Critical Crossfield outcome 4 (cont.)

Quick update on the scenario featuring An Education Department, An Educator that seems to have lost her marbles or never had them in the first place, Parents of A Learner who pointed out the lack of marbles, Other Learners who don't know the difference between marbles and unmarbles.

Next Act:

The previous act has not concluded satisfactorily, and the conclusion will set the scene. The Department wants to hush the matter up. Like the parents thought they would. The parents are saying there are principles involved that affect education at its very core. The Department doesn't seem to be able to deal with such concepts, and would dearly love to "contain" the matter as a disagreement between individual parents and the poor misrepresented educator.

What will the next act bring? Will the parents and the learner who blew the whistle on the absence of marbles receive the apology demanded as minimum recompense to settle the matter? Probably not...so then what? Should the matter be exposed to a greater public for discussion? Should the Educator be sanctioned and how? Should the matter of the educator's past demonstration of lack of professional marbles be exposed, so dragging in previous schools who would probably love just to be let alone after the damage she caused there?

THIS SITUATION IS PIVOTAL TO THE QUALITY AND PRACTICES OF MAJOR PLAYERS IN SOUTH AFRICAN EDUCATION.  We would really like to concentrate on more constructive and entertaining issues but will have to see this one through!

Critical Crossfield Outcomes 4(b)

THE NEXT ACT

The scene: The Principal's Office
The department roars onto the scene, Deus ex machina style, apparently surprises the principal, and comes to investigate the matter in the form of a well-spoken and dignified female who appears to be recently married from her style of headdress.
The educator is interviewed. Other stakeholders are not to know what transpired in the interview, but the educator puts its best foot forward by praising the brilliance of the learner in question and most probably comes across as being confused and hurt by having her good intentions questioned. Always works, that one, and even the most seasoned employers fall for it.
The parents of the learner are asked to come and be present while the learner is interviewed. At the end of a lengthy discussion, the department's representative is cracking her knuckles with anxiety to conclude and contain the matter. As mentioned in setting the scene, the department does NOT need a scandal. Neither does the principal, or the school, as reputations will forever be tarnished. Pity they didn't think about that when the appointed the educator without checking references!

The department is overtly unwilling to discuss or investigate the Facebook element. It is "after hours". Whether it destroys the thinking ability of students in this case, or contains demonstrable instances of libel, threats and instigation of those, is of no interest to the department.

The department has to obtain the permission of parents in order to interview other learners involved. It doesn't want to interview them, as the investigation then becomes bigger and the threat of it becoming public grows exponentially. It babbles things like "protecting the child", keeping people in schools etc in order to try and calm the parents down. It doesn't take the victimisation seriously, as the child was not present when it happened and can only take it into account if other children are interviewed.

Hm. What are the parents to do? Be content with a slap on the wrist of the educator when SHE is the one who took the matter to a greater audience? And now the PARENTS are held responsible if it becomes public? Is this how the department thinks?

The parents decide on letting go in the interest of certain learners, and possible old acquaintances that they do not wish to embarrass. They demand a public apology to their daughter as the humiliation and victimisation were public and continue to be so through harassment on Facebook. The apology doesn't seem to be forthcoming, so watch out for the third Act!

Critical Crossfield Outcomes 4; Communicating Values 2

This post, and the following ones with the same heading, combine some of the things touched upon in previous ones, by painting a very real scenario and asking how CCFO 4: COLLECT, ANALYSE, ORGANISE AND CRITICALLY EVALUATE INFORMATION is served, or not, by this scenario.

Knowing the difference between right and wrong, between solid, useful and relevant information and what is conveniently known as crap, is a fundamental skill.

THE SCENARIO

Main character: An educator that has been expelled, in the natural if not legal sense of the word, from two previous workplaces for unprofessional misconduct towards learners. Instigating mistrust towards authorities and the system in both places, casting aspersions on the intentions and actions of those above her and posing as the only saviour of the poor, poor learners who are being exploited and limited by others seems to be, from information gathered so far, a favourite MO.

Other important characters:
1. The learner (now hounded by other learners, with veiled and illegal threats made against her in the school corridors)who first sounds the alarm to
2. Her mother, who happens to be more familiar with the education system, the Public Service Code of Conduct, and the dire need of the education department in question not to have more scandals thrown at them than most parents
3. The principal, let's call him Mr Expedience, very chuffed with himself for having received awards from the department in question and having hobnobbed with names that he drops like a man with no arms
4. The education department in question, that first acts in alarm and pleads for the issue not to be made public, but then seems to be dragging its heels on the level where its workload and the perceptions of the principal intersect.

In the wings, but not at all unimportant:
1. Several educators and stakeholders in the school who strongly, but out of necessity anonymously (you don't want to piss the department off, because you have a job and have to feed your children and elderly parents), urge the mother on to take the case to the highest levels of the department, as they have very grave concerns about the ability or intention of the principal to run the school along the lines of what they perceive to be "right and wrong". These have been in education for very long and include parents of top past learners
2. Gum-chewing governing body members who until recently thought all coloured learners were Muslims
3. Facebook
4. Previous employers, who may still be battling after-shocks
5. Dominees. The misguided ones with personal issues.
6. The courts, who may or may not be approached for interdicts to force the principal to run his school on professional lines, with the interests of learners, and not educators, protected
7. The majority of parents, who leave education to the school and don't want to be bothered if they think their children may be victimised (as is demonstrably happening now), or if they are not directly involved

THE BATTLEFIELD
The minds of hundreds of learners who will, or will not, at the end of the play know what is professional behaviour expected (and legally enforceable) from public service educators. Who will, or will not, understand that they have been the victims of emotional brainwashing, and will or will not be able to discern between propaganda and facts.

THE QUESTION (or the one asked by THIS post):
Should churning out symbols to impress your superiors be a stronger motivation for a principal than producing emotionally intelligent, informed learners who can make choices and not act like lemmings? That question does not only apply to this scenario.

Watch this space for CCFO's 4(b)!

MOVING!

This blog is moving to Wordpress! It will stay up here for a while longer, but all new posts will be on fundamentalskills.wordpress.com.

Critical Cross-Field Outcomes 3

The CCFO's, to recap, serve as "generic outcomes that inform all teaching and learning" (SAQA). They are deemed critical for the development of the capacity for life-long learning, also according to SAQA. The third of the seven main CCFO's that MUST be included and assessed in all qualifications on the NQF is;

ORGANISE AND MANAGE ONESELF AND ONE'S ACTIVITIES RESPONSIBLY AND EFFECTIVELY

That is not a small outcome, and should perhaps be the first and most important instead of the third in line! It is applicable to all stages of life and would have different visible results at different ages. It does, however, imply having all applicable information and options at your disposable, and making your own decisions instead of being herded into options that you wouldn't have chosen if you HAD had all those options and choices.

Much is said on a daily basis, on Twitter and other platforms, about the state of South African education. It is not a pretty picture, granted, but much of the criticism is wrongly aimed at the SYSTEM, which is a good and solid one. Comments like "I see the system producing obedient slaves"; "the system kills creativity" and others which are no doubt based on seeing what comes out at the end of 12 years of schooling, abound.

But the current system, theoretically and on paper, does strive to instill good, useful skills and attitudes into learners, and does contain the possibility of producing healthy, independent thinkers in control of their destinies and the discernment to make the choices that will result in organising themselves responsibly and effectively. The subject of Life Orientation, for example, is aimed at exactly that. It is debatable whether it should be an examinable subject for school-leaving purposes, but perhaps ridicule of it should be shelved until the whole South African population is able to organise itself in such a way as to make the subject redundant.

Because the problem with South African education is NOT the system, but the cultural attitudes of many of its people. This goes across race lines, one hastens to add, before high horses are mounted and shrill protests well up.

South Africans of many backgrounds have an authority problem. We want authority, and we want someone to tell us what to do. And if things don't happen the way we want to, we want someone else to blame. The government, the system, apartheid, America... I call it the "De la Rey" syndrome, after the (in)famous Afrikaans song that gives voice to our yearning for a leader.

THAT is the main problem with education in South Africa today. Children are simply NOT taught at home that they are autonomous beings that must take responsibility for all their OWN actions, and therefore they are easily shaped by peer pressure and the mediocrity that the system currently produces, not because of itself, but because teachers and implementers themselves are victims of the De la Rey syndrome and because the workload and problems are just so much that it is easier to slip into familiar patterns than to go against the flow. Even the most creative and idealistic teachers get bogged down by the sheer crush of old attitudes that have not changed, and succumb to the paradigm of "we have to churn out mathematicians and scientists". That thinking in itself is a killer of creativity (and the subject of another blog), but the SYSTEM (in its purest form, as in that which is written down as its aims and motivations) is not the problem.

The sheep-mentality of the people is still just too overwhelming for a good system to kick in and produce the results it was conceived to do. It is too advanced, and therefore seems to be the culprit. We want others to organise our lives, and we want others to take responsibility. It may take two generations of Life Orientation for more autonomous thinking to kick in and start taking root, and for our current educational system to come into its own. If it is not thrown out completely because those in control succumb to the sheep-mentality.

Communicating VALUES: looking at ads (1)

McCAIN

The current McCain ad, on etv around 7p, news time (that is all that is watched in this enterprise/household), is primitive, iniquitous and completely out of touch with current South African and world issues. That COULD have come at the end of this commentary, but an explanation follows. For those who don't know the commercial: it depicts a middle-class black family where the mother tells the father: look here, they say here fresh fruit and veggies are the best for your family. This is followed by images of the father toiling and sweating with a spade etc, and then the virtues of frozen veggies are extolled and the impression created that they are at least as good as fresh ones. Think again, think McCain. One could add selected punctuation marks: Think again! THINK, McCain!

While one appreciates the need for low-budget commercials that people can identify with, McCain and their ad agency (which planet do these guys live on???) really insult their target audience with this effort. The ad communicates and encourages the following values:

1. Working with the soil is difficult and back-breaking
2. Producing fresh food yourself is difficult
3. Working with the soil and producing food is undesirable for people moving upwards
4. Consumerism is the way to go
5. Plastic packaging is desirable and to be striven for if you are not a poor fool living on the platteland somewhere
6. Freezing stuff, so contributing to electricity costs, is desirable and to be striven towards
7. All of the above, contributing to an excessive carbon footprint, is absolutely wonderful

In a country where agricultural issues, food production, food security and electricity consumption are pertinent, this ad sends all the wrong messages to people who may not have the analytical skills to know what they are being dished up. Pun intended. The message is irresponsible and the intention cynical. South African consumers deserve better.

One wonders how this commercial would fare in a developed and aware environment like the EU. Ad agencies would probably not even CONTEMPLATE producing something like that, as the high environmental awareness in the EU would not accept such shoddy thinking. MCain, and its ad agency locally should strive to rectify the stuff-up. Seeing that the product, at this stage, fulfills a certain need, they should be more respectful of and responsible towards their audience by perhaps depicting food production as the most noble activity there is, with McCain adding value, or whatever they think they're doing. Bringing in message of dealing with their plastic packaging responsibly, using freezing space efficiently, or any such aware behaviour will not hurt their product. It will also not hurt the budget, and will at least create the impression that they and their agency are not cynical rip-offs, unaware of pressing global issues.

About MONEYmental

Yesterday, after a long hard slog with many twists and tails and too many variants to even mention, we managed to publish the first of the MONEYmental series of video clips, in Zulu, on youtube. The second installment in Zulu should be ready early next week, after which we will relax the teeniest bit. The Afrikaans clips have all been prepared, but we may still change the presenter for greater inclusiveness.

MONEYmental was conceived as a very basic financial literacy and management intervention for children and teens - 8-15 - especially those with limited resources. It is meant to encourage discipline and focus when it comes to money, even with very little of it. It hopes to identify and develop sustainable principles that can be applied whenever money is encountered. These principles, when applied to small amounts, or even dreams of money, would then hopefully become entrenched and lead to success later on.

The first mini-series, aimed at the age group mentioned, will be followed by a series for rural women. The principles contained in that one will be adapted from existing projects in India and other parts of the world.

Of course, at FUNDAmental SKILLS one of the basic and non-negotiable principles is that of mother-tongue education. To reach where poverty is worst, and opportunities at a premium, starting financial literacy has to be in the languages of South Africa's poorest children. And they are everywhere, which is why the series will be translated and produced in as many languages as we can find willing language practitioners for.

The production of the series is not funded in any way except personal initiative and sacrifice. For the first two Zulu clips, Ntokozo paid, out of pure idealism, for her own flight from Durban to here. This followed an advertisement for language practitioners on Gumtree. There has been a lot of response, but as soon as people understand that reward will come only from monetisation, and that this will be divided equally between producers, translators and/or presenters, the enthusiasm wanes and even firm commitments are not met. People just don't appear for the recording sessions!

Willingness doesn't always mean expertise or experience, though, so the first clip may come across as slightly hesitant in presentation. The second one picks up speed, so keep on watching! We envisage a great career as presenter and voice artist for Ntokozo, who is already an accomplished translator and interpreter. There is more experience on the production side, although editing was also new. That is where the hold-up occurred: the clip was shot in November already, but the cameraman, who had to deal with extraneous noises and distractions too hilarious and unprofessional to go into, insisted on mastering editing on Avid Media Composer 5 before we could proceed. Needless to say, THAT monster programme has not been MASTERED yet, but subdued enough to produce a reasonable clip for the purposes.

Teachers or community workers who would like to use the clips as EMS tool, or aftercare activity, or any educational purpose, are welcome to access them at any time. We know that we cannot stop the videos from being downloaded, but of course watching them online is always preferable. And if anyone would like to contribute to translations or presentations - give us a call when you are in Cape Town and we will happily slip into production mode to accommodate you!

CCFOs 2

Phew...a few days (good) interruption in the normal schedule has resulted in more gaps between discussions about the critical cross-field outcomes than intended!

The second CCFO as adopted by SAQA is:
Work effectively with others as a member of a team, group, organisation or community.

This one is neither difficult nor contentious. On business level it can mean to network, know how your position interacts with others within your organisation, and where the organisation you work for (or work!) fits into the market, and then to know what to do to make the whole situation function effectively by contributing the part you are best suited to.

African culture espouses the principle of UBUNTU, which has become something of a buzzword, even among those of us who come from an individualistic cultural background and wield it as a weapon to make people feel guilty about not being nicer to one another.  Ubuntu refers, of course, to the second biggest team of all: humanity. You know your place because others know their place and everyone knows what is expected of them for a harmonious co-existence (to be unsentimental and mechanical about it!)

But it somehow doesn't happen anymore. Not at primary, secondary or tertiary education level, where the principle is supposed to underlie all learning, not in South Africa, not in the world, and certainly not on the level of the biggest team, which includes all life on earth.

The immediate culprit that springs to mind is, of course, the individualism embedded in Western style education. In trying to get the teamwork principle across in its content and activities- from life orientation through sports activities to EMS -, it works against itself. It makes the end goal of education the achievement of the individual through unsustainable competition, the reward of individual academic effort and the pervasive idea that if you perform in those areas, YOU - the individual - will experience financial success and personal fulfillment. 

That brings in the materialism that is increasingly being accepted and pursued by African society as a sign of having arrived and being sophisticated, and which will mean the definitive end of ubuntu if not checked drastically, RIGHT NOW, in our educational institutions.

By putting it that way, this sounds like a pathetic little hoarse voice crying in a vast and crushing wilderness. What are good ways of counteracting this "black hole"? How can we introduce and emphasise and ply and wield the principle of teamwork - which is related to another CCFO that we will come to - so that it REALLY translates into more cooperative learning and working and achievement?

The question is left open: please contribute ideas, suggestions, opinions! It is too big an issue, and too important a principle to cover in one discussion. It is of utmost importance, not only for our society here in South Africa, but ultimately for the survival of the species. 

CRITICAL CROSS-FIELD OUTCOMES 1

Behind and beyond and underneath all the subject matter available to study on the South African education and training scene lie the CCFO's - the Critical Cross-Field Outcomes as identified by SAQA and underpinning all learning. They even have to be identified as such and their testing shown on assessment instruments. How many people, especially learners, are aware of them?

THE CCFO's are, of course, fundamental skills. No matter what the subject is that a child or adult may be studying, if the CCFO's are not present, the subject matter remains isolated and unconnected with the rest of the student's experience. And this disconnectedness, this lack of reference and being able to relate learning material, is the root cause of academic dysfunction and the need for a 30% pass mark to boost the self-esteem of learners. Surely the long-term sustainability of our education system, and the functionality of our population, would be much better served if the CCFO's were taught as meta-learning, and students made aware of how they can apply them to all areas of learning? In so doing a functional network of inter-related learning can be created in ALL minds, facilitating the acquisition and retention of knowledge and resulting in an intellectually competitive nation.

The first CCFO is the ability to:
Identify and solve problems in which responses demonstrate that responsible 
decisions using critical and creative thinking have been made.  

Quite a mouthful, that one, which can be broken into the following components for ease of discussion:
1. Identifying problems
2. Solving problems
3. Making responsible decisions
4. Thinking critically
5. Thinking creatively

What comes to mind after just GLANCING at those components, each of which should be a CCFO on its own, is that these skills, or the conscious teaching and acquiring of them, are somehow lacking in our education system. Of course, they are in the manuals, printed out in the assessment guides and methods...but do they reach the children? Is teaching, in general, geared towards instilling this approach in learners? Or are there too many THINGS to teach and work to plough children through? Is the hysterical, narrow focus on "MATHS & SCIENCE" detracting from the more important task of developing minds that can make decisions based on a much wider set of resources?

Once a mind has learnt to identify and solve problems, think creatively and critically, and make responsible decisions BECAUSE it CAN think like that, maths and science will follow easily if the student wishes to pursue them. The student will also have a wide frame of reference, from which s/he can choose options to pursue career-wise.

The minds of young children can absorb so much more than we are limiting them to in our current GET practice. The correct and visionary policies and theory lurk somewhere in the system: we should let children participate in their own development by CONSCIOUSLY using an approach of problem-solving, referring to a wide range of resources in the process, and learning to think CRITICALLY and not to accept anything at face value. Watch the retention rate, pass-rate and employment rate skyrocket after 10 years of actually APPLYING the CCFO's!

EPD 2: Articles! 1

What use of the indefinite article - "a(n)" can you deduce from the following examples? At the same time, explain the difference in meaning that the inclusion of the indefinite article makes:

1. Mr Smith said that his failure was due to (a) depression. 
2. When I was in the shop I hear the assistant say that she had lost (a) weight.
3. I don't think that (a) strict order is necessary.


This is a sample of the kind of stuff dealt with in Module 3 of the English for Professional Development Course soon available on CREEL. You will never be confused about article and other small word use again after plowing through all that, and having fun and improving your expressive power at the same time!

We will also publish free English, Afrikaans, social studies, LO exercises and tips for high school learners every week.

EPD 1

English for Professional Development! For all up 'n coming entrepreneurs and those who want to polish their presentation, here is the first of the tips, tasters of the FUNDAmental SKILLS EPD course.
The full five-part course will be available from CREEL (creel.co.za) soon - watch this space and Twitter!



When you greet someone, or approach them on the phone for the first time (or any other time, for that matter...), DO NOT SAY 

"Hello how are you?"  

The formula "how are you"or its original "Kunjani?" is idiomatic in Zulu and the other languages that it is used in. IT IS NOT IDIOMATIC TO ENGLISH. It sounds strange. It sounds wrong. It even sounds rude and intrusive.

Asking how someone is, in English, is limited to people who know each other. Well. It implies, to a certain extent, a real interest in how someone is doing. The answer is not something English is comfortable sharing with people it doesn't know.

It is certainly very wrong as the first thing to say to someone.

This is one of the little situations we as South Africans from different cultures encounter every day. KUNJANI is a good and proper thing to say, in the context in which it arose. HOW ARE YOU is simply not, and in a professional or non-personal situation it shouldn't be used. Even if people are tolerant of cultural differences, most people feel uncomfortable and irritated when asked that by someone they don't know, and that immediately detracts from your sales-pitch, the receiver's willingness to listen, and ultimately from your professional image.

The RIGHT thing to say when phoning someone for the first time, whether to sell something, or provide customer service, or respond to a query, is to say

1. Good morning Sir/Madam (or whatever other form of address is appropriate, like Mr/Mrs Name)
2. (Ask whether you are speaking to the person you want to speak to) (this can be left out if appropriate)
3. IDENTIFY YOURSELF CLEARLY.
4. State your business and ask whether it is convenient to talk. (if appropriate)

After these steps, the person will know who they are talking to and will be in a position to decide whether they want to talk to you or not.

Whatever you do, or whatever order you do the above in, DO NOT ASK "How are you?" Awkward, awkward, awkward!!

Die Taal (in Afrikaans)

Taal is iets waaroor ons sterk voel by FUNDAmental SKILLS, soos vorige blogs duidelik behoort te maak. Gister verskyn daar 'n retweet op ons tydlyn wat lei na 'n opinie, gepos in "Taal", van Johan Swarts oba @gormendizer. Die kern van die artikel was die argument dat om te beweer dat Afrikaans n Afrika-taal is, in die konteks van "everyone must learn an African language", ten beste niksseggend en ten slegste foutief is. Die argument word gestaaf met soliede linguistiese bewyse en is natuurlik heeltemal wetenskaplik korrek as dit slegs op linguistiese klassifikasie gebaseer is.

Die artikel voer aan dat as die stelling "Afrikaans is 'n Afrika-taal" polities is, dit slegs triviaal korrek is. (Daar bestaan goeie Afrikaanse woorde vir "triviaal"!) Dit is hier waar ek effens van gormendizer verskil. Dit is nie "triviaal" korrek nie, dit is polities BEDUIDEND korrek, en dié wat nog altyd breinloos "die taal van die verdrukker" jammer behoort onmiddellik daarvan kennis te neem.

'n Opsomming van die ontstaan van Afrikaans (vir wie dit verbygegaan het):
Jan van Riebeeck et al het vir hulle aanvanklike werkgewers, die VOC, 'n proviandstasie aan die Kaap gevestig. Die plaaslike bevolking, naamlik die Khoi-khoi, was nie beskikbaar as arbeid nie en kon, volgens die   verwronge Christelike geloof van die nedersetters,  nie  "verslaaf" word nie omdat hulle van plaaslike oorsprong was. Daar was egter geen beswaar teen slawerny in die algemeen nie, en slawe kon van ander VOC-plekke ingevoer word. En hulle is toe ook ingevoer: vanaf Indië, Maleisië, Madagaskar, Oos-Afrika en Wes-Afrika, in verskillende getalle. 

Die slawe is in die Slawehuis gehuisves, sowel as op die plasies en in huishoudings van die nedersetters, wie se taal die Nederlands van daardie tyd was - nogal verskillend van die gestandaardiseerde "hoog-Hollands" van vandag. 

Die situasie was ideaal vir die ontstaan van 'n pidgin: 'n kontaktaal met beperkte toepassing. Werkgewers wou bevele gee, slawe en ander werknemers moes belangrike inligting meedeel, die slawe kon mekaar nie verstaan nie en moes ook noodgedwonge kommunikeer; die nedersetters, meestal mans, moes met hulle slawe-houvroue (EN Khoivroue!) sekere lewensbelangrike woorde wissel.

Die kenmerke van 'n pidgin sluit gewoonlik 'n beperkte woordeskat van die brontaal in, met 'n baie vereenvoudigde grammatika. Partymaal is die grammatika van die nuwe pidgin gebaseer op dié van die substratumtale, naamlik dié wat NIE die hoofwoordeskat verskaf nie, en wat minder sosiale aansien geniet en dus nie wensbaar as 'n teikentaal is nie. In die geval van die pidgin aan die Kaap was dit nie werkbaar nie omdat daar so baie substratumtale was, en die grammatika, "such as it was", was van vereenvoudigde Germaanse struktuur. 

'n Pidgin verander van status en word n kreool wanneer dit as moedertaal gepraat word. Die Kaapse pidgin is alreeds in meer as die gewone beperkte omstandighede gebruik, en kinders van gemengde afkoms (verskillende kombinasies...)is gou gebore en het gepraat wat hulle om hulle gehoor het. Binne minder as tweehonderd jaar is die kreool Afrikaans gevestig as die voertaal van die Kaap, en veral van die gemengde slawegemeenskap en hulle vry afstammelinge. Soos die areas van toepassing uitgebrei het, het die woordeskat en grammatikale ingewikkeldheid ook uitgebrei, met die gevolg dat ons vandag 'n volwaardige taal het wat nog steeds dinamies is en neologismes kan genereer (Nederlands het lankal opgehou probeer en inkorporeer amper nog net Engelse en Franse leenwoorde).

Die eerste boek in Afrikaans is in die laat 1850's (ek moet die datum net weer bevestig) in ARABIESE skrif uitgegee deur die gemeenskap van die Bo-Kaap en in Turkye gedruk. Die wit gemeenskap kan geen krediet aanvaar nie! Soos die latere, meer bekende geskiedenis van Afrikaans wys, was die wit gemeenskap besonder hardkoppig gekant teen die erkenning van die feit dat hulle dieselfde voertaal as die slawe- en vermengde Khoi/Nederlands/slawegemeenskap gepraat het, en het dit Totius en ouens met name soos Pannevis geverg om erkenning vir  Afrikaans te kry.

Die verskil tussen 'n kreool en n "taal" kan amper altyd in eenhede van politieke mag gemeet word. Eers in 1925 het Afrikaans die status van amptelike taal gekry, en die res weet ons almal. 

Die punt van die relaas, op hierdie stadium en ter verduideliking van my verskilletjie van gormendizer is dus: Afrikaans is baie definitief en beduidend, polities en geskiedkundig, n Afrikataal. Dit behoort aan die bevolking wat hier tot stand gekom het. Dit het eerste, en met trots, aan nie-blanke sprekers behoort. Dit is 'n politiese en sosiale tragedie dat dié wat dit eerste gepraat het en hulle identiteit daarop gebou het, dit in "droves" agterlaat omdat 'n paar klipkoppe dit lomp aangewend het om hulle magsposisie te probeer bewys en verstewig. 'n KLIP IN DIE BOS: dié wat aan hierdie groep behoort, onthou: JULLE HET JULLE ERFENIS EN IDENTITEIT AAN 'N PAAR KLIPKOPPE OORGEGEE.

Die voorafgaande hopelik interessantheidshalwe. Ons weet presies waarna gormendizer verwys, en wat hy nie so wou uitspel soos ek dit nou gaan uitspel nie: 
Die "disingenuous" "Afrikaans is ook 'n Afrikataal"-kreet kom gewoonlik van mense wat eenvoudig nie kan vrede maak met die feit dat ons in Afrika leef en dat wit Afrikaners uiteindelik moet aanpas en integreer nie. Dieselfde mense WIL net nie 'n (linguisties-geklassifiseerde) Afrika-taal leer nie omdat hulle (1) nie kan nie (2) regtig onder die indruk verkeer dat Afrikatale op 'n manier minderwaardig is en nie so ryk aan uitdrukkingsvermoë of grammatiese kompleksiteit soos Europese tale is nie. Hierdie mites word natuurlik oor en oor herhaal deur klipkoppe wat hoegenaamd geen kennis van linguistiek het nie, hoegenaamd geen kennis van genetika en antropologie het nie, en wat nog steeds glo in die 19de-eeuse mites van rasgebaseerde meerderwaardigheid van Europeërs. 

As daar enige ingryping van regeringskant in die inhoud van taal- en geskiedenishandboeke in staatskole is, wat oor die algemeen onwenslik is en tot vergrype en propagandaverspreiding kan lei, sou dit nuttig wees om seker te maak dat die taalgeskiedenis van die land - nie net van Afrikaans nie - akkuraat en intelligent aangebied word sodat ons kinders 'n duidelike beeld van 'n hulle erfenis kan hě en verhoudings kan bou gebaseer op wedersydse respek vir die kulturele rykdom wat ons SAAM daarstel. Dan hoef niemand hulle identeit uit skaamte te verloën nie, niemand hoef op enigiemand anders neer te kyk nie, en almal se begrip, verwysingsraamwerk en waardering vir mekaar kan uitgebrei word. 'n Ware en waardige nasiebou-poging.

2013 The Year of the Education Revolution?

Thousands of 2012 Matrics are chewing through their nailbeds as we chew the cud, awaiting the state school Matric results. No one expects them to be as spectacular as the IEB ones...which had commentators gushing about the quality of South African private schools - comparable to the best in the world, etc, etc. And then we have the quality of "the others", producing results that compare well with the worst in the world.

Everyone knows there is a problem, lurking somewhere in the chasm between the two. Everyone has something to say about the probable causes, and admirable initiatives to improve South African education abound. Between activist NGO's, corporate support initiatives, private and faith-based projects and sheer dogged determination on the part of selected individual learners, progress is made on a variety of fronts. I have three suggestions, aimed at producing sustainable results in the medium term while making school immediately a lot less torturous and senseless for most learners, especially the underserved rural ones:

1. Forget about the constant harping on maths and science education as a priority. Maths and science will always be there for those interested and drawn to them. GET THE BASICS RIGHT FIRST. Concentrate on language issues, and make sure that ALL learners go to school and learn new concepts in the language they are most comfortable with. The rest, believe me, or if you don't, check worldwide statistics and experience, will follow by itself. Sending children to school in a language they battle with is a sure-fire way of screwing up their heads for life. Killing off the potential of generations of children through sheer laxity, neglect or lack of political will is heinous. Stop it. You have the resources and the expertise, government. Make it happen if you are in the least interested in the well-being of the people who have elected you to govern.

2. Foster a culture of pride in obtaining knowledge and lifelong learning. That would be the equivalent of "kill the NAFI germ" that seems to have reached endemic proportions in the majority of South African children, teens and young adults. To start on this project, one of the first steps would be to remove all traces of the entitlement mentality that has teachers, administrators, unions and learners in its thrall. Nothing is gained by doing nothing, holding your hand out and blaming others for your lack of success. This needs to be drilled into learners from the first contact with formal schooling. Maybe, over a generation or so, it will be drilled in at home as it will become the prevalent way of thinking. The worst example South African children have is the Sunday Times Mampara of 2012. The current South African dream is a dreadful, nightmarish twist on the American one: you can become president even if you have no education to speak of. Then you can have lots of wives, children and things ( = consume madly), act like a fool, do the most seriously corrupt and stupid things, and still try to act like you're not only president but also a champion psychologist in trying to "decolonise people's minds". We have to move away from any thinking along those lines, otherwise any and all current initiatives aimed at improving education in SA are doomed to fail in the long run.

3. Encourage a wide frame of reference. The more things, people, places, ideas and facts children know about, the more intelligent choices they are able to make when the time comes for career decisions. And the better they will know themselves and where they fit into the bigger picture. At the moment, because of past inequalities, even many in decision-making position know preciously little about not only their own subject matter, but seriously important issues around it. That not only results in a "lack of capacity", but in the worst cases PERPETUATES ignorance and has horrendous practical implications for anyone in that particular sphere of influence. To illustrate the last complicated sentence: I am aware of an FET-level work-readiness programme of which the tender gets awarded to the same company year after year - and the programme is based on outdated Scientology material, full of glaring inaccuracies and techniques that are utterly useless for South African circumstances. Is the person who awards the tender, spending South African taxpayers' money on advancing Scientology, a closet Scientologist working undercover? Or just terribly uninformed and in the process jeopardising thousands of students' ability to perform meaningfully in their field of study?

I have seen more than one tender process go very wrong through either corruption (subject of other blogs and opinions) or sheer ignorance on the part of those in control. South Africa could have had a thriving agritourism industry in the rural areas if the consortium with the knowledge and expertise had been awarded a certain tender in 2005. But because people in control were greedy and UNINFORMED it never happened, and is still not happening.

These things do not get sorted out in a year. But we can make a start this year, in our respective spheres of influence. We MUST immediately embark on a scientific approach to language in education. We MUST kill nafiness and its causes wherever we encounter it. And we MUST provide resources and access to them to all children so that they can see the world as a whole and spot their place in it. At FUNDAMENTAL SKILLS we are committed to these ideals, and we will support - with encouragement or materials or expertise, wherever we see them implemented elsewhere.