar.d at least four members of the flroederbond.

The chairman aI the commission. Prof J P de Lan;e, who is the rector of the Rand Afrikaans University, was also director of research for the commission^

Top menOther prominent members of the

commisjioo are:• Dr J G Garbers, the president of the HSRC Or Garbers was dean of the faculty of education at the Rand Afrikaans University before joining the HSRC.• Dr S Brand, chief of financial policy in the Department of Finance. Dr Brand was an economic adviser to the Prim* Minister, and the Government's economic planning chief before his appointment to his present post• Prof J H Joosie? Director of Education in. the Transvaal since 1575. Dr Joost* has devoted his entire career to education, and was the rector of Potchef- stroom’s College of Education in 1964 and 1965. He b also listed in the book “The Super-Afrikaners” as a member of the Broederbond.

)e Lange Commission on Educa- iucation and governmeat.

• Prof A’N Boyce, a well-ltnow.u author of school history books, and rt'Ctor of the Johannesburg College of Education. He was also president of the Transvaal Teachers’ AssociaUon In 1979 and J980.• Prof R E van der Ross, rector of the University .of the Western Cape, w ho was also a member of the Theroo C oav mission of Enquiry into the Coloured people.•P rof P J van der Merwe, vice-chairm an of the N atio n a l M anpow er Commi.tsion.

Apart from these six, there are three beaas ot educational institutions, Mr Franklin Sonn, director of the Peninsula Technikoiv Professor A C iVkabinde, rector of the University of Zululand. and Mr A Pittendrizh, director at the Natal Technikon, and tie vice-principal of Potchefstroom University, Prof N J Swart (a member of the Broederbond).

ProfessorsA number of heads of university de

partments served as members: Prof S R MaharaJ, dean of the faculty of education at the University of Dcrban-West- ville. Prof F van der Stoep, dean of the faculty of education at the University of Pretoria, and a member of the Broederbond, and.Prof-W B Vosloo, head of the department of political science at Stellenbosch Vnrverarty.

Two men who specialise In educational research, Mr J B Haasbroek (director of the SA Institute for Educationa l R esearch),- and D r K enneth Hartshorne (a consultant at the Centre of Continuing Education) also served on the commission.

PAGE 4

Firstly tnc report claims to be scientific, and as such, maintains that it is not representative of any particular interests. The report is therefore said to be neutral. And because of its neutrality it is also said to be non-political. Secondly, it can ignore any criticism of its findings as unscientific.

The report tnes to achieve its neutrality in two ways. 1) By making no reference to the type of society which exists in SA. Anyone reading the document will not find any reference to Apartheid, to racial discrimination or even to the Department of Education and Training. There is only one reference to the school boycotts of 1980, but no link is drawn between the education crisis and these boycott

The report defines the problems in

The importance of the claim to a

scientific reporteducation as technical rather than social. So this means that it also sees the solutions as technical rather than social restructuring.

For example, de Lange defines educational problems as being those of bad management, poor utilization of resources, and inefficiency, rather than a system of education designed to make people play a subordinate role in an unequal and unjust society.

This emphasis on the technical political nature of the problem is to be found in the type of questions to which the commission addressed itself, namely:

“how can we make it work better” rather than, “how does it work”, and “who benefits” . Such questions are not asked in the report as they would be called ‘unscientific’ and 'political'.

By ignoring these questions and by making recommendations within the current framework of South African society the Commission is not remaining neutral. It is taking a very definite side - the side of those who wish to maintain poverty and wealth, privileged and underprivileged. In order to understand why this acceptance of the present education system makes the de Lange report a fundamentally conservative document, we need to understand a little more clearly the role which the present education system plays in our society. ■

The ABC of CMEHow does the present education system work?

/ •' -I — " •‘. - • v v y / ' lThe education system is one of the central institutions in any society. It helps to reproduce that society by educating and training people. Along with institutions like the church, the family and the media, the education system helps to socialise, qualify and allocate people.

SocialisationSocialisation refers to the manner in which education and schooling teach people to look at the world in a particular way and to accept certain values. The education system teaches people to accept the present social, political and economic system and the values that underly it. It also stands to reason that the education system and the role it serves will reflect the interests of the dominant groups in society. Because people occupy different positions in society, the education system must socialise them differently and get them to look at their position in society differently. In South Africa, therefore, Christian National Education has been used as a conscious attempt by certain groups to maintain political power. Black education has been used as a tool of domination, preparing black people

for political rightlessness and economic exploitation.

QualificationThe same is true of qualification.

Along with the perceptions of themselves and of the world that we instil in our pupils, the qualifactions that we give them go a long way towards determining the roles that they play in society. However, under the present education systeih in South Africa, the acquisition of these skills is heavily weighted in favour of white, middle class children. The greater amounts of money spent on white education, the better training that white teachers receive, coupled with the privileged backgrounds of white children ensure this.

AllocationThe combined effect of socialisation

and qualification is allocation. Allocation to roles within the current social, political and economic structures in such a way that those structures are maintained. On its most basic level in South Africa this works in the following way: the type of education that a person receives is determined by their racial category. Whites get better education than blacks. The result is that

I. ’ ’ * j . j

— f / - 1

s « i

whites get better jobs than blacks.The fact that education, through the

functions of socialisation, qualification and allocation, serves to maintain and advance the status quo is clearly illu

PAGE 5

Education of ‘equal quality’ is not equal education

strated in the by now infamous quote of Verwoerd. While minister of Education he said:

“When I have control of native education I will reform it so that natives will be taught from childhood that equality with Europeans' is not for them . . . When my department controls native education it will know for what class of higher education a native is fitted, and whether he will have a chance in life to use his knowledge . . . what is the use of teaching the bantu child mathematics when it cannot use it in practice? That is quite absurd”.

Education serving vested interests

The education system in South is designed to create and maintain divisions between workers and employers and between black and white South Africans. When it can no longer socialise, qualify, and allocate people in a way that serves and maintains the status quo, then the education system is in crisis.

Instead of protecting the dominant interests in our society, the education system has come to generate conflict that now threatens those interests. It is not meeting the political and economic needs of the dominant groups and it certainly does not meet the needs of the majority of South Africans. This has forced the government to restructure the education system. Its objectives remain the same, but the methods will have to change. It may well be that South African society is based on inequalities that can never be effectively accommodated and that the education system will always express those inequalities and the conflicts that they generate. Furthermore it may be that no amount of tinkering with the form of our education can disguise its contents. But that is something the government will only leam the hard way.

In the meantime the de Lange commission has proposed a new set of educational criteria which they hope will remove the more glaring inequalities in our education system and replace them with far more subtle control. In this way they hope to release some of the pressure that has been building up in the black schools and which threatens to explode again.*

The Committee used eleven principles to quide its report:

1. Equal opportunities for education, including equal standards of education, for every inhabitant irrespective of race, colour, creed, or sex, shall be the purposeful endeavour of the state.

2. Education shall afford positive recognition of what is common as well as what is diverse in the religious and cultural way of life and the languages of the inhabitants.

3. Education shall give positive recognition to the freedom of choice of the individual, parents and organisations in society.

4. The provision of education shall be directed in an educationally responsible manner to meet the needs of the individual as well as those of society and economic de-

-velopm ent, and shall, inter alia, take into consideration the manpower needs of the country.

5. Education shall endeavour to achieve a positive relationship between the formal, non-formal and informal aspects of education in the school, society and family.

6. The provision of formal education shall be a responsibility of the State provided that the individual, parents and organised society shall have a shared responsibility, choice and voice in this matter.

7. The private sector and the state shall have a shared responsibility for provision of non-formal education.

8. Provision shall be made for the establishment and state subsidisation of private education within the system of providing education.

9. In the provision of education the processes of centralisation and decentralisation shall be reconciled organisationally and functionally.

10. The professional status of the teacher and lecturer shall be recognised.

11. Effective provision of educatio/i shall be based on continuing research.

In analysing these principles we will not go through each in turn, but will look at the substance of them which the committee themselves summarised into five points.

1. Equal opportunityThe committee itself admits that this

principle can be interpreted in many different ways. In the course of the report we get an idea of the committee’s interpretation of this concept. As we shall show later, the committee recommends different forms of education. After an initial period of basic education, students will be streamed either into formal academic education, or for those who do not do so well, into varieties of technical and vocational education without the option of a formal education. The basis for selection is merit and this is where the question of equal opportunity comes in.

2. What is common and what is diverse

The committee accepts the idea that South Africa is a “plural” society. In other words, there are people of different racial and ethnic groups who all have their own culture which should be maintained. Since colonial times there has been a policy of separating Zulus from Sothos, Indians from coloureds, black from white. The effect of this policy is to divide the oppressed in South Africa in order to keep control over them. So, in South Africa a principle of separate but equal amounts to a thinly disguised form of racial discrimination in which people are kept separate but very far from equal.

PAGE 6

3. Closer inter-linking of formal and non-formal education

In the introduction we argued that de Lange defined the main problem in education as being that many students were inadequately prepared for employment in industry and commerce. The principles which relate to the relationship between formal and non-formal education are obviously trying to deal with the problem of the lack of skilled labour which de Lange identifies as the major impediment to economic growth in South Africa and therefore, one of the main solutions to the education crisis.

4. Decentralised Reponsibility for the provision of education between state capital and communities

These principles relate to two different aspects: Firstly, the financing of education and secondly, determining the content. With regard to financing, it seems that while de Lange is suggesting that the State assist in some form of “private” education (one can assume on-the-job training), de Lange is basically suggesting that financial responsibility for the provision of education will fall increasingly on the community and the private sector and less and less on the State. This obviously has very important implications for future inequalities in the provision of education, as richer communities will be able to provide better facilities than poorer ones. It also means that many people who are unemployed, or whose employers choose not to provide training, will not benefit from “non-formal” education.

Participation in decision making

We have already argued that the de Lange Committee report, which is the official education planning document, did not consult with the people most directly affected by the form and content of the education system, namely: parents, teachers and students. There is very little in the report to suggest that

these people will have any say in the future, either over how the education system is managed, or what the content of the syllabi will be. This view is supported by the fact that in the principles, emphasis is placed on research to inform the development of the curriculum. In chapter three of the report it is made quite clear that thorough research would be passed onto “qualified planners”. Once again the stress is on discovering the variety of needs which have their origins in the needs of the “individual learner” and the “needs of

the country”.The solution to this situation was

seen as planning “differentiated” curricula. Needless to say none of this falls in line with the demands which we have heard students express ever since 1976! Instead, it is the basis for removing decision making even further away from the people participating in education, and placing it in the hands of professional bureaucrats whose interest in maintaining the status quo, both in education and South African society, is not in doubt. ■

Fitting education to the needs of the economy

The major problem, according to the committee, is not an unequal racist education system which the majority of South African students don’t want. The major problem according to the committee is one of “harmonisation” between the educational aspirations of the people and the manpower needs of the economy.

The committee acknowledges that there is a widespread demand for what they term “formal education” (ie formal schooling) in the world today. The report argues that this is because there is a strongly held belief that there is a

connection between education andOver the last six years black students

have clearly and publicly demanded equal education for all racial groups under one education department, equal facilities, and in the short-term such things as textbooks, repair of broken windows, and democratically elected student representative councils.

The response of the government to these demands was to appoint the de Lange commission to make recommendations for the education system. If we look at the beginning of chapter three of the report we can see how the com

mittee defined the “crisis” in education, economic development of the country as a whole. The committee argues that in fact formal schooling (for every one) does not lead to socio-economic development and it can in fact retard such development.

For the committee the problem is one of imbalance between the demand for formal schooling on the one hand and the educational requirements of the country on the other.

With regard to the first imbalance, the committee argues that it is not possible to give everyone the same formal education because this will lead to unemployment among school leavers, what the commission describes as “unrealistic” demands for university education and finally problems in financing this education.

Having discussed this problem, the committee then goes on to focus its attention on the second imbalance. The commission makes its position on this question quite clear by stating:

“investment in education can only show dividends if it can guarantee that the mapower potential of a country is applied productively in its development” (de Lange p 20).In trying to explain ways in dealing

with this problem the committee implies that the present educational system is wasteful. This is manifest in two ways:1. Because of factors like social depri

vation, primary education does not adequately teach people basic numeracy and literacy skills and therefore many students are not capable of benefitting from the education they receive in later years.

2. Formal education is geared towards academic qualifications and a university entrance. However the majority of students drop out long before they reach matric which means that their education is not appropriate and hasn’t provided them with technical training.

So the major problem which the committee identifies is the “serious shortage of skilled manpower at all levels (which) are highly detrimental to the further development of the South African economy. One of the direct causes of this is the ‘neglect’ of career education, especially at the secondary level”, (de Lange p30).

Moving education forward to keep society back

PAGE 7

We have said that the de Lange Commission aims to maintain unequal education. Instead of doing this along racial lines as in the past, the report sets out a ‘differentiated’ education system. This will channel people either into an academic schooling or into vocational or technical training on the basis of merit. So instead of discriminating against students on racial grounds, the committee recommends distinguishing between them on the basis of ‘individual ability’! As we have already noted, the unequal backgrounds of black and white children in South Africa mean that criteria like ‘individual ability’ and ‘merit’ simply entrench and leave untouched the inequalities.

It is very clear that in doing this the committee is trying to deal with what they see as being the problem: namely

reconciling ‘individual potential’ with the economic needs of the country.

We shall argue that this will continue to entrench educational inequalities along class and racial lines. Secondly it is giving people technical training to the exclusion of a broader social education.

The HSRC report recommends an educational structure which would be divided into a formal and non-formal system of education. Formal education refers to a system of academic schooling, non-formal education refers to a range of different forms of training, eg, adult education, in-service training* technical training. These two systems will exist side by side and will form the basis of the differentiated system of education which we have already referred to. ■

The implications of understanding how de Lange sees the problem cannot be over-stressed. By identifying the crisis in education in technical terms, the committee has defined limits within which they can suggest a solution. Hav

ing excluded political and ideological factors from the definition of the problems, the committee has shown thatit is ignoring the very basis on which the students have rejected the education system. ■

De Lange’s proposed schooling systemPre-basic educationWc said in the first section that the committee considered the present system to be wasteful because many pupils, especially those from deprived backgrounds were inadequately prepared to begin schooling. Therefore a pre-basic phase of schooling was desirable in order to prepare them for basic schooling. Creches, nursery schools etc., which would comprise the pre- basic phase of education.

The Commission proposes that these should prepare children for school but does not consider it realistic to provide for these on a large scale. In other words, the provision of creches and nurseries is not seen as a priority and will not be uniformly adopted - which suggests that they will exist where there is money available. This means that while the committee recognises that underprivileged children have a disadvantage before starting school, no real steps are recommended to ensure that this disadvantage is dealt with.

Basic educationPrimary education, as we know it,

will change to be called the basic phase of education. During this six year period it is envisaged that children will learn basic literacy and numeracy. The reason for this change is that the committee feels that at present many children do not leam these basic skills and therefore are unable to benefit from professional or vocational education at a later stage.

The report places primary emphasis on the “technical'’ skills which young pupils can acquire and totally ignores questions of creativity or the ability to reason. What the report recommends may amount to qualification but it is not education. T he report recommends that even at this early stage children will be streamed according to their academic achievements. By the time that they reach the age of twelve it will be easy to decide where their educational future lies. The report also recommends that this phase be compulsory and that state spending on education be concentrated here.

By means of streaming (what the report calls canalisation methods) it will be possible to determine who moves from the formal to non-formal education and when. For example, after six years basic schooling, a pupil will be streamed either into an academic secondary school or into a technical school, or into the sphere of non-formal education, eg, in-service training.Post basic education

Present secondary education will be divided into two phases and called “post basic” education. The report recommends that after six years of basic schooling one of three futures awaits pupils:1. They could be channelled into an

academic school.2. They could be channelled into a

commercial or technical school.3. They could leave the formal educa

tion system and enter into non-formal education. This could involve anything from in-service training to learning specific technical skills in a

private institution.Thus de Lange identifies ‘education’

with ‘formal’ secondary education and ‘training’ with something else. Education in secondary, academic schools, is no longer compulsory.

On the surface the report seems to be trying to approximate the English system of education which was abandoned some years ago, namely the division of children into either ‘secondary modem ' (technical, vocational, commercial) schools or grammar (academic) schools. One of the most important reasons that this was abandoned in England was that this kind of schooling limited, rather than expanded, pupils’ choices concerning their future careers. It was found to be educationally unsound. Pupils in secondary modems developed a low self-image, suffered from lack of motivation and were prevented from entering universities if they were late developers.

During this post-basic phase education will have to be subsidised by parents and the private sector.

What does de Lange mean by “canalisation”?

Pupils will be streamed during the basic phase of education and channeled into the various forms of formal and non-formal education on the basis of academic achievement.

This achievement will be assessed by various tests. These tests are supposed to measure “inborn mental abilities" and a child's ability to gain from education is supposed to depend on tne amount of intelligence he or she possesses. However these tests embody the values of those who devise and administer them. A child’s ability to answer these tests depends on the extent to which he or she has been brought up in the same intellectual and cultural traditions as the people who draw them up. For example middle class children receive books and expensive conceptual toys at an early age. They are therefore able to develop this part of their abilities at a far younger age than working class children. Black and white poorer children do not have expensive toys and books and so do not develop “book IQ ’s” and “toy IQ ’s”. It is this knowledge that psychometric tests presuppose in measuring ability. Consequently working class children find these tests difficult to cope with while middle class kids enjoy an advantage.

In this way IQ tests perpetuate the myth that working class children are “stupid” and lack ability. This myth is used to justify the fact that they do not continue with an academic education but are channeled into technical or mechanical learning which, it is claimed, they are more suited for.

The implications of de Lange’s recommended schooling system become obvious. Pupils from white middle class backgrounds will be channeled into academic schools, universities, and in time, into professional and managerial jobs. Black working class children will be forced to make do with technical education or will be pushed out of school onto the job market after an initial literacy and numeracy training. Evidence of this trend is to be found in the fact that many schools in black communities are in the process of being converted into technical or commercial

hijh schools.De Lange explicitly states that

“blacks, coloureds and Indians” are the target group of non-formal education. The committee’s report speaks of the disharmony that is being created by the increasing number of blacks, coloureds and Indians who have academic qualifications compared with the fact that “the present and future SA situation needs people with practical skills.” (p 138) It is this disharmony which the committee argues is responsible for high unemployment!

At the same time as the committee makes provision for the majority of black working class children to go into technical education, some will be channeled into academic schooling. Because this system will discriminate on the basis of merit rather than on the basis of race, it will be possible for those few black children who come from more middle class homes or who are “super-achievers” to make their way into academic schools and ultimately into university. There is no doubt that far from moving away from inequalities, this system will further entrench them.

The aims of the Report’s recommendations

The question remains: why ddes de Lange make these recommendations?It seems that an answer to this question must be found on two levels:1. The need for technically trained

workers which commerce and industry have been demanding fo r ' some time now.

2. "Hie demonstrations of ’76 and the boycotts of 1980 made it quite clear that students would no longer accept the racially discriminatory education system.

Let us look at these two issues in a little more detail:

1. The need for skilled workers

The S.A. economy has become increasingly sophisticated technically. Capitalism in S.A. has entered a new phase of growth and expansion and needs to take advantage of economies of scale. Thus this production process

__________________ _________PAGE 9

PAGE 10

FINANCIAL restrictions have beta superseded u the most critical constraint on economic growth In the country by m anp ow er, states Anglo American Corporation in it s annual report.

The directors identify three key problem* evident In the labour market:• There is a grave shortage of management and skilled labour because South Africa has traditionally drawn skilled worker* from among Whites who constitute only 20% .of the total production, j

"But 1930 saw a change with the registration of the first Black apprenticeship contracts, albeit a very small s ta rt of Just 82 applicants out of some 10 000 contracts ’■igistered.”• The skilled labour shortage co-exists with an oversupply of unskilled labour, with unemployment variously estimated at between one- and two-million workseekers.

“A further relaxation of Government controls on the movement of labour and on formal and informal economic activity would ease this problem."• The collective bargaining process within the industrial council system has not kept pace with the growth and proliferation of unions.

“ At p resen t only 500 000 workers belong to- trade unions which are Involved In collective bargaining out of a labour force in the cash economy of approximately seven-million.

"The registration and Inclusion of Black unions into the

BLACKS MUST BE TRAINED n o w s??rIndustrial council-kuerf collective bargaining system appears

slow, calling for a com- ecsive review of the cur

rent system."While the global thrust of

mining technology continues to be capital-machinery' intensive, th e’ corporation.-has-dem onstrated practical concern for the continuing Southern African demand for labour-intensive pro j e cu .

Labour Intensive Industries Trust Limited (LTTET), an investm ent holding company owned and funded Jointly bj| Anglo American and D« Beec* was established during the veal to create employment opportajnlties In Southern Africa oy initiating or expanding Labour intensive industries.

Attention is being concentrated on the rural areas in South Africa where unemployment is more severe.

The corporation's 1981 report states that to data more than R2-million has been committed In five separate manufacturing ventures comprising knitwear and footwear production, rug and textile weaving and brick making, leading to the creation of well over 1 000 Jobs. ■

has had to change. With the introduction of sophisticated machinery the organization of work in the factory/firm has also had to change.

Before, work was divided between skilled and unskilled workers. Today this division of labour has been replaced by one between semi-skilled operatives (who ‘mind’ machines) and supervisors on the one hand and scientific and technical labour on the other.

To give some idea of the nature of the shortage of skilled workers: in1980, the Financial Mail found that at present, 0,1 percent of managers were black. It was estimated that by 1987, whites would be able to fill only 40 percent of the managerial positions. (FM 5/12/82)

The education system proposed by de Lange is clearly in response to the demands made for semi-skilled, technical and professional workers. Through non-formal education (in-service training, upgrading programmes, technical and scientific education), a manual worker can now become a semi-skilled worker. Through upgrading Bantu Education a black person can now become a technical worker, a clerical worker, a supervisor, and an engineer.

2. The need for a “new” education system

On an ideological level the committee is trying to do three things: firstly to sell an essentially unequal system of education under the guise of a differentiated system of education based on merit rather than race; secondly to offer limited opportunities for certain sections of the urban black communities to step into the professions and middle class; thirdly the form of education which people are being offered by the committee aims to control them by giving them technical training to the exclusion of an education which will teach them to think critically or to participate actively in shaping their own lives.

We are aware that a highly industrialised technological society requires trained, skilled people and that any restructured education system should make provision for manpower requirements. We are thus not critical of technical training per se, but suggest that de Lange proposes a particularly impoverished form of it.

It is clear that industrial training in

non-formal education will provide workers with technical competence but with little else. Apart from basic literacy and numeracy skills, they will be given nothing but the skills that will make them “better” workers. They will not be given an education which will develop both the ‘many-sided play of muscles’ and the capacity for intellectual activity. The latter is not considered necessary to the job demanded - there are others to do the thinking.

Technical skills have to be learnt, but on their own they are limited and limiting. They give workers the tools to enable them to ‘adapt’ more easily from job to job, but not to understand, make decisions and control the social forces which determine their lives. It is not an education that will put them in a gen

eral condition to govern.Equipped with very specific skills the

worker is left more vulnerable than ever before. Technical change is a constant feature of capitalist development and workers can be made redundant and unemployable in the case of technical change and replacement.

His or her technical training does not allow for job mobility and hence workers have to consider more carefully before jeopardising their jobs either through strike action or “choice” .

ConclusionFrom the above it becomes clear that

the old functions of education, namely socialisation, training, and allocation into unequal positions in an unjust and unequal society, remain the fundamental purpose of the committee’s reforms.

PAGE 11

One umbreSSa: four departmentsSince 1976, one of the central de

mands of the students has been for one education department. The committee’s report on the management of education suggest that one education department be formed to control overall education provision and financing. This recommendation is an obvious attempt to defuse one of the major demands of black students. It is also the recommendation which has created greatest conflict between the so-called verligtes and verkramptes in the ruling class.

The de Lange report recommended three levels of education management:

Level I Centralised National Structure

This would consist of one education department to control the provision and financing of education as well as the employment of teachers. This ministry would be advised by the SA Council for Education and official teachers organisations.

' races. The recent creation of a new top “co-ordination” post in the Department of National Education will allow the DNE to take over other education departments. (RDM 5/10/82).

Whether this proposal is implemented or not, it will not substantially alter the fact that education in SA will remain racially segregated and as such totally unequal. An education system that is managed according to “de- mographic factors will in practice mean the separate population groups of apartheid society, while separation according to “economic factors” will mean entrenching the economic inequalities which already exist between different racial communities.

One education department may go some way towards establishing uniform standards in school qualifications and thereby hide the present overtly racist nature of education. However it will not remove the inequalities of the present education system. It is these inequalities that students, parents and teachers want removed.

Level II Regional Structures

These would be responsible for all education in a given geographic area, defined in terms of demographic and economic factors. This would be advised by a “second level department” of education headed by a director of education.

Level III Local Structures

These would be responsible for the daily running of nearby groups of schools and would involve principles, staff and parents.

It is clear from these proposals that while de Lange proposes one National education department, education would in fact still be racially segregated because the actual daily running of education would take place at levels II and

However it is these proposals which

have attracted widespread publicity in both the liberal English press and the not so liberal Volkskongres and the Transvaalse Onderwysunie (TO). For the conservative T.O. suggestion of one education department was the “thin edge of the wedge”. In October1981, the government stepped in and affirmed its commitment to separate education:

“. . . In terms of the policy that each population group should have its own schools, it is essential that each population group should also have its own education department”. However this has not healed the

split. The recent conflict between the T.O. and the Minister of National Education makes it quite clear that there are very different ideas in the ruling class on how to maintain Apartheid education.

It appears that the final de Lange proposals which will be given to the cabinet will lead to the creation of a single umbrella education department with sub-departments for different

New plan is ‘thin end of wedge’

Teachers’ row signals split over reform

T H E b ea d -o n co llis io n b e tw e e n ih e p o w e r fu l T r a n sv a a lse O n d e r w y se r w e r e m g - u i ( (TO) a n d the M in u te r pf .National E d u c a tio n h a s s i m a i le d a s e n o o s sp lit in A fr ta n e r d o n a o v er th e G o v e n m * r .’ s im m in e n t ed u ca tio n re fo rm s

The fierre row betw*«n Dr C c m t Viijoce and the TO - chaired by Conservative Part* Supporter P re fn so r Henmc Mar** - is Own* • m b as an attem pt to red a bouioer u> u m peia of Um De Lange Com m ill** i final proposals lor education reform, due to be subm itted to u m Cabinet this m ontl

The s u n m e r u i tension between ibe CP- w pportm g TO and Dr VU)oea has b nnt into the open, say education sources. bnrauae of the TO leadership i deep-rooted fear that Us 17100 member-] m ay b* falling under the Minister's reform ist spell

The f in a l f > l - j n »cccuia.■l!l~ mufllion

p m pn a i l i a m i lm n s t-c rea tion of a

drparunenu for different races.This. Wtia L5f racenl r r p x i in n ^

co-ordination poet in the Depanmem oT WsumilT LaUClti&n. apparently fed ihe TUTo t h e m e n w t laivo taat week in ila jom-n^i

• y MARTIN F f INSTfIN e d u ca tio n Report**

MoodstukThe journal attacked Dr Viljoen for trying

to gaui "political profit- by appearing at m e e u n p of Transvaal teachers without TO approval. and dubbed him the T rojan horse of education reform

At the weekend the Minister replied by sharply auactuag Moodstuk (or label ling him "a Trojan horse — an enem y which is na*d with deadly e ffect by penetrating the w nrct** of an unsuspecting com m unity'

I * Vlljoen said: “I know of few u n d e n ts in recent u r a that have contributed more in the poliucuauon and casting of political suspicion* m education than this artic le .'

He saio it appeared that som e TO m embers wanted a M inister ~who does not achM «e successes, who m akes a mesa of his tasa. who refuses to build good relations with the teaching profession, who c h ooM S to let teachcrs rvmain entangled and uninformed and who is generally m rom potent"

The Mondstua article conflicted with the com em and sptru of previous informal discussions between him and the TO

He said he had previously explained to Moodstuk • editor that be did not attend

m eetings without I

Irom the area s official teacher organisation He said h* rem ained anxious to wort wit

a l l teacher l«ad«rs "against w o m n n | signs politicisauon in UM profession and in c la a

• » h ic h w as Um subject of increasing

Yesterday the TO esecu tive m et to discuss

hwwweT ** ^ *° M

^ g ching the backfrownd to the dispute* weil-in

Collection Number: AK2117 DELMAS TREASON TRIAL 1985 - 1989 PUBLISHER: Publisher:-Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand Location:-Johannesburg ©2012

LEGAL NOTICES:

Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.

People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of the collection records and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.

This document is part of a private collection deposited with Historical Papers at The University of the Witwatersrand.