LETTER: Changing a school’s ‘educational culture’ has a sinister implication
Why would Angie Motshekga and her staff deem a decision taken by a school governing body about language policy, a wrong one?
In amending legislation, basic education minister Angie Motshekga intends removing the rights of government school governing bodies (SGBs) to change their language policies, and to allow the state to step in and change schools’ language policies and “educational culture”.
This emerged from her responses to recent questions in parliament from Dr Wynand Boshoff of the Freedom Front Plus. Dr Boshoff was referring specifically to Afrikaans-medium schools.
The broad question remains why Motshega and her staff would deem a decision taken by an SGB about language policy to be the wrong one. Most schools hold AGMs with parents at which such major decisions are, or are not, endorsed. Only then does the SGB put its name to said policy. There is nothing to stop parents from raising the question of a change at a future stage.
At least one understands what is meant by a “language policy”. But what is meant by a change of “educational culture”? A “culture” cannot be imposed. It develops over time.
Since the curriculum is obligatory for all schools to teach, what does she mean when she talks about a “culture” that needs changing? Since we talk about “language policy” separately and the issue of curriculum is determined entirely by the department, what issues of “culture” could she be talking about?
Since the goal of changing the “educational culture” has a somewhat sinister implication, it is incumbent upon Motshekga to give us examples of what she has in mind so that we can seriously engage with the amendment bill.
Sara Gon, Institute of Race Relations
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your comments to letters@businesslive.co.za. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.