This article was downloaded by: [Ryerson University]

On: 03 December 2014, At: 00:55

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Comparative Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
[Link]

Education quality in post‐apartheid

South African policy: balancing equity,
diversity, rights and participation
a b
Yusuf Sayed & Rashid Ahmed
a
School of Education and Social Work , University of Sussex ,
Brighton, UK
b
Department of Psychology , University of the Western Cape ,
Bellville, Republic of South Africa
Published online: 18 Feb 2011.

To cite this article: Yusuf Sayed & Rashid Ahmed (2011) Education quality in post‐apartheid South
African policy: balancing equity, diversity, rights and participation, Comparative Education, 47:1,
103-118, DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2011.541680

To link to this article: [Link]

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at [Link]
and-conditions
 Comparative Education
Vol. 47, No. 1, February 2011, 103–118

Education quality in post-apartheid South African policy:

balancing equity, diversity, rights and participation
Yusuf Sayed*a and Rashid Ahmedb
a
School of Education and Social Work, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK; bDepartment of
Psychology, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, Republic of South Africa
Comparative
10.1080/03050068.2011.541680
CCED_A_541680.sgm
0305-0068
Original
Taylor
102011
47
ymsyd1@[Link];
YusufSayed
00000February
and
&Article
Francis
(print)/1360-0486
Francis
Education
[Link]@[Link]
(online)

In spite of numerous definitions of quality, consensus on what constitutes

Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

quality is less clear and contested. Using South Africa as a case study, this
paper explores the current conceptual thinking and debates about education
quality. Specifically the paper reviews selected South African policy texts to
identify how some of the global dimensions of quality map onto South African
policy discourse. The paper begins by reviewing some of the conceptual work
in the area and concentrates on identifying and exploring some of the
dimensions of quality. This is followed by a brief contextualisation of policy
development in South Africa leading to an analysis of key issues and debates in
discourses about quality present in selected education policy texts. The
concluding section identifies, through the South African experience, some of the
global challenges and ways forward. The paper notes the many challenges
present in South Africa’s attempts to balance equity, diversity, right and
participation in delivering good quality education. This experience resonates
with that of many other contexts.

Introduction
In spite of numerous definitions of quality, consensus on what constitutes quality is
less forthcoming. In the descriptive sense, quality implies characteristics or
attributes (Alexander 2008). The crucial question though is which characteristics or
qualities? Lawton summarises it as ‘… questions such as, quality of what? Quality
for whom? Quality in relation to what?’ (1994, 1). The aim of the current paper is
to develop the current focus on conceptual work in the area on the dimensions of
quality in low-income contexts. Through an analysis of selected South African
policy texts an attempt will be made to identify how some of the dimensions of
quality map onto South African policy discourse and the relevance for the quality
debates. In the first section, the paper selectively reviews some of the conceptual
work in the area and concentrates on identifying and exploring some of the dimen-
sions of quality. The second section contextualises South African policy develop-
ment, while the third section identifies some of the key issues and debates in
discourses about quality present in selected policy texts. The concluding section
identifies, through the South African experience, some of the global challenges and
ways forward.

*Corresponding author. Email: [Link]@[Link]

ISSN 0305-0068 print/ISSN 1360-0486 online

© 2011 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2011.541680
[Link]
 104 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

Approaches to quality in education

The scope and depth of the literature on education quality is enormous and we confine
our focus to some of the key texts attempting to problematise and broaden our concep-
tualisation of education quality (Barnes 2006; O’Sullivan 2006; Alexander 2008;
Barrett et al. 2008; Tikly and Barrett 2008a, 2009; Nikel and Lowe 2010). Current
conceptualisations are rooted in different approaches to education and in their more
recent work in this area Tikly and Barrett (2009) identify three approaches to education
quality: the human capital approach; the human rights approach; and the social justice
approach. Human capital approaches view education as contributing to economic
development, and argue for investment on these grounds (Hanushek 2003). The focus
is on how this investment can be maximised and what are the gains from this investment
(Hanushek and Luque 2003; Heyneman 2004). This approach is influential and remains
extremely valuable for identifying and quantifying inputs and outputs, examining the
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

relationship between them and is potentially helpful for directing policy to processes
that influence outcomes. However, the often narrow focus on inputs and outputs with-
out adequate engagement with process, the over-reliance on standardised assessments
of cognitive learning and the inability to fully engage with human rights issues, point
to limitations in this conceptualisation of quality.
The human rights discourse on quality is pervasive and dominant in discussions
about education quality in low-income contexts. The Education for All movement
best captures this approach and, according to Mundy (2006), has succeeded in
bridging the gap between those concerned with equity and the negative impact of
market forces and those who view economic growth as positive and inevitable.
Within this approach education is viewed as a basic right that a learner is entitled to,
and governments and institutions need to work towards creating conditions for a
quality education for all. Furthermore, processes like learner-centred pedagogies and
democratic school structures that facilitate and maintain the development of these
rights are also highlighted.
This approach has been critiqued as being somewhat narrow and legalist
(Unterhalter 2005; Robeyns 2006; Tikly and Barrett 2009). While it broadens the
conceptualisation in comparison to human capital approaches, it is a top-down
approach, which views rights primarily as legal rights rather than substantive rights,
and does not always fully engage with the socio-political contexts that impact on
human rights and education. Tikly and Barrett (2009) suggest that while both the
human capital and human rights approaches are useful conceptual tools for educa-
tional quality, their inability to provide comprehensive, contextual accounts limits
their utility.
Drawing on the work of Sen (1999), Nussbaum (2006) and Fraser (2008), Tikly
and Barrett (2009) propose that the social justice approach is an advance on the
human rights approach in two key areas. First, unlike the human rights approach that
is often construed as legal rights, drawing from Fraser’s work (2008), Tikly and
Barrett (2009) emphasise far more strongly substantive rights in the broadest sense.
Within this framework participation is seen as central to quality and suggests that
improving quality must include giving ‘voice’ to all, especially the marginalised. The
second area draws from the recent focus on capabilities in education. Drawing on the
work of Sen (1999, 2009), capabilities are defined as any potential functioning which
is valued. A distinction is also made between capability and functioning as
capabilities may not be realised. This approach broadens education to ‘doings and
beings’ valued by society.
 Comparative Education 105

The approaches to education quality are complemented by a significant body of

scholarship on what constitutes quality. In their review of the literature Barrett et al.
(2008) provide a useful categorisation that captures much of the current thinking.
Through a selective review of some of the representative definitions of quality, they
identify five analytical components of quality, namely: effectiveness, efficiency,
equality, relevance and sustainability. Nikel and Lowe (2010) have extended this
conceptualisation by adding two new dimensions and, more importantly, attempting
to conceptualise the inter-relationships between the dimensions. Nikel and Lowe
(2010) identify seven dimensions, the two additional being responsiveness and reflex-
ivity. The inter-relationships are conceptualised as a fabric with both tensions and
complementarity depending on context. In a similar vein, the utility of the social
justice approach is the identification of three key dimensions for quality, namely:
‘redistribution’, ‘recognition’ and ‘participation’ (Fraser 2008). Barrett et al. (2008)
suggest that while the focus on socio-economic disadvantage and poverty reduction is
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

important, current approaches do not take into account multiple forms of inequality.
We argue that the literature reviewed above considerably broadens the parameters
of what constitutes quality and forms the basis for our conceptualisation of quality.
The contextual conceptualisations of quality (Tikly and Barret 2008a, 2008b, 2009)
are most useful, and our definition is located within this conceptualisation. Drawing
on this work and the GMR report (UNESCO 2005), quality is understood as encom-
passing the interaction between what learners bring to learning (learner characteris-
tics), what happens in the learning space such as school/classroom setting (enabling
inputs), what happens to individuals as a consequence of education (outcomes) and
the context within which the activity takes place. However, deciding on what consti-
tutes quality is an intensely value laden activity and involves both what is, but also
what should be (Tikly and Barret 2008a; Sayed 2010).

Contextualising education quality policy changes in South Africa: 1994–2008

The breadth and depth of policy change in South Africa was extensive as the country
made the transition to a democratic state. In this section we review selected policy
texts and how they engage with quality and how policy implementation and policy
departures illuminate some of the challenges emerging in terms of the quality debate.
In drawing from our definition we identify three key questions in relation to these
policy texts. First, what are some of the dominant discourses about quality in South
African policy texts? Second, which dimensions of quality are highlighted in these
policy texts and how do they map onto current approaches to education quality?
Finally, what are some of the contradictions that emerge in both policy formulation
and attempts to implement a quality education in South Africa and how do these
inform the quality debates?

Education quality in post-apartheid South Africa

The features of the apartheid system are well documented (Fiske and Ladd 2006;
Motala 2006; Christie, Butler and Potterton 2007) and scholarship has emphasised
the fragmentation and inequities of the system. Post-apartheid policy was shaped by
its response to this system and in the post-apartheid era, South Africa has seen a
proliferation of educational policies. From the Department of Education website
(http//:[Link]), it appears that between 1994 and 2007 seven white
 106 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

papers, three green papers, 26 bills (of which 17 are amendment bills), 35 Acts (of
which 22 are amendments of existing laws), 11 regulations, 52 government notices
and 26 calls for comments covered the whole education sector from basic to higher
education. These exclude some of the policies presented in 2008, which are not yet
posted on the website.
The volume of and discernible shifts in policy activity attest to the necessity of
engaging with this task, as well as the subsequent challenges that emerged. In terms
of the conceptualisation of quality we have presented, all policy activity was an exer-
cise in quality in that a discriminatory, exclusionary, fragmented system was being
overhauled in line with a vision for a transformed society. The policy exercise
engaged with all the dimensions of quality identified in our definition above and was
informed by the values and ideals of a new society. While state policy was not specif-
ically informed by a broadened conceptualisation of quality, the need for policy to
address issues like equity, diversity and human rights at the outset meant the quality
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

endeavour was inevitably broader. Our review focuses specifically on the vision or
approaches to quality, as well as some of the descriptions of quality in some of the
foundational and influential policy texts.

Key issues in education quality in South Africa

Education and quality as a human right
The extent to which educational transformation was viewed as a human rights exercise
is prominent. Foundational policy legislation clearly foregrounds this framework and
all subsequent policy is articulated within this framework. Human rights are viewed
from within a local and global framework and are captured as:

(a) the advancement and protection of the fundamental rights of every person guaran-
teed in terms of Chapter 3 of the Constitution, and in terms of international conven-
tions ratified by Parliament, and in particular the right –
(i) Of every person to be protected against unfair discrimination within or by an
education department or education institution on any ground whatsoever;
(ii) Of every person to basic education and equal access to education institutions.
(NEPA 27: DoE 1996, 4)

What is clear from this is the acknowledgement of the local and global discourse of
education as a right. Educational service delivery then is framed within this mandate.
This is further specified as:

Whereas this country requires a new national system for schools which will redress past
injustices in educational provision, provide an education of progressively high quality for
all learners and in so doing lay a strong foundation for the development of all our
people’s talents and capabilities, advance the democratic transformation of society,
combat racism and sexism and all other forms of unfair discrimination and intolerance,
contribute to the eradication of poverty and the economic well-being of society, protect
and advance our diverse cultures and languages, uphold the rights of all learners, parents
and educators, and promote their acceptance of responsibility for the organisation, gover-
nance and funding of schools in partnership with the State … . (SASA 84: DoE 1996, 1)

The extract captures the emphasis on human rights and crystallises the state’s vision
for education. Rights are presented as both the protection against discrimination but
also as the promotion of civic participation. In response to apartheid history, racism
 Comparative Education 107

and sexism are also highlighted as particular forms of inequality. The quote also distils
the essence of the state’s vision on education more broadly, and quality specifically.
It is a very broad vision and captures some of the key dimensions of quality emerging
from the literature. We highlight some of the crucial ones. First, equity and quality are
seen as related and the state mandate is to address both. Second, education is tied to
development and significantly to the eradication of poverty. Third, there is an
acknowledgement of diversity. Fourth, civic participation is implied as a goal in the
democratic transition of society, but, more importantly, necessary for the implemen-
tation of this new educational vision. Finally, while there is a strong human rights
discourse, educational outcomes are framed far more broadly as ‘the development of
all our people’s talents and capabilities’ (SASA 84: DoE 1996, 1).
We argue that some of the discourse of the foundational documents could be inter-
preted as presenting a potentially broad conceptualisation of quality. While drawing
from a human rights framework the state’s vision and mandate extended far beyond a
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

narrow legalist framework. However, in tracing policy developments in some of the

areas we have highlighted, subsequent policy developments suggest a more circum-
scribed vision, and contradictions that have not been adequately managed.

Equity and quality or equity vs. quality?

The strength of the state’s vision was in the recognition of the link between equity and
quality and the assumption was that greater equity would improve quality as the
following excerpt illustrates: ‘Effecting redress and equity in school funding, with a
view to progressively improving the quality of school education, within a framework
of greater efficiency in organising and providing education services are matters of
urgent priority for the Ministry of Education’ [National Norms and Standards for
School Funding (NNSSF) (DoE 2006, 7)]. While the link between equity and quality
is consistent with more recent global trends (Alexander 2008), what is less clear is
how these processes converge or diverge and at the policy level the question was
whether both were addressed. It has been suggested in the Global Monitoring Report
(GMR) (2004) that state success was largely about equity rather than quality. The
evidence for this conclusion appears to be based on state per-capita expenditure as an
indicator of equity, and pupil performance on numeracy and literacy in comparison to
other countries as the indicator of quality. While our analysis partially supports this
conclusion, the picture is a lot more complex than this conclusion suggests.
One of the primary challenges at the state level was to address both equity and
quality within the context of a previously fragmented and inequitable system as well
as a system that provided a different quality education to learners based on apartheid
classification systems. Furthermore, educational service provision had to be located
within other transformation agendas, like health and social welfare, facing the emerg-
ing state. The state opted for a pragmatic policy path that allowed schools to charge
user-fees. The rationale was that state resources could then be directed at assisting
the marginalised and that the public schooling system could be retained. This policy
was revised in 2006 and poorer schools were exempt from the responsibility of
generating additional revenue from school fees and would instead receive an addi-
tional subsidy per pupil from the state, should they fall into what became categorised
as no-fees schools. A differential funding policy that favoured poorer schools was
introduced. Schools were categorised into poverty quintiles and an adequacy bench-
mark of R554 was set for the middle quintile, with poorer schools receiving more
 108 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

than this benchmark and richer schools receiving less than this benchmark (NNSSF:
DoE 2006, 31).
Some argue that the ability to retain the public schooling system and the equalisa-
tion of state per capita expenditure per pupil attest to the success of this policy (Fiske
and Ladd 2004, 2006; Fleisch and Woolman 2004). Others by comparison argue that
the decision to charge user-fees maintained existing inequalities and that a more accu-
rate indicator of equity is both state per capita expenditure as well as school revenue
obtained from user-fees. They argue that inequities between the rich and poor may
have even increased in the post-apartheid period and user-fees essentially amounted
to the ‘privatisation’ of education (Motala 2003, 2006, 2009; Ahmed and Sayed
2009).
When the relationship between equity and quality is examined the situation
becomes even more complex. In reviewing the policy there is an acknowledgement
that user-fees allowed wealthier schools to maintain or improve quality and that this
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

was as a consequence of the focus on equity. This is captured as:

Ironically, given the emphasis on redress and equity, the funding provisions of the Act
appear to have worked thus far to the advantage of public schools patronised by middle-
class and wealthy parents. The apartheid regime favoured such communities with high-
quality facilities, equipment and resources. Vigorous fund-raising by parent bodies,
including commercial sponsorships and fee income, have enabled many such schools to
add to their facilities, equipment and learning resources, and expand their range of
cultural and sporting activities. Since 1995, when such schools have been required to
down-size their staff establishments, many have been able to recruit additional staff on
governing body contracts, paid from the school fund. (NNSSF: DoE 1998, 7)

While elsewhere in the document, state policy seems to suggest that the user-fee
policy was a success, this extract suggests that both large gaps in equity and quality
were the policy outcomes. What is also revealing in this text, as illustrated both above
and below, is how the state defines quality and what is seen to improve quality. In
specifying the usage of state subsidy the following is suggested:

In general, the school allocations are intended to cover non-personnel recurrent items
and small capital items required by the school as well as normal repairs and maintenance
to all the physical infrastructure of the school. Moreover, the school allocation is prima-
rily and exclusively intended for the promotion of efficient and quality education in
public ordinary schools. (Amended NSSF: DoE 2006, 26–27)

The emphasis in the excerpt seems to suggest that a specific input (financial) would
automatically lead to good outcomes, and only if funds are utilised in the specified
manner. For the state then quality is conceptualised as a simple input–output model.
Elsewhere the document also specifies how the allocation can be spent and this spec-
ification is confined to only a few indicators of quality (largely infrastructure). As
evident here and later, the quality–resource link is a prominent feature of state
discourse.

Participation and quality

As suggested earlier, participation was central to South African educational transfor-
mation for a number of reasons. First, it was a response to the exclusion of the major-
ity in democratic processes like voting in the apartheid era, and was seen as
 Comparative Education 109

foundational to the new democracy. Second, there was a long history of civic struggles
to transform education in the apartheid era. Given these forces, the expectation that
vigorous civil society participation would extend to all areas of education, including
quality, is not surprising. However, in spite of the broad and vigorous participation
alluded to in the foundational policy texts, a far more circumscribed, localised view of
participation emerged in relation to quality.
Two dominant discourses emerge. First, policy discourse is striking in the way
participation is circumscribed to the local level (for example School Governing
Bodies). Second, quality is decentralised to the local school level. The excerpts below
capture some of this:

20. (1) Subject to this Act, the governing body of a public school must –
(a) promote the best interests of the school and strive to ensure its development
through the provision of quality education for all learners at the school;
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

(SASA: DoE 1996, 9)

and

36. A governing body of a public school must take all reasonable measures within its
means to supplement the resources supplied by the State in order to improve the
quality of education provided by the school to all learners at the school. (SASA:
DoE 1996, 14)

It continues further as:

37. The SASA imposes a responsibility on all public school governing bodies to do their
utmost to improve the quality of education in their schools by raising additional
resources to supplement those which the state provides from public funds (Section
36). (Amended NSSF: DoE 2006, 10)

Our definition of quality has highlighted participation as a central aspect and the rele-
vant policy texts cited above articulate a very specific participation discourse. In spite
of a broad human rights framework and a vision of broad-based civil society partici-
pation, the excerpts highlight a far more local and qualified participation and repro-
duce the global ‘governance’ approach to quality. In terms of quality, participation is
presented as a means to achieve quality rather than being a dimension of quality.
Furthermore, the participation discourse is one that imposes a responsibility for qual-
ity on parents and the schooling system. Both schools and parents are mandated to
participate through financial contributions and this is juxtaposed with a quality educa-
tion. The quality exercise then is a top-down approach of the state and the mandate is
to ensure that finances and quality are delivered at the local level. While the constant
references to quality could be understood as rhetorical devices they also reflect the
devolution of responsibility for quality to the local level. This interpretation is consis-
tent with the broader processes of decentralisation that accompanied South African
educational transformation.

Quality as pedagogy
There is a consensus that pedagogy is at the heart of quality (O’Sullivan 2006;
Alexander 2008; Barrett et al. 2008; Bernard 2009) and that ‘good’ pedagogy is possi-
ble even in resource constrained contexts (O’Sullivan 2006). Furthermore, one of the
 110 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

implications of the capabilities approach is that it offers the potential to view pedagogy
beyond a narrower numeracy/literacy frame. These two aspects are considered through
two questions about the South African experience. First, to what extent did good peda-
gogy emerge in a resource constrained context? Second, was a broader conceptualisa-
tion of pedagogy present and were there any shifts in this conceptualisation? A review
of the South African attempt at overhauling teaching and learning as a quality exercise
is beyond the scope of this paper and we confine ourselves to certain key issues.
The First White Paper on Education laid the foundation for curriculum reforms. It
called for a complete overhaul of the apartheid curriculum, which was both outdated
and discriminatory, and for its replacement with a new and flexible curriculum which
would cut across traditional divisions of skills and knowledge and defined standards
in terms of learning outcomes. One of the major outcomes was a curriculum restruc-
turing exercise in 1997 referred to as ‘C2005’. Subjects were replaced with learning
areas, each of which had a range of statements and outcomes. The learning areas in
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

the new curriculum restructured the traditional subject disciplines that divided learn-
ing into knowledge and skills as an integrated knowledge system through the integra-
tion of education and training. C2005 and Outcomes Based Education (OBE) put the
emphasis on competency or skills, knowledge and attitudes on the basis of criteria
established by the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). SAQA identifies
what is referred to as ‘critical outcomes’, which all learners, in any content area,
across the entire education and training system, need to acquire. These include, inter
alia, being able to engage in teamwork, critical thinking skills and problem solving
skills.
While there is an enormous debate about C2005, it was clearly a major restructur-
ing of the apartheid curriculum based on ‘traditional’ pedagogy and held much prom-
ise as a broadened conceptualisation of pedagogy that included outcomes like,
teamwork, critical thinking skills and problem solving skills. It is also consistent with
the broader vision of education articulated in some of the foundational policy texts.
However, as policy implementation unfolded it raised a number of issues and we high-
light some of the key areas for the quality debate.
One of the key issues that emerged was the complex pathways to quality
outcomes. Scholarship points to enormous disjuncture between investment and
outcome in South African education (Van der Berg 2005; Van der Berg and Louw
2006). While there was considerable investment in education, such as significant state
expenditure, resource advantages like a higher per capita income (Van der Berg 2005;
Van der Berg and Louw 2006) and policy for a progressive and innovative pedagogy,
South African pupils still fared very poorly on international assessments. For example,
on numeracy and literacy South African Grade 4 pupils were ranked last of 12 partic-
ipating African countries (Van der Berg and Louw 2006). More recent Southern Afri-
can Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality (SACMEQ) II data confirm this
trend with South African pupils performing even below many other poorer countries
(Van der Berg and Louw 2006).
What is less clear are the reasons for this disjuncture and two are highlighted here.
First, it is quite clear that there was an equity–outcome link, with the rich outperform-
ing the poor (Van der Berg 2005; Christie, Butler and Potterton 2007; Van der Berg
2008). The state commissioned report, Schools that work (Christie, Butler and
Potterton 2007), suggests that in terms of the OBE curriculum there was an acknowl-
edgement that access was not accompanied by a quality education. In reviewing the
exit exam the report notes that
 Comparative Education 111

… the fact that for the majority of learners the language of learning and teaching – and
of the Matric exam – is not their home language means a structural disadvantage within
the system that is currently addressed by a 5% mark adjustment. This can in no way
redress the cultural and linguistic advantages that some have over others, and the
inequalities that slice through the education system from top to bottom. Equity, like qual-
ity, has proven to be elusive in the new educational dispensation. (Christie, Butler and
Potterton 2007, 9)

Second, there appears to be a performance–efficiency link. In drawing from the

SACMEQ data, Van der Berg and Louw (2006) suggest that the relatively poorer
performance of even richer schools points to school-related factors impacting on
outcomes. They identify a number of variables like teacher absenteeism, principal
monitoring of student progress and teacher quality as interacting with SES and
impacting on performance. They suggest that these variables may be proxies for
school management.
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

The discussion highlights some of the challenges in delivering ‘good pedagogy in

resource constrained contexts’ and the multiple and complex processes that influence
outcomes. One policy response was the 2008 foundations for learning campaign
which focused specifically on reading, writing and numeracy. While this was helpful
and consistent with the current debates on C2005, it was also a reflection of a failure
to engage with some of the processes identified above and a consequent narrowing of
the quality frame.

Quality and diversity

In presenting a contextual account of quality we argued that quality must engage with
diversity and we highlight three issues from the South African context. First, in spite
of the obvious link between diversity and quality in the South African context, policy
activity suggests a failure to substantially address this link. Secondly, the conceptual-
isation of diversity in South African policy raises a number of issues for the quality
debate. Finally, the South African experience illustrates how inextricably linked qual-
ity, equity and diversity are in low-income contexts.
We argue that all policy documents address diversity in that the previously frag-
mented, racially divided system was replaced by a unitary, non-racial educational
service provision. Within this framework, diversity emerged as part of the broader
process of social transformation, rather than a specific target for policy interventions
or as a specific quality exercise. The assumption was that the new foundational legis-
lation would create the conditions for non-racialism and diversity. Diversity in the
South African context could be seen as tackling two related processes, the racial
inequalities of the past and the cultural marginalisation of the majority, and to promote
harmony and tolerance. One of the strengths of the policy approach to diversity is the
extent to which it was tied to the South African constitution and framed as a human
rights exercise. Vandeyar (2003) argues that diversity in the constitution is tied to a
‘… dynamic definition of equity’ in which a truly equal, reciprocal relationship
between different ‘cultural’ groups is envisaged (2003, 194). We suggest that this
broader conceptualisation of diversity (i.e. diversity as social transformation) as well
as attempts to frame diversity within the South African Constitution were promising
developments. However, here again, subsequent interpretations became narrower and
policy development suggests a failure to adequately engage with some of the contra-
dictions that emerged.
 112 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

The absence of a specific quality–diversity link could point to a significant omis-

sion in state policy or could also reflect the assumption that focusing on racial and
gender equity would automatically produce quality. While there are clear indications
of how quality can be achieved in areas like school resourcing policy, this kind of
substantive formulation is missing in addressing diversity. In spite of a clear discourse
on diversity there is no clear diversity–quality link. Scholarship suggests that rather
than simply being an oversight, it is reflective of a policy conceptualisation of the
learning subject that fails to acknowledge diversity. Silbert (2009) argues that in
policy texts, the learning subject is constituted as an ahistorical, passive subject,
removed from context. According to Silbert (2009), in one of the more significant
policy attempts to engage with quality (The Whole School Evaluation Policy) no
reference to diversity and quality is made in any of the nine focus areas in whole
school development.
In the contradictory location between constitutional imperatives such as social
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

justice, non-racism and non-sexism, unity and diversity, the South African experi-
ence illustrates how inextricably linked diversity, quality and inequality were and we
highlight some of the more important areas. In the area of school integration two
trends have been identified. First, the migration is largely one of ‘Black’ (‘Coloured’,
‘African’, ‘Indian’) into ‘White’ schools with the majority migration being ‘African’
learners into other schools. The ‘host’ school then has either maintained its numerical
dominance or, even when ‘Black’ learners are the numerical majority, they have
been integrated into the ‘host culture’ (Metcalfe 1991; Carrim 1992, 1995; Soudien
1998, 2007; Carrim and Soudien 1999). Second, the migration pattern seems to
reflect the assumptions that ‘White’ schools are better resourced and of better quality
and the advantage of attending them outweighs even disadvantages like racism.
Ndimande’s (2005) study of ‘Black’ parents’ choices reveals that the availability of
resources is one of the main reasons for parents’ choices. They are, however, at the
same time concerned about racism and the lack of effective integration within these
schools.
The failure to make considerable inroads on racial integration was accompanied
by failure to engage with diversity in a number of other areas (Nkomo, McKinney and
Chisholm 2004; McKinney 2005; Meier 2005; Hemson 2006; Nkomo and Vandeyar
2008; Weber, Nkomo and Amsterdam 2009), and just two are highlighted here. In her
review of selected Grade 1 and Grade 7 texts, McKinney (2005) concludes that while
racial representation was being addressed in texts, other representations like class and
gender were not. Hemson (2006) echoes a similar theme in a different area. In review-
ing three universities involved in teacher training, she concludes that, for all these
institutions ‘… the staff and student composition by and large reflect the racial
composition of the institution during Apartheid …’, and that ‘… issues of diversity
are not engaged with, and there is a little sense of urgency in meeting these challenges’
(2006, v).
A significant body of scholarship has described the South African discourse on
diversity as assimilationist (Carrim 1992, 1995; Sayed 1997, 2003; Ahmed, Sayed
and Soudien 2007). This is best captured by the Rainbow Nation discourse, i.e. an
assimilation of all the different peoples of the nation (Vandeyar 2003). What the
South African experience has highlighted is that increased access for the margina-
lised ‘race’ or ‘ethnicities’ was within a context of acculturation within the dominant
culture and marginalisation of the ‘majority culture’ (Metcalfe 1991; Carrim 1992,
1995; Soudien 1998, 2007; Carrim and Soudien 1999; Ahmed, Sayed and Soudien
 Comparative Education 113

2007). While there are many reasons for why this happened we try and identify some
pointers. First, marginalisation or exclusion is about the context of power and
cultural hegemony. In the South African context racial integration was about capitu-
lation or assimilation (Bulhan 1985) rather than one in which ‘diversity’ flourished.
Second, there has been a consistent critique in the South African literature (Metcalfe
1991; Carrim 1992, 1995; Soudien 1998, 2007) that the policy restructuring exercise
as well as how schools implemented the policy emphasised certain kinds of cultural
capital. For example, literacy, numeracy and middle-class norms and values were the
benchmark by which all pupils were assessed. Good or quality schools and good or
quality pupils were then those that met this benchmark. Third, policy documents did
not sufficiently engage with ‘African’ worldviews (Mkhize 2004). While notions like
‘ubuntu’ are present in policy discourse, it is the viewpoint identified above that
prevailed.
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

By way of conclusion
Our analysis of South African educational policy on education quality and problem-
atisation of the construct quality identifies three main areas for future engagement.
First, it is clear that work that locates quality more broadly and identifies dimensions
beyond ‘narrow’ cognitive markers is extremely helpful and needs to be developed
further (Unterhalter 2005; O’Sullivan 2006; Robeyns 2006; Walker 2006; Alexander
2008; Tikly and Barrett 2008a, 2009; Nikel and Lowe 2010). The current difficulty
is the divide between process models (Tikly and Barrett 2008a) that start to link
inputs and outcomes, but do so within implicit assumptions about causality and
broader conceptualisations that identify many dimensions (Unterhalter 2005;
Robeyns 2006; Walker 2006), but do not always address relationship pathways. The
contradictions that emerged between equity and other quality indicators illustrate
how complex these relationships are. The major challenge is to develop conceptual
models that foreground context, integrate processes identified in the more recent
literature in the area as well as the more conventional literature, start to develop
explanations for the relationships between the processes, and also consider how they
might be assessed.
Second, our analysis strongly concurs with the literature cautioning against a ‘one
size fits all approach’ (Barrett et al. 2008). One of the biggest gaps has been the gap
between quality as a vision or ideal and the specific context under which quality
unfolds, as the South African case has illustrated. Findings from other countries
suggest a similar disjuncture between global ideals and local realities as well as
policy ideals and policy implementation and outcomes at the local level (Hall and
Peters 2003; Dello-Lacovo 2009). Our main argument is that a broader vision
existed, but it was constrained by some of the challenges facing the state with an
ensuing ‘narrower’ conceptualisation emerging. Context also influenced the focus on
equity with attendant consequences for other dimensions of quality. This inevitably
raises questions about the ability of resource constrained contexts to deliver a broader
quality mandate.
The need to contextualise quality is emphasised (Barrett et al. 2008; Tikly and
Barrett 2008a) in both the local and global context and had a significant impact on
policy. Bond (2000) argues that the transition to democracy was accompanied by
negotiations that ensured participation in the global economy and one of the
outcomes, according to Bond (2000) then, was a considerable increase in income
 114 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

inequality in the post-apartheid period with the gap between rich and poor ever widen-
ing. It is within this context that the decision by the state to allow schools to charge
user fees emerged. As discussed earlier, this created enormous inequities (Ahmed and
Sayed 2009), and is viewed by some as the privatisation of education (Motala 2009).
The verdict on privatisation is mixed, with some suggesting that it could be a prag-
matic policy path for developing contexts with limited resources (Tooley and Dixon
2006; Rose 2007), but with others suggesting that it increases inequity and does not
facilitate access (Mehrota and Panchamukhi 2006) in the South African context.
Increasing inequity, the erosion of broad-based participation and the marginalisation
of indigenous knowledge systems were some of the major consequences related to
privatisation. In terms of the local–global dialectic, policy formulation largely repro-
duced, rather than contested, the dominant expressions of cultural capital. We argue
that processes like privatisation and the global quality imperative potentially under-
mine quality.
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

Our analysis suggests that conceptualisations of quality need to integrate some of

the contradictions that emerged in the South African context. Greater consideration
needs to be given to the possibility that quality processes are related in extremely
complex ways and gains in quality can set in motion processes that undermine quality.
In terms of context we have argued that greater attention needs to be given to
processes like globalisation and macro-economic policies as these are central rather
than peripheral to the quality endeavour. Within this a greater engagement is also
needed with the attendant ‘cultural’ contestation and exclusion that accompanies these
processes. Finally, while we still believe that the conceptual directions being
suggested need exploration, as complexity increases, so does the challenge of assess-
ing this complexity. Specifically, how do the different quality dimensions fare against
each other? Is this comparison meaningful? Can we assess them? What do we
conclude? A response to these questions is beyond the scope of the present paper and
we instead highlight a few pointers.
The South African experience illustrates how the conceptualisation of quality
narrowed and quality became conflated with a focus on performance on achievement
tests. Sayed (2010) argues that initiatives like SACMEQ, while valuable, reinforce
the notion of quality as performance on achievement tests. This focus on achieve-
ment tests is a global trend and out of step with the scholarship that we have
reviewed. Current conceptual work in the area (Tikly and Barrett 2008a, 2009)
suggests that the debate needs to move even beyond the indicators/measure debate
(Alexander 2008). Indicators or measures should be accepted as partial assessments
of processes, as imprecise, and should always be interpreted within a broader
context. Quality indices that have been developed (European Commission 2000;
Pigozzi 2008) provide useful starting points but need to contend with some of the
issues raised above. Furthermore, scholarship is needed on assessing dimensions like
participation, equity and diversity so that they can be fully included in current indices
of quality.
A significant shift is to move from assessing quality as a summative evaluation of
education service delivery to assessing quality as integral to the educational enterprise
as suggested by Tikly and Barrett (2009). The emphasis on quantitative markers like
achievement tests can be complemented by rich qualitative data illuminating
processes and relationships. The critical approach to education quality that emphasises
participation, values and context needs to be utilised to both complement and
challenge the dominant process models. Broad-based consultation in both defining
 Comparative Education 115

and assessing quality, use of internal evaluations of quality by the intended targets of
quality (teachers and pupils), possible transformation of teacher training and teacher
roles to include assessing quality beyond the classroom, are some possible avenues of
exploration.
The current approaches to education quality we have reviewed are extremely help-
ful. Locating these more carefully within diverse contexts and current trends emerging
in globalisation and macro-economic policies can serve to further refine them.
Furthermore, starting to identify and examine the different processes that produce
outcomes is another necessary conceptual leap. In terms of methodological consider-
ations, the acceptance that quantitative evidence is not enough and a consideration of
the critical contextual approach to quality is an avenue for exploration. In terms of
implementation the gap between quality as a vision and pragmatic constraint needs to
be acknowledged. Within the global quality imperative it is crucial that the quality
agenda is not imposed on resource constrained contexts, as this can serve to under-
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

mine the quality agenda and reproduce colonial relationships. Both in terms of the
global and local quality agenda, context specific conceptualisations of quality that
carefully balance the local–global dialectic should be our goal.

Acknowledgements
A special thank you to Ms F. Peters, Ms C. Carels and Mrs. R. Klink for all their help in the
completion of this manuscript. A big thank you to all the reviewers for their constructive feed-
back that helped tremendously in finalising the manuscript.

Note
1. The use of this term needs to be problematised. Other terms included in this category are
‘White’, ‘Black’, ‘African’ and so forth. We do not imply any fixed essentialised construc-
tion of identity. However, race remains, in the South African context, an important marker
of inequality.

Notes on contributors
Yusuf Sayed is a Reader in International Education at the University of Sussex. Previously
Yusuf was Senior Policy Analyst at the EFA Global Monitoring Report, UNESCO, Team
Leader for Education and Skills at the Department for International Development UK, and
Head of Department of Comparative Education at the University of the Western Cape, South
Africa. Yusuf’s current research interest focuses on the effects of fee charging in education and
education quality as it relates to issues of equity, rights and justice.

Rashid Ahmed is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Psychology at the University of the
Western Cape, South Africa. He is a qualified teacher and was previously involved in the train-
ing of educational psychologists. Rashid’s current interest is in the changing face of apartheid
inequity in the area of school resourcing and quality.

References
Ahmed, R., and Y. Sayed. 2009. Promoting access and enhancing education opportunities?
The case of ‘no-fees schools’ in South Africa. Compare 39, no. 2: 203–218.
Ahmed, R., Y. Sayed, and C. Soudien. 2007. Creating a rainbow nation? Citizenship and
education in South Africa. In Changing notions of citizenship education in contempo-
rary nation-states, ed. K Roth and N. C. Burbules, 119–138. Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
 116 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

Alexander, R. 2008. Education for All, the quality imperative and the problem of pedagogy.
CREATE Pathways to Access, Research Monograph No. 20. Brighton: Centre for Interna-
tional Education, University of Sussex. [Link] [Link]/pdf_documents/
[Link].
Barnes, T. 2006. Nation-building without mortar? Public participation is higher education
policy-making in South Africa. Perspectives in Education 24, no. 1: 1–13.
Barrett, A.M., R. Chawla-Duggan, J. Lowe, J. Nikel, and E. Ukpo. 2008. The concept of
quality in education: A review of the ‘international’ literature on the concept of quality in
education. EdQual 2: 1–19.
Bernard, J. 2009. A place to learn: Theoretical roots and lessons from the field of learning
environments research. Montreal: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Bond, P. 2000. The elite transition: From apartheid to neoliberalism in South Africa. Scotts-
ville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Bulhan, H.A. 1985. Frantz Fanon and the psychology of oppression. London: Plenum Press.
Carrim, N. 1992. Desegregation in Indian and coloured schooling. Johannesburg: Education
Policy Unit, University of the Witwatersrand.
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

Carrim, N. 1995. From ‘race’ to ethnicity: Shifts in the educational discourses of South Africa
and Britain in the 1990s. Compare 25, no. 1: 17–33.
Carrim, N., and C. Soudien. 1999. A critical antiracism in South Africa. In Critical multicul-
turalism: Rethinking multicultural and antiracist education, ed. S. May, 153–190.
London: Falmer.
Christie, P., D. Butler, and M. Potterton. 2007. Report of the ministerial committee: Schools
that work. Report to the Minister of Education. [Link]
[Link]?pageid=329&catid=10&category=Reports&legtype=null.
Dello-Lacovo, B. 2009. Curriculum reform and quality education in China: An overview.
International Journal of Educational Development 29: 241–249.
Department of Education (DoE). 1996. South African schools act no. 84 of 1996, 15 November.
Pretoria: Government Gazette.
Department of Education (DoE). 1998. South African schools act: National norms and
standards for school funding. Notice 2362, 12 October. Pretoria: Government Gazette
No. 19347.
Department of Education (DoE). 2006. South African schools act: National norms and
standards for school funding. Notice 868, 31 August. Pretoria: Government Gazette
No. 29178.
Department of Education (DoE). 2008. Foundations for learning campaign 2008–2011,
Notice 306, 14 March. Pretoria: Government Gazette No. 30884.
European Commission (EC). 2000. European report on quality of school education: Sixteen
quality indicators. Report based on the work of the working committee on quality indica-
tors. Italy: European Commission.
Fiske, E.B., and H.F. Ladd. 2004. Balancing public and private resources for basic education:
School fees in post apartheid South Africa. In Changing class: Educational and social
change in post-apartheid South Africa, ed. L. Chisholm, 57–88. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
Fiske, E.B., and H.F. Ladd. 2006. Racial equity in education: How far has South Africa
come? Perspectives in Education 24, no. 2: 95–108.
Fleisch, B., and S. Woolman. 2004. On constitutionality of school fees: A qualified defence.
Perspectives in Education 22: 111–123.
Fraser, N. 2008. Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hall, G.B., and P.A. Peters. 2003. Global ideas and local practicalities in education policies
and planning in Lima, Peru. Habitat International 27: 629–651.
Hanushek, E.A. 2003. The failure of input-based schooling policies. The Economic Journal
113: F64–F98.
Hanushek, E.A., and J.A. Luque. 2003. Efficiency and equity in schools around the world.
Economics of Education Review 22: 481–502.
Hemson, C. 2006. Teacher education and the challenge of diversity in South Africa. Cape
Town: Human Sciences Research Council Press.
Heyneman, S.P. 2004. International education quality. Economics of Education Review 23:
441–452.
 Comparative Education 117

Lawton, D. 1994. Defining quality. In Improving education. Promoting quality in schools, ed.
P. Ribbens and E. Burridge. Cassell: London.
McKinney, C. 2005. Textbooks for diverse learners: A critical analysis of learning materi-
als used in South African schools. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council
Press.
Mehrota, S., and P.R. Panchamukhi. 2006. Private provision of elementary education in India:
Findings of a survey in eight states. Compare 36: 421–442.
Meier, C. 2005. Addressing problems in integrated schools: Student teachers’ perceptions
regarding viable solutions for learners’ academic problems. South African Journal of
Education 25, no. 3: 170–177.
Metcalfe, M. 1991. Desegregating education in South Africa: White school enrolments in
Johannesburg, 1985–1991: Update and policy analysis. Johannesburg: Education Policy
Unit, University of the Witwatersrand.
Mkhize, N. 2004. Psychology: an African perspective. In Critical Psychology, eds. D. Hook,
N. Mkhize, P. Kiguwa, A. Collins, E. Burman, and I. Parker. UCT Press: Lansdowne.
Motala, S. 2003. Review of the financing, resourcing and costs of education in public
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

schools: A commentary. Quarterly Review of Education and Training in South Africa

10, no. 1: 2–13.
Motala, S. 2006. Education resourcing in post-apartheid South Africa: The impact of finance
equity reforms in public schooling. Perspectives in Education 24, no. 2: 79–93.
Motala, S. 2009. Privatising public schooling in post-apartheid South Africa – equity consid-
erations. Compare 39: 185–202.
Mundy, K. 2006. Education for all and the new development compact. Review of Education
52: 23–48.
Ndimande, B.S. 2005. Cows and goats no longer count as inheritances: The politics of school
‘choice’ in post-apartheid South Africa. PhD diss., University of Madison-Wisconsin.
Nikel, J., and J. Lowe. 2010. Talking of fabric: A multi-dimensional model of quality in
education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 40, no. 5:
589–605.
Nkomo, M., C. McKinney, and L. Chisholm. 2004. Reflections on school integration. Cape
Town: Human Sciences Research Council.
Nkomo, M., and S. Vandeyar. 2008. In search of best practice in South African desegregated
schools. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council.
Nussbaum, M.C. 2006. Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership.
Cambridge: Belknap Press.
O’Sullivan, M. 2006. Lesson observation and quality in primary education as contextual
teaching and learning processes. International Journal of Education Development 26:
246–260.
Pigozzi, M.J. 2008. Towards an index of quality education. Paper prepared for the IWGE,
10–11 June 2008. Paris: UNESCO-IIEP.
Robeyns, I. 2006. Three models of education: Rights, capabilities and human capital. Theory
and Research in Education 4, no. 1: 69–84.
Rose, P. 2007. NGO provision of basic education: Alternative or complementary service
delivery to support access to the excluded? CREATE Pathways to Access, Research
Monograph No. 3. Brighton: Centre for International Education, University of Sussex.
[Link]
Sayed, Y. 1997. The concept of quality in education: A view from South Africa. In Education
dilemmas: Debates and diversity, ed. K. Watson, S. Modgil, and C. Modgil, 21–29, Vol.
4. Lindon: Cassell.
Sayed, Y. 2003. Educational inclusion and exclusion: Key issues and debates. Perspectives in
Education 2: 1–12.
Sayed, Y. 2010. Good quality education in and through the GMR. Norrag News 43.
Sen, A. 1999. Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, A. 2009. The idea of justice. London: Penugin.
Silbert, P. 2009. National education policy and the learning subject: Exploring the gaps.
Perspectives in Education 27, no. 4: 385–394.
Soudien, C. 1998. ‘We know why we are here’: The experience of African children in a
‘coloured’ school in Cape Town. Race, Ethnicity and Education 1, no. 1: 7–29.
 118 Y. Sayed and R. Ahmed

Soudien, C. 2007. Youth identity in contemporary South Africa: Race, culture and schooling.
Claremont: New Africa Books.
Tikly, L., and A.M. Barrett. 2008a. Education quality – Research priorities and approaches in
the global era. EdQual 1: 1–17.
Tikly, L., and A.M. Barrett. 2009. Social justice, capabilities and the quality of education in
low income countries. Ed Qual 8.
Tooley, J., and P. Dixon. 2006. ‘De facto’ privatisation of education and the poor: Implications
of a study from sub-Saharan Africa and India. Compare 36: 443–62.
UNESCO. 2005. EFA global monitoring report: Education for all the quality imperative.
France: UNESCO.
Unterhalter, E. 2005. Global inequality, capabilities, social justice: The millennium devel-
opment goal for gender equality in education. International Journal of Educational
Development 25: 111–122.
Van der Berg, S. 2005. How effective are poor schools? Poverty and educational outcomes in
South Africa. Paper to the SACMEQ International Invitational Research Conference held
in Paris, September 2005.
Downloaded by [Ryerson University] at 00:55 03 December 2014

Van der Berg, S. 2008. How effective are poor schools? Poverty and educational outcomes in
South Africa. Studies in Educational Evaluation 34: 145–154.
Van der Berg, S. and M. Louw. 2006. Lessons learnt from SACMEQ II: South African
student performance in regional context. Paper to the conference on Investment
Choices for Education in Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Vandeyar, S. 2003. The jagged paths to multicultural education: International experiences and
South Africa’s response in the new dispensation. South African Journal of Education 23,
no. 3: 193–198.
Walker, M. 2006. Towards a capability-based theory of social justice for education policy-
making. Journal of Education Policy 21, no. 2: 163–185.
Weber, E., M. Nkomo, and C. Amsterdam. 2009. Diversity, unity and national develop-
ment: Findings from desegregated Gauteng schools. Perspectives in Education 27,
no. 4: 341–350.