One of the crucial tools in the transition to democracy was the transformation of the school curriculum. From a forward looking, aims and objectives curriculum of the apartheid school education system, the new philosophy of Outcomes Based Education (OBE) formed the vehicle for educational transformation across the education systems in South Africa.
OBE is a philosophy that identifies particular competences a person needs to acquire right at the outset and a curriculum is designed to achieve these expected competences.
In introducing this new educational philosophy, the language in describing, developing and assessing the educational outcomes was quite different from that of the aims/objectives philosophy.
For example, OBE speaks of competence rather than pass or fail, outcomes rather than aims and objectives, and assessment criteria. Assessment criteria are provided at the outset, so that pupils are aware of what and how they will be assessed.
The teaching and learning experience is also different. Pupil-centred education replaces a teacher-led classroom engagement. Pupil-centred education is not only about getting the pupils active in the learning process (thorough group work) or that the teacher facilitates and mediates the learning process.
It goes beyond getting pupils more active in the learning process. The selection of materials, the use of exemplars, the pupils’ backgrounds are considered in the planning process to provide pupils with a learning experience that is relevant, meaningful and which the pupil can identify with.
How has the OBE philosophy been introduced within the school system since 1994?
There have been several iterations of the OBE philosophy. The first of these was the Curriculum 2005 (C2005).
C2005 was named to reflect the process of introducing the OBE philosophy into the school education system. It began in 1998 and was expected to be fully implemented across all grades of schooling by the year 2005. C2005 had three distinct features.
The first was that the curriculum was characterised by outcomes statements – what the pupils should know, demonstrate and value.
The second was that the knowledge was to be integrated. Content and context was central to determining what needed to be learnt. Hence subjects were replaced by Learning Areas (LA).
The third was the promotion of a pupil-centred teaching and learning strategy. New language of the school curriculum had to be learnt by teachers, pupils, parents and the public.
Teachers needed to be re-developed to understand the new philosophy, new learning areas, outcomes statements, range statements for assessment and of selecting context, content and teaching methodologies.
The classroom required a level of sophistication (matched with that of a developed world context) to support teaching and learning in this iteration of OBE.
There were several critiques about this iteration.
These included teachers not being qualified enough to take on C2005, the school infrastructure not being adequate to support OBE philosophy, and the training of teachers was poor and inadequate. C2005 had a built-in review process. This was to evaluate the implementing the OBE philosophy and make recommendations for changes during the implementation process.
With a strong critique of the C2005 process of introducing OBE into the school education system, the review process was commissioned in 2000 by the Department of Education.
The review outcomes led to the second iteration of the OBE philosophy. This was initially in the form of the Revised National Curriculum Statement (RNCS) and later into the National Curriculum Statement (NCS).
Recognising the large number of outcomes statements for each learning area that was characteristic of the C2005, the complexities of assessing these outcomes and the poor training that teachers received, the RNCS and NCS had fewer outcomes statement and assessment criteria. A maximum of six curriculum statements were determined for each LA, with most having three to four statements.
School phases became a central factor in the NCS curriculum. Each phase had to select appropriate outcomes for each LA aligned to the respective national curriculum statements. Teachers within a school phase had to collaborate to determine what outcomes, assessments, contexts and content needed to be taught, and how it would align with other phases, pacing and ordering of what is to be taught.
More training of the teachers was needed. RNCS was introduced in 2004 and NCS came into being in 2007. Assessment took on a more central focus in the NCS iteration of the OBE philosophy.
The main purpose of assessing pupils was to enhance individual growth and development, to monitor the progress of pupils and to facilitate their learning. Assessment took on a stronger focus of assessment for learning rather than assessment of learning.
Assessment for learning would provide the teacher an understanding of where the pupils were having difficulties and what difficulties they were experiencing. The teachers were then expected to plan interventions to assist the pupils to achieving the expected competences.
As curriculum is never neutral and is a highly contested terrain, it would be a natural expectation that there would be further changes to the school curriculum. The NCS was also deeply critiqued in terms of the knowledge base of pupils coming out of this school curriculum.
Teachers had a lot of autonomy within the NCS iteration of OBE with regards to content, context, teaching methodologies and assessments.
There was public and professional concern about the quality and standards of the NCS.
Other role players became interested in the school education systems, because of their experiences of the product of the school education systems. For example, higher education complained about the under-preparedness of students for study in higher education programmes as performance in higher education was low.
The next iteration of OBE was that of Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements (Caps) and was introduced into the school education system in 2012.
The knowledge content became a major focus within this iteration of the OBE philosophy. Caps can be described as a restricted curriculum where the content to be taught, how it is to be taught and at what pace it is to be taught has been predetermined.
Teachers are given a handbook that specifies all of these details, including that of assessments and are expected to implement this curriculum in schools.
Teachers would, therefore, need to know the content knowledge required, how it needs to be taught and when the content should be taught.
The quality of the curriculum was enhanced, among others, through raising the overall minimum pass requirements for each level of pass, new minimum requirements for basic NSC, improve the credibility of school-based assessments and to give more focus on knowledge acquisition.
As can be expected, there will be further curriculum changes to the school education system.
Perhaps the next iteration would go down to the level of lesson planning, where each lesson to be taught by teachers will be planned in advanced by planners and teachers would then be expected to implement the planned lessons.
Ramrathan is an associate Professor School of Education at the University of KwaZulu-Natal