Disinvestment in excellence imposes limits on illimitable human potential

Addressing capacity audience at the Carnegie Mellon University in 2007 on “Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams” in what has become known as his last lecture, Professor Randy Pausch said that “when you do something young enough and you train for it, it just becomes a part of you”.

This statement has the relevance against the backdrop of what I believe has been a catastrophic lowering of quality and standards in our basic education system – a disinvestment in excellence. If we do not instil excellence in young people, it will never become a part of them.

The introduction of the National Curriculum Statement (NCS) has not only led many of our young people into a false sense of achievement, but it compromises their prospects of being resourceful, fully functional and globally competitive people. It has also imbued them with sorry attitude that entrenches mediocrity in what has been euphemistically dubbed “elementary achievement”.  National and international tests of competence in mathematics, science and literacy consistently show that South African young people perform at dismal levels; much lower than some of our poorer neighbours who invest relatively much less in education.

In the lecture referred to above, Professor Pausch related a story about his own students’ quality of whose work on the assignment he had given them had held him spellbound. He was convinced the class had proven its erudition. Excited about this feat, Professor Pausch shared the news with his mentor. The feedback he got from the mentor was that he needed to tell them that “that was pretty good, but I know you can do better”. This was essential for “you obviously don’t know where the bar should be, and you’re only going to do them a disservice by putting it anywhere”.

During her recent interview when she visited South Africa, Oprah Winfrey decried the low bar that we have set for our young people. Quality education and assessment standards should help to extricate them from social and education disadvantage. But our current standards and quality could only embed these.

I have not really followed the discourse behind the rationalisation of lowering of pass thresholds immanent in the NCS. What I do know, however, is that I needed at least 50 percent to pass my subjects in 2001 when I matriculated. Any mark below that threshold was a failure. Stringent measures were in place then to ensure that no unnecessary marks were allocated to pass (promote) undeserving candidates.

Learners knew then that they had to work hard to earn entry into the next academic level. Immanent in that standard was a determination to pursue excellence. There used to be an encouragement of a healthy competition in pursuit of high marks. Meritorious awards were the preserve of those who had prodigious capacity for academic excellence. No one would receive such an award with marks below 65 percent. Even then, we conceded that 65 percent was, in all honesty, an under-achievement in the context of outstanding academic performance.

If it is true that what you do young enough becomes part of you, our country has got justifiable grounds to worry about the future we are constructing by encouraging “elementary achievement”. Through this (sub)standard, we have imposed on our society a culture of ‘half a loaf is better than nothing’. The bar has been lowered too low, which will result in an insidiously degenerating future that cannot be expiated easily.

South Africa has set itself lofty goals. These ambitions arise from our indisputable history of excellence embedded in the liberation struggle over the years. With the dawn of democracy, the leadership of the country leveraged excellence in placing South Africa at the pedestal of the African agenda.

South Africa’s achievements since 1994, domestically and internationally, are a matter of public record. The pace with which these strides have been made have earned the country both admirers and detractors.

“When you do something young enough and you train for it, it just becomes a part of you.” – Prof. Randy Pausch.

We have in many respects become a stickler for determination, commitment, dedication, desire to achieve more – we are reputable as country of excellence. Our standards and quality of education is a rueful reminder that if amends are not made urgently, this country of excellence will cease to be such. This is despite the steady growth on our education expenditure in recent years.

One of the problems bedevilling the country and therefore compromising excellence is the shoddy workmanship in the delivery of services, particularly on infrastructure. Examples abound of houses cracking within a few years of construction; we have read of new roads being washed away by heavy rains hardly months after completion; and so forth. While visible progress has been made and appreciated in the delivery of services to the poor and needy, it is the quality of these services that has earned government the most vitriolic criticism.

Setting the bar of excellence so low when we do not even know how high it should be is the reason why delivery of services is so poor. Our collective skills and competences have become so mediocre that we can no longer contribute efficiently and effectively to the development of our dear country.

We should pause and ask what kind of investment we want to make for a future South Africa when we celebrate sub-standard performance. Our embracing mediocrity condemns our future leaders into not dreaming bigger. Dreams are the framework for one’s vision. They determine direction.

By celebrating 30 percent as pass mark, we are saying to candidates that that is the best they can ever achieve. They grow up accepting that as a fact. Society is then thrown into disarray upon such false achievement. As I have said in many other ways, we are dissuading our people from  pursuit of excellence.  Currently, there is broad consensus that South Africa is experiencing the dearth of intellectuals. There is also an agreement that central to the resolution of our problems is increased production of knowledge and innovation. In part, the recently released Green Paper on Post-School Education seeks to position universities and the post-school sector as “creative and prolific producers of knowledge” and practice. Practically, this will include improving the quality and quantity of research. It is common cause that knowledge is crucial in the pursuit of betterment of society. Post-School education is therefore central in producing skills that better respond to recorded problems of humanity. Education is the gateway to securing the inherent dignity of human beings.

The Green Paper is a welcome intervention given its futuristic orientation. The goal to expand access at both university and FET levels is encouraging. Should this be achieved, it will go a long way towards improving the crudely low levels of literacy in South Africa.

However, the main challenge of this noble goal may not even lie with the post-school education. In response to problems of overcrowding experienced in the late 90s and in aftermath of 2000, universities took advantage of what was known as the ‘Enrolment Capping’ plan to refuse majority students access to higher education. They did this through revising their admission policy which saw many of them tightening/upping their minimum points required for entry. This happened even before the introduction of

the NCS.

It is now widely accepted that our basic education does not adequately prepare learners for university education in the main. Yearly, while there is ‘growth’ in the NCS’s success rate, this does not necessarily translate into increasing access into university education. There is agreement that the quality of marks is declining, particularly in Mathematics and Physical Science. Bachelor degree passes are not significantly increasing.

Given the growingly stringent admission requirement autonomously set by universities, will the target be met? Consistent with the ideals set out in the Green Paper, shouldn’t we be reviewing the NCS standards, and in the process inculcate a culture of excellence among our future leaders? Frankly, isn’t the head fake of the NCS an entrenchment of mediocrity that stands opposed to unleashing the full potential of human beings?

With few exceptions, I contend that the NCS breeds a culture of laxity. It may be daring to call for the review of the NCS, but like Randy Pausch says, “if you’re going to do anything that pioneering you will get those arrows in the back, and you just have to put up with it”.