Hoërskool Ermelo has on average about 22 learners in a classroom. At the nearby Lindile School, 62 learners are on average crammed into one classroom. Until now the school’s medium of instruction was Afrikaans and the school was so determined to keep things this way that it challenged the lawfulness of a decision by the Head of the Mpumalanga Education Department to withdraw the powers of the school’s governing body to determine its own language policy.
In Head of Department: Mpumalanga Department of Education and Another v Hoërskool Ermelo and Others the Constitutional Court today confirmed that the Head of Department had acted unlawfully. But this was a Pyrrhic victory for the school as it was ordered to reconsider its language policy and the school will almost certainly have to change its language policy. This will allow black learners who do not wish to be taught in Afrikaans to attend the school.
This judgment is important because it clarifies the powers of school governing bodies to determine a school’s language policy as well as the powers of the Head of the Education Department to intervene in a school’s affairs – including the determination of a language policy.
Section 6(2) of the Schools Act provides that the governing body of a public school “may determine” the language policy of that school. However, Deputy Chief Justice Moseneke, in a unanimous judgment, made it clear that this does not mean that the “function to decide on a medium of instruction of a public school is absolute or is the exclusive preserve of the governing body. Nor does it mean that the only relevant consideration in setting a medium of tuition is the exclusive needs or interests of the school and its current learners or their parents”. As Moseneke J points out:
[A] school cannot be seen as a static and insular entity. Good leaders recognise that institutions must adapt and develop. Their fiduciary duty, then, is to the institution as a dynamic part of an evolving society. The governing body of a public school must in addition recognise that it is entrusted with a public resource which must be managed not only in the interests of those who happen to be learners and parents at the time but also in the interests of the broader community in which the school is located and in the light of the values of our Constitution.
In this case the governing body’s language policy excluded learners (all black) who wanted to be taught in English. Although section 29(2) of the Constitution states that “everyone has the right to receive education in the official language or languages of their choice in public educational institutions where that education is reasonably practicable” and, further, “that the state must consider all reasonable educational alternatives, including single medium institutions”, when realising this right, there is no absolute right in the Constitution to be taught in a single medium Afrikaans school.
Considerations of equity, practicability and the need to redress the results of past racially discriminatory laws and practices must all be taken into account when considering whether the maintenance of single medium Afrikaans schools are reasonably practicable. In Ermelo, suggested the Court, it is clearly not reasonably practicable to maintain a single medium Afrikaans high school and the insistence by Hoërskool Ermelo (whose student numbers have been dropping) to continue with an Afrikaans only policy was therefore probably not reasonable.
The Court also made it clear that the Schools Act allows the Head of Department to withdraw the powers of a governing body to determine a school’s language policy “on reasonable grounds”. What would constitute reasonable grounds will have to be determined on a case by case basis but a reviewing court will have to consider carefully the nature of the function, the purpose for which it is revoked in the light of the best interests of actual and potential learners, the views of the governing body and the nature of the power sought to be withdrawn as well as the likely impact of the withdrawal on the well-being of the school, its learners, parents and educators.
It is important to note that all these factors would have to be weighed within the broad contextual framework of the Constitution to provide access to education for all and the need to redress the results of past racial discrimination. School governing bodies are therefore not allowed to use a language policy in an indirect manner to prevent large numbers of black learners to enroll at a school. Where there are vast discrepancies between the class sizes in different schools in a single town, a school governing body would not be justified in sticking to a policy of teaching exclusively in Afrikaans.
The judgment will probably not be welcomed by Afrikaans language activists, but it seems to me to strike a good balance between the needs for equity and redress on the one hand, and the right of school governing bodies to determine language policy on the other. The crux of the matter is that a governing body is not allowed only to consider the interests of the existing learners and parents: it must also consider the needs of the broader community. The judgment therefore reflects a need for us all to embrace social solidarity and not to act in a selfish manner to exclude others in order to further a narrow kind of language nationalism.
The case is also strikingly innovative and pro-active in the way it addresses the problem of overcrowding in schools and the tardiness of officials in dealing with this issue. Justice Moseneke lambasted the Department for not taking adequate steps to ensure that there are enough places so that every child in Ermelo can attend school as required by the Schools Act and as guaranteed by the Constitution.
The Court therefore ordered the Head of Department to submit a report to the Court by 16 November 2009 setting out the likely demand for grade 8 English places at the beginning of 2010 and setting out the steps that the Department has taken to satisfy this likely demand for an English or parallel medium high school in the circuit of Ermelo. The report must also provide information and statistics on the levels of enrolment in other high schools in the area in the light of the learner-to-class ratio norms set by the Minister for Education.
The order clearly attempts to force the Department to do its job properly and this is to be welcomed. It remains to be seen how the court will deal with this report, but it represents quite a leap for our Constitutional Court and demonstrates that as far as education is concerned, it is prepared to stick its neck out to try and get the politicians to do their jobs.
Pierre, do you think the CC would have found differently if
- the governing body’s language policy excluded learners (all black) who wanted to be taught in Sotho and not English?
Some more questions.
- The the court say how classes should be presented? Ie In English and Afrikaans or separate parallel classes?
- It seems as if the court basically says that where a majority in an area wants to be taught in one language (regardless whether its their mother tongue), no single language school (regardless if its mother tongue) can remain. Is this the correct reading?
- What this would mean in effect is that only in the Western & possibly bits of the Northern Cape Afrikaans would remain as the language of schools. Do you concur?
- Do you think this would further lead to the urbanisation of Afrikaners or perhaps the semi-gration back to the Cape province?
Kameraad Mhambi says:
October 14, 2009 at 18:23 pm
It seems as if the court basically says that where a majority in an area wants to be taught in one language (regardless whether its their mother tongue), no single language school (regardless if its mother tongue) can remain.
—————————————————————————————————–
It would seem that the school’s language policy prevented access to the school.
“The school was originally built to accommodate 2000 learners. However over the years its enrollment had dropped and by 2007 it had only 587 high school learners.”
Stating the blooming obvious – “It would seem that the school’s language policy prevented access to the school.”
There’s a German school in Pretoria, guess what – you can attend if you want to be taught in German.
PS: Ermelo is a particlulary interesting case. For those that don’t know, although a state school it was always considered a cut above most Afrikaans schools, particularly for its music teaching.
My mother attended it.
The schools governing body and parents have over the years built an auditorium and music hall and an impressive array of instruments – over and above state contributions – to make it one of the best equipped Afrikaans schools in the country for music teaching.
I think that since Afrikaners are the only group in South Africa that want to be teached in their mother tongue the practical effect of this judgement is move to the Cape or be taught in English?
Or is there a point I am missing?
Harold Ferwood says:
October 14, 2009 at 15:30 pm
“There’s a German school in Pretoria, guess what – you can attend if you want to be taught in German.”
State school or private?
“I think that since Afrikaners are the only group in South Africa that want to be teached in their mother tongue the practical effect of this judgement is move to the Cape or be taught in English?”
I missed that in the judgment, I was of the impression that it required teaching in English and Afrikaans.
I suppose, please correct me if I am wrong, that the government will not supply extra teachers, but that it would be expected of teachers to double their classes, or to present the same class in two languages. I am not aware of an successful educational system that works this way – without exta resources. Let’s not beat around the bush. The End result will be an English school.
A famous ex pupil of ermelo was one jennifer ferguson, anti-apartheid activist, and later ANC mp.
She sang the old Afrikaner song o boereplaas, so beautifly – o moerdertaal, o soetstetaal, ek het jou lief bo alles.
Al gaan ek heel die wereld deur… Etc
But she new Afrikaners would pay for their sins, which is why she added, ‘die Volk se vlag is rooi met bloed… To her song.
The Professor makes out that the judgment strikes a decent enough balance between (i) the capacity of a governing body to determine its language policy and (ii), the needs of equity and redress.
Kameraad seems to make out that the judgment may give rise to future consequences that could be unfairly prejudicial to (a) Afrikaans learners and (b) the Afrikanns language.
I actually tend to agree with Kameraad. Given the Professor’s very able exposition of the judgment’s core content, and given also certain other troubling developments in South Africa that I will refer to later, I think that this jugment represents in some respects a further means to undermine the Afrikanns language.
Taking Kameraad’s views into account as well as material that I encountered elsewhere, I think that we can identify the following potential implications of what could potentially be construed as another assault on the Afrikanns language: this particular school, Ermelo High Scool, has managed to distinguish itself as an especially strong state school. It is thus something of a cultural resource for Afrikaans speaking people and learners. It is unclear whether the school will run its classes in dual or parallel media. Dual medium instruction (one class being taught at once in two languages) strikes me as being impractical and generally misconceived. It is distracting for learners. And it troublesome for teachers who have to focus on not just getting content across clearly, but also formulating their thoughts in two languages. Teaching in one language at a time is difficult enough as it is. And parallel medium instruction (separate classes covering the same content but in one language for one class) can, as I believe Kameraad correctly intimates, only work with additional resources. Now the question is: who do we suppose is going to provide those?
Speaking frankly, I think Kameraad is correct in saying that it is probably Afrikaans that is going to have to make way. Dual medium instruction does not seem to be especially desirable or pragmatic. And for parallel medium to work, it could be that schools will have to double the compliment of teachers or at least pay teachers double. And even if teachers could be paid extra, would not the quality of their work suffer if they had to prepare lessons in different languages? Thus in the end, it seems that given the greater demand for instruction in English, Afrikaans as a medium of instruction may be cornered into fringe existence.
I recently read a very provocative piece in the Mail and Guardian about Stellenbosch University. And the content of that piece, taken together with some of the potential implications of the judgment to which Kameraad has drawn attention do give me to believe that many South Africans – apparently including their lords and ladyships of the Constitutional Court – are unaware that the Afrikaans language is fighting for its life as a launguage of instruction and maybe even scholarship.
The Professor may well be right in saying that the judgment is both innovative and pro-active. But it seems to me that it is not especially insightful or critical. This sort of shallow balance-striking exercise represents lawyers going through the motions. It is not especially strong jurisprudence by my reckoning insofar as it does not, at least on the Professor’s exposition, consider hidden and long term prejudical effects to the Afrikaans language and Afrikanns learners.
Thanks Leigh, I could not agree more.
On the point of it not being a private school.
We have already had a massive erosion of the state and its powers in this country. There are 3 times the amount of security offices than there are police. The only functional hospitals run outside of state control.
Citizens are starting to generate their own power even.
Maggs, do you really want a large chunk of Afrikaans speaking learners to be taught in schools situated in the private sector?
Leigh says:
October 14, 2009 at 14:34 pm
With all respect, the advocacy of communitarianism which many black South Africans tacitly communicate looses sight of the possibility that such advocacy can easily lead to the suppression of individuality. That is, people could, in a sense, end up being enslaved by culture.
Personally I think that the dictates of reason ought to trump the dictates of culture at every turn. That is, where cultural directives are consistent with the best available conclusions, those cultural dictates should stand until better conclusions are determined. And if it all boils down to a tension between an indefensible cultural practice on the one hand, and a tenable conclusion on the other which happens to run contrary to the cultural demands, well then culture ought to gracely make its way of screen.
http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/where-is-president-zuma/comment-page-3/#comment-20330
Kameraad Mhambi says:
October 15, 2009 at 8:17 am
Maggs, do you really want a large chunk of Afrikaans speaking learners to be taught in schools situated in the private sector?
————————————————————————————————————
Not at all.
The judgment is clear – people are entitled to be taught in the official language of their preference (that includes “Afrikaans speaking learners”).
This judgment is not taking that away, rather the opposite.
Going off to the WC is not a sensible solution – our constitution applies to everyone as does this judgment.
Maggs, what is the nature of the “indefensible cultural practice”.
Anybody can attend the school if they want excellent teaching in Afrikaans.
Although I understand it given our history I find the snobbish behavior of black learners misplaced and distasteful.
And the irony is – with time – as with most rural English schools – they will receive a much worse education than with an Afrikaans school.
“The judgment is clear – people are entitled to be taught in the official language of their preference (that includes “Afrikaans speaking learners”).”
So if the majority wants to be taught in English then what – then everybody has to? You know the implications of this.
I got to do a presentation in two hours so excuse me for a bit.
Kameraad Mhambi says:
October 15, 2009 at 8:28 am
Parallel medium schools exist.
The idea of parallel medium schools is hairbrained as the idea of neo-liberal ideologues that one can have true competition in telecommunications – which is a natural monopoly.
As with South Africa’s poor internet parallel medium schools will only end in under performing expensive education.
And now I really got to go.
Kameraad, you are very welcome.
During the course of his piece, the Professor draws attention to the possibility of indirect prejudice insofar as he mentions that language policy should not be used as a means to indirectly preclude learners from attending a school.
I think that more can be said on the potential for indirect prejudice. I think that insofar as the decision (and apparently South African society at large) do not consider the particular plight of the Afrikaans language, this judgment, and what appears to be a general disinterest in the preservation of Afrikaans as a medium of scholarship and instruction, could constitute sources that indirectly prejudice the Afrikaans language.
I think that the way kameraad has expressed himself is dangerous, he may have a point.
The one ex-Afrikaans primary school in PMB (Piet Retief) has become more of an English medium school with a number of the people in that are sending their children there. Voortrekker High (I didn’t want to say whore school as i don’t know how to put the accents on there) is still entirely Afrikaans, I think, i know they offer English 1st language though. Then there’s Gert Maritz, fully Afrikaans primary school. An interesting twist is two schools. Ridge Junior Primary and Pelham Senior Primary, which were originally English medium but are now dual (English and Afrikaans).
My exposition is simply to say that sometimes it happens that a school is taken over by another language. This is, however, not always the case. There are numerous schools which have been dual medium for years without any problems.
In the case of Ermelo High (do the girls wear black skirts, stockings and court shoes)? Is their feeder Afrikaans medium, or dual medium? How many of these black pupils go to that school? Why does Ermelo High negotiate that as of next year their feeder school or schools take MORE English (or black) pupils in so that they can be taught in Afrikaans at high school and they scould have the benefit of knowing more languages.
I’m reminded of that PANALB or PANSLAB head who sent her son to Durban High School (a “prestigious” all boys high school) and she was upset that they taught “kitchen Zulu”, referring to either 2nd or 3rd language. She wanted DHS to start teaching 1st langauge Zulu, in the middle of a term, or else she would deregister her son from DHS. That kind of behaviour is madness and we shouln’t become like that.
Mhambi, I think most high schools have 2 different classes running. Imagine teaching History in two languages in the same class at the same time – too weird.
The blame lies, however, with the Department of Education. they were well aware of the fact that there was a shortage of space at the one school and did NOTHING. Instead the Minister of Higher Education buys expensive cars and seems to think that cars fix education problems in SA. We should not let the state get away with messing up the entire education system.
Leigh, Afrikaans won’t die. it has Universities.
Maggs, in my post from another discussion which you provided, my basic point was that people are not obliged to follow the dictates of their cultures and should decide for themselves.
Here I argue that the Afrikaans language as a medium of instruction has been imperilled. I am certainly not advocating slavish devotion to culture. Nor do I think that my posts in the present discussion lend themselves to that construction. There is a marked difference between on the one hand, not wanting to see a language undermined, and on the other, advocating that individuals should be independent thinkers.
Thus the post which you provided (which I penned) is irrelevant to the present discussion. Thus I can only conclude that you did not attempt to understand either of my positions. And in addition, this conclusion is bolstered inasmuch as you do not even try to illustrate the relevance of my earlier post to the present discussion.
nkululeko says:
October 15, 2009 at 8:47 am
There are different reasons that people send their children to particular schools.
It’s odd that where parents choose schools because of the school track record rather than proximity, that they then want to change the school policies which contributes to the exemplary record that attracted them in the first place.
Nkululeko, welcome back mate.
You are correct to say that there are Afrikaans Universities. The trouble is that Afrikaans Universities are not so very Afrikaans these days.
On the assumption that the piece in the M&G which I read is accurate, Stellenbosch University actually has dual medium instruction – which is a likely calamity by my reckoning and also, as you rightly say, just weird. Moreover, many of the students who attend Stellenbosch (which is traditionally a very strong Afrikaans University that has produced some outstanding scholars)insist on being instructed in English – which is reducing instruction in Afrikaans to such a degree that Afrikaans may even be replaced as the predominant medium.
And the M&G article which I mentioned above makes another alarming point: many so-called coloured people in our country speak Afrikaans as a mother tongue. Many of them who wish for tertiary education would understandably feel more comfortable at Afrikaans universities. And actually, I think Stellenbosch even aims at attracting Afrikaans speaking coloured students. But if Afrikaans continues to be undermined as a language of instruction – even at institutions that are traditionally Afrikaans nogal – where will these students go?
The basic point here is that if someone does not take steps to stop the bleeding, there may not be any Afrkaans institutions (including Universities) that can lay proper claim to that description.
Kameraad Mhambi says:
October 15, 2009 at 8:35 am
The idea of parallel medium schools is hairbrained as the idea of neo-liberal ideologues that one can have true competition in telecommunications – which is a natural monopoly.
As with South Africa’s poor internet parallel medium schools will only end in under performing expensive education.
———————————————————————————————————–
This one seems to be doing well.
http://www.bpms.co.za/index.php?item_id=1
Leigh says:
October 15, 2009 at 8:54 am
I thought that it summed up the judgment very appropriately even though you wrote that elsewhere.
Seems that you are saying that I am wrong about that.
Maggs, just three respectful questions.
1. What do you take to be the central message of the judgment?
2. What is the central message of my post from the different discussion?
3. What makes you say that my post from the different discussion sums up the judgment?
Leigh says:
October 15, 2009 at 9:27 am
“Maggs, just three respectful questions”.
And I will respectfully respond that I was mistaken.
Thank you Maggs. I can respect that. This is undoubtedly a great blog. But the natural downside of such exchanges is that we have no independent arbitrater to make decisions. Thus we can make headway largely through people making approprite concessions.
I will probably be mistaken tommorrow.
George is right.
It is not every day that we have had the privilege of a contribution that takes the trouble to meticulously psycho-analyse our contributions. My one complaint, George, is the clipped brevity of your postings. Why not take a little time to draft somewhat lengthier commentaries on each of the inputs you have opted to dissect? We would all benefit.
And congratulations, George, on your insight that many of us just channel the comfortable liberal consensus one finds so drearily rehashed in the pages of the M&G every Friday morning, What makes your rebuttal such a breath of fresh air is that it is so damn original. OK, some may carp that your critique tracks the kind of stuff that is manufactured wholesale in mildly-leftish Media Studies everywhere from Newlands to New Haven. But we scorn the acute insights of elite academia at our peril. (Never forget, we are dealing here with brilliant scholars whose mother’s milk was Critical Theory!)
I have no doubt that the media slaves that dominate this forum will benefit greatly from the startlingly original insight that Leigh’s vaunted “reason” is but a “cultural construction.” I know Professor de Vos occasionally reminds us that “race” is but a “construct.” Still, George’s timely injection of a tiny nugget of undergraduate social science is a gift we can should embrace rather than shun!
Most of all, I say George is right is demanding that Leigh (may I call you “mate”?), drop her boring jurisprudential obscurantism. Admittedly, this forum goes under the name “Constitutionally Speaking.” But that does not excuse her tiresome retreat into ostensibly neutral legal formalism — a discourse so desiccated that it lacks the resources even to articulate the eternal verities of “Truth” and “Justice” so eloquently invoked by George.
I was a member of a school governing body – an Afrikaans medium school. The Education Department requested us to make it a parallel medium school with classes for English and Afrikaans leaners. We did as they asked – and guess what – with the new English classes the Department bluntly refused to appoint a single extra teacher for the new English classes. It was an absolute mess, and we had no choice but to change it back to an Afrikaans medium school, just to keep the school functional. I’m just wondering if that is also the future for Ermelo.
Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder says:
October 15, 2009 at 9:54 am
“I know Professor de Vos occasionally reminds us that ‘race” is but a “construct.’ ”
Just as a rainbow is an optical illusion.
Mikhail
Chris – About 10 years ago, I became Chairperson of the governing body of the local secondary school, a public, Afrikaansmedium (predominantly white) High School. We had enough teachers (mostly paid by the governong body/parents), enough class space, but the number of learners were not dwindling, rather increasing – however not at a rate that would fill all classes to capacity. A number of black parents inthe area wanted to enrol their children into the particular school because of the good results (100% Matric passing rate for the past 10 years or so), and did not care even if their children were to be taught in Afrikaans. I knew, however, that there were black parents who would enroll their children at our school if they could be taught in English, and the Education Department have already been making noises about Afrikaansmedium schools not being acceptable. I did some reasearch and found that we already had teachers that were perfectly competent to teach English, first langauge, and to teach other classes in English. I also noticed that some white Englishspeaking learners from this area were sent to other areas because the classes at our school, except for English language classes, were all taught in Afrikaans. I then got a mandate from the parents to proceed and to convert the school into Paralel medium, English and Afrikaans. Our learners have increased again, but I told the Department that, even though we are converting to Paralel medium, and even though we would try to help previously disadvantaged learners as far as we could by providing them with quality education, they must remember that we are predominantly an Afrikaansspeaking comunity and school, the only one in the area, and, if we get more Afrikaansspeaking learners, those taught in English will have to be the first to leave if there are other English schools that they have to drive past by before reaching our school. I also insisted that we do not fill the school beyond capacity. However, because of the bargaining tool of voluntarily transforming, I got the Department to fund more teachers posts, so that the governing body had to pay less. That led to a reduction in school fees. I also informed the Department that there is a need for more English schools, and I did most of the research for them Even though we are operating across the border of two Provinces, I liased with the rapidly developing mines in our area, and, guess what? The mines assited the Department to erect three new English schools in our area, which were then appropriately staffed by the Department. Our school’s teachers take turns to go and assist and train the neighbouring schools’ (not only the new ones’) teachers. Guess what, our school still obtains a 100% passing rate each year, and the majority of learners are still Afrikaansspeaking. My eldest child now teaches english, first language, at that school (I have resigned as member of the governing body). Some black, Sipedi speaking children, are insisting on being taught in Afrikaans. We have never been side-lined by the Department, and we are filled to capacity.
I’m sure that, if Ermelo did not kick against demands for transformation, but rather worked with the Department and not refuse to fill classes to capacity (not only with a max of 22 learners per class!), they would have been better staffed by the Department, and all of this hullaballoo would not have been necessary. I think the judgment strikes a good balance as far as public schools are concerned. Governing bodies do have autonomy, but they must remember, if it is a public school, it must be accessible to the entire community in need of basic education. We have a Constitution that govern us. Ermelo could have done much better by opening their school to English teaching long ago. But then, the Departmen’t hard-line approach, bolstered by the Full Bench of the TPD of the High Court in suspicious circumstances (the JP first setting aside the temporary interdict first obtained, then placing it before a Full Bench presided over by himself, and ruling in favour of the Department), is also clearly wrong constitutionally speaking. They cannot just sit back and say, “Hey, here is a whitey only school, lets invade it and force it to teach in English. We need not build new schools, we can take the previously whites only schools. blah, blah, blah.” (Now, I have inside information that that is in fact what happened, and the Department did not even want to listen to proposals that the governing body and FEDSAS made subsequent to that. So you can assume me to be correct.)
Once again, I think that the judgment strikes the right balance. Moseneke DCJ, is properly clued-up on issues such as these since he has had experience on the High Court Bench before being appointed to the CC Bench.
Kameraad et al: the CC judgment makes it clear that section 20 of the Constitution guarantees for EVERYONE the right to be taught in a language of their choice as long as this is reasonably practicable. That section also states that single medium instruction must be conaidered after taking into account equitability, practical matters and the need to address past racial discrimination. This means that where a sizable section of learners want to be taught in Afrikaans it would be unreasonable for a governing body to make the school single medium English. What will happen in Ermelo is that the High School will have to take in MORE learners and class sizes will have to go up from the present 22 to closer to the 35. Teachers will not be required to teach more as there are only so many classes available. They will be required to teach more learners at a time. Pretoria University is a dual medium institution and it has improved its academic standing after becoming dual medium. I would therefore contend that one cannot categorically say that standards would go down when teaching isn not done in Afrikaans only.
About Afrikaans (my home language which I hold dear): all this talk of threats to the language seems to me completely unconnected from reality. This year I have been to both the KKNK Festival at Oudshoorn and Aardklop at Potchefstroom and I saw a language that was thriving – exactly because it was not the officially sanctioned languae of the state anymore. I saw brilliant plays and musical theatre, bought Afrikaans novels and volumes of poetry and listened to Afrikaans discussions on art and politics. There is even a DSTV channel dedicated tor Afrikaans music. I suspect people who say the language is under threat, are really using the language issue as a metahpor for their feelings about their loss of political power. This does the language more harm than good.
This discussion (not the thread, but the Prof’s summary) reminds me of the debilitatting effects on the peace process that is Israel’s view of the existential threat they face. Their argument is similar: the Arab world wishes to annihilate us, so let’s strike hard and often because we’re fighting for survival.
No matter how often they are told this is not so, and that a lunatic fringe are the only one’s making hollow threats, they hold onto this worldview.
Our beloved Afrikaner South Africans make the same mistake. No matter how often the Constitution is rolled out to demonstrate their equality, they reject it.
So, what may the consequences of this constant rejection be? Perhaps, the rest of us tire of trying to massage egos and making peace?
Come now, there is no existential threat, and you know it. This is a group of people who do now want to share, do not want to admit they are no more and no less equal to the rest of their countrymen, and who hold fast, stupidly, to an outdated and increasingly dangerous argument.
@ Prof.
Great post. Great judgment. Now I am eagerly awaiting a Constitutional challenge to the draining of our jurisprudence by conducting court proceedings in Afrikaans. The Concourt has redeemed itself here after the water judgment…
Professor, thank you for your contribution to this discussion.
Forgive me if I am wrong here, but it seems one can distinguish between dual medium on the one hand, and parallel medium on the other. Dual medium teaching seems to mean that one class is conducted in two languages. Parallel instruction seems to mean that the same content is covered in two different classes taught in two different languages.
As regards dual medium instruction, would you as an educator find lecturing in two languages in the same lecture to be a challenging task that could compromise your ability to get content across clearly? And how do you think your students would take to such instruction?
And regarding parallel medium instruction, the point that I made earlier was that parallel instruction would involve the need for some sort of increase. Either teachers would have to teach one class in English and another covering the same content in Afrikaans. Or additional teachers would have to be drafted in to cover the content in question in the other language. With respect, it seems that this point is distinguishable from the consideration of whether class sizes will have to increase insofar as it speaks to either (i), the possible need for the increase of the staff compliment or (ii), an increase in the difficulty of teaching by teachers, and comprehension by learners.
I would also add that if an institution had the means to implement parallel medium instruction in such a way that teachers were not over burdened, well then I would of course concede that that would be terrific. But of course the question which pertains to the Ermelo instance is whether this state school will be given the means to implement sustainable parallel instruction.
I will also respectfully ask you if the change at Pretoria University is properly described as the introduction of dual medium or parallel medium instruction.
“would you as an educator find lecturing in two languages in the same lecture to be a challenging task that could compromise your ability to get content across clearly? And how do you think your students would take to such instruction?”
There was a time, not lonbg ago, when educators could not be promoted unless they demonstrated the ability to conduct lessons in both languages, the so-called Ae or Ea qualification, the upper case demonstrating the stronger or first language. This requirement has therefore already been part of teaching.
There is one thing I hope we can all are upon. Government needs to focus intently on the scourge of Afrikaans schools using language medium as a pretext for keeping out black kids. Once it has rooted out the last vestiges of racism in “white” schools, DOE can turn to fixing the tens of thousands of rural schools — where many teachers are scarcely literate in any medum at all, and which year after year produce young people that perfectly match Oom Hendrik’s fond aspirations for Bantu Education.
“all agree upon”, the first line should read …
Mark, as regards dual medium insruction, my first question to the Professor was whether he thinks that teaching in both languages in the very same lecture could at all impair his ability to get the content across? The second question (somewhat reformulated here) is whether the Professor thinks that students could find dual language instruction distracting.
Thus the core thrust of my questions is whether dual medium instruction is desirable. So with all respect, whether it was at one stage a part of our teaching system is irrelevant. That is, the question is not did we ever have it. The question is should we have it.
Pierre,
I cannot agree with neither the tenor of your argument nor the tenor of the CC’s judgement. South Africa’s Constitution has been celebrated as “one of the more/most progressive Constitutions around” in that it’s anchored the protection of majority and minority languages. So far so good. The ramification of this is the all people from the respective language groups have a right to be taught in their native tongue – and if this is cannot take place at school, then where and how should this constitutional right can this right be implemented other than at school. Thus, if an Afrikaans-speaking pupil wishes to learn Afrikaans at an institution which teaches Afrikaans exclusively – why should this be constitutionally and socially inequitable? Inasmuch as blacks (or other groups) have the right to attend any other public school where their preferred language is taught, Afrikaners ought to have the right to attend a school where their preferred language is also taught, particularly also when the governing body has fixed this. The fact that the CC has “disarmed” a school body from determining its language policy is not fixing the social and linguistic imbalance of 62 learners being in classroom at one school vis-á-vis 22 learners in another in any equitable way at all. In fact, it is an excuse to address the real issue: the right of a school governing body to determine the medium of instruction. Why does one have a functioning governing body when the CC disarms it – it is making a toothless dog out of a functioning body? It is not the duty of the CC to interfere and to instruct a school as to which language medium it is mean to teach – this is the clear domain of a school body. I think the CC has outreached itself on this issue and with judgement and this is a gross misinterpretation and application of a statute in the name of “the broader community-argument”. Moreover, it has created a conflict in the interpretation and application of statutes (and this in the name of “a-broader-community-interest-argument” – which argument is no reason to force Ermelo to teach in another medium. To me, the tenor of this judgement (and your comment too) is more retrogressive than progressive and more of a déja vu – dare I remind of what happened in 1976!
Anonymouse says:
October 15, 2009 at 11:06 am
Well done Mouse – hats off to ya.
Chris says:
October 15, 2009 at 10:04 am
“Just as a rainbow is an optical illusion”
———————————————————————————————————
“But perhaps the greatest piece of misinformation about South Africa is the frequently touted opinion that transition has been a ‘peaceful miracle’”.
http://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/dissent/documents/Merrett_96isc.html
Pierre De Vos says:
October 15, 2009 at 11:07 am
“I suspect people who say the language is under threat, are really using the language issue as a metahpor for their feelings about their loss of political power. This does the language more harm than good”.
I couldn’t agree with you more Prof.
Sne says: October 15, 2009 at 12:10 pm
“Now I am eagerly awaiting a Constitutional challenge to the draining of our jurisprudence by conducting court proceedings in Afrikaans”.
I can’t wait either. To me there can be no talk of equality when 2 law students at the same institution (say, UCT) are not able to access legal information equally because one can and the other cannot understand Afrikaans. Surely the one who understands both English and Afrikaans has an unfair advantage – I remember when I could only read headnotes in some of the critical Court decisions whilst some of my colleagues were able to read the full judgments.
Leigh says:
October 15, 2009 at 9:41 am
Thank you Maggs. I can respect that. This is undoubtedly a great blog. But the natural downside of such exchanges is that we have no independent arbitrater to make decisions. Thus we can make headway largely through people making approprite concessions.
I will probably be mistaken tommorrow.
———————————————————————————————————
Some smart person once said that there are no contradictions, just one or some of the assumptions that are wrong.
I assumed consistency.
I was mistaken.
Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder says:
October 15, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Hey Dworky.
I tried to get our kid into a parallel medium school closest to us – our application got turned down.
A neighbour in the same complex who applied at the same time got both her kids into the school.
The school was kind enough to give us a list of other schools in the area, including a few overcrowded ones in a township about 30 kms away, but they refused to give us the information as required by the Act to appeal their decision.
Anyway – all’s well that ends well – we found another school that is further in distance (but shorter in time considering the morning traffic). And this school is wow!
I agree that the department can do with a serious waking up in a whole host of ways.
Leigh, I was muddled in the use of terminology. I meant to refer to parallel medium instruction, not dual medium instruction. The former is what is being used at UP (the latter is being introduced at Stellenbosch to a limited degree). From a pedagogical point of view the latter is said to be a more sound model by many progressive educational experts who support multilingualism (Neville Alexander being one, if I am not mistaken). The former can lead to a kind of classroom apartheid and denies students the benefit of a multilingual experience, an experience which would enhance respect for diversity. But it is not without its practical problems as it cuts down on teaching time and depends on the availability of materials in both languages. This places much pressure on teachers and lecturers who must ensure that such materials are available.
It seems to me this is an issue of fair distribution of public resources. Should Afrikaans kids have the right to demand to be taught in a single medium Afrikaans school when black learners down the road are forced to sit in classes that are almost double the national average? That is why section 29 talks about what is reasonably and practicably possible. The sections contains an internal qualifier to ensure that language rights are not used to deny fair access to state resources. That is why I support this judgment: it takes account of the language rights and of the rights of poor people to get access to education and tries to balance what can often be competing interests.
Anonymouse says:
October 15, 2009 at 11:06 am
My experience was not in Gauteng – there are reasons why some people trow stones to stay in Gauteng Province, the standards of the Provicial Education Department are one one of those reasons.
Pierre De Vos says:
October 15, 2009 at 11:07 am
“Pretoria University is a dual medium institution and it has improved its academic standing after becoming dual medium.”
I’m in favour of universities being dual medium, but my son is registered at Pretoria, and I’m afraid his classes are English only (he doesn’t study English).
I had a lecturer who delivered all his lectures dual medium (in Afrikaans and English) without any problem whatsoever, so it can be done. I must add, only the exceptional talented lecturer will be able to do it.
Chris – My experience also not in Gauteng. For fear of loss of my anonyminity I can however not disclose in which Province I operate.
Professor, thank you once again for taking the time. You draw attention to both potential problems with and benefits of dual medium instruction.
I will agree with you as to the potential problems which you suggest. I will also add that many students find it very difficult to focus consistently. And the routine of changing between languages may, I would imagine, make the activity of concentrating even more difficult in that it almost encourages the back and forth between spells of heightened and then reduced attention.
Thank you for outlining some possible benefits of dual medium instruction. I was not aware of them. But with respect, I think we may be able to identify some problems here. One of the potential strengths is that it could eliminate the possibility of classroom apartheid. This is, I think, a fair point. But what happens if students start forming groups in the classes that are being taught by way of dual medium instruction? Essentially I think dual medium instruction could give rise to intra classroom apartheid. But I will concede that it could conceivably involve less of a risk of classroom apartheid than parallel medium instruction.
You make out that by your reckoning, the issue here goes to the distribution of public resources. That is, how might the relevant resources be distributed fairly? I will of course concede that this is an issue here – and an important one at that. But my grievance with the decision is that this issue, to my mind, is not the only issue here.
I have read your description of the KKNK festival and Aardklop. And further, I take your point that these events seem to suggest strongly that the Afrikaans language is thriving. But what happens if we investigate the view that these events suggest that Afrikaans is thriving as a language of instruction?
Let us assume for the moment that should some circumstances obtain, both dual and parallel medium instruction could undermine Afrikaans as a language of instruction. Could it be that the circumstances in question arose after many of the scholars and authors that you saw at the events received their training? Could it be that they were educated when education in Afrikaans faced fewer challenges? If so, then could one not argue that they represent a sort of sunset for people educated in Afrikaans? I would also be curious to find out how many of them went to private schools.
You are of course right there is no absolute right to single medium instruction. And I will certainly not dispute your statement of an important issue here. But what if another issue is whether a specific language (maybe even in a specific community) could be in need of protection? If so, then surely one would be looking at two questions rather than one. First, given the competing interests of the right to single language instruction on the one hand, and the need for equity and redress on the other, what is the appropriate balance? And secondly, what sort of prejudice could the particular language sustain if the policy of single language instruction is revoked?
I have a child in a single medium afrikaans school, now for three years. Prior to that she was in a single medium english school. In my opinion, the quality of both these schools, including small class size, has been exceptional.
Two other schools in the community are single medium afrikaans serving the poorer colored and black students, both in Afrikaans. They are pitiful in their abilities, run down, dirty with predictable results for the students and the teachers cruise for the girls. A third school, former Class C, while well integrated with quality teaching offers English only at an additional fee. The local high school recently went through a battle over the very issue your blog refers to. Having addressed that school I found that all the white kids sat together, then there was an empty distance in the middle of the room before the other grouping black children sat, like on two sides of an isle. Looked like Apartheid to me.
I understand that this issue has many spirials, the quality of teaching and class size, being considerable.
I do believe however, that the Afrikaans people should be allowed to have their children taught in single medium, and considering what a minority they are, i don’t get why not. If its political, its as much political on the black side as it is on the white. In my mind it boils down to all the corruption making it impossible for our government to supply enough facilities and quality teachers. And I also think that the Black people in power have ulterior motives. Ironically, most of the black people I know speak afrikaans, and if not from the Eastern Cape, have no issues about it. This is not 1976!
sirjay jonson says:
October 15, 2009 at 16:51 pm
“…if not from the Eastern Cape, have no issues about it.”
…………………………………………………………………………….
What are you insinuating Sirjay? Any specific examples of the issues you’re referring to?
For the first time I fully agree with you Prof the analyses are correct and are constructive keep it up prof from now on I will read your comments with the understanding.You have siad the mouthful prof keep it up.
Vusi Makamu
Pretoria
“Hoërskool Ermelo has on average about 22 learners in a classroom. At the nearby Lindile School, 62 learners are on average crammed into one classroom.”
Is the number of leaners in a classroom relevant at all? I think not. The school should have five different grades, with a number of optional subjects. For that they will need X amount of teachers, and Y number of classrooms. To change to a parallel medium school, logic tells us they will need double the number of classrooms, and probably substantially more teachers. The relevant question will not be how many leaners in a classroom, but how many classrooms are needed, and how many classrooms are available. Mseneke J says: “The learners per class ratios in Ermelo reveal startling disparities . . .” To do things the way the Department wants it done, will not cause the number of learners is the Afrikaans stream to suddenly be more than 22 in a classroom. We learn from the judgement that in this case the school has 32 classrooms, and more teachers than classrooms.
It is clear from the judgement that the party to blame for the state of affairs at Ermelo is the Education Department who failed to see that the problem in Ermelo was a lack of classrooms.
No offense Sne. I know folks from the Eastern Cape who complained to me that everyone insists on speaking to them in Afrikaans here, which ‘here’ happens to be notably afrikaans speaking. When I in all friendliness asked where they were from and did they like it here, I was informed no, they didn’t like it!
Subsequently I asked ‘well why did you come here, and why do you stay if you don’t like it’. Their responses were that ‘this is our country and we have to be here to establish that’. I took it with a grain of salt as they say.
Chris: why do you think the number of leaners in a classroom is not relevant? Is not the large number of learners in a class room the first indicator that the education system under the present Dept is not working, indeed can’t work?
If it were necessary I’d give up my evening glass of wine to ensure my child was in a low student-number classroom.
sirjay jonson says:
October 15, 2009 at 18:57 pm
I don’t think its relevant to establish if the school has the capacity to entertain another language as medium of instruction. In the Ermelo case, the Prof De Vos writes that “the school will almost certainly have to change its language policy”. There are not enough classrooms to allow a parallel medium, so they will have two options: Duel medium with Afrikaans and English being used at the same time in the same classroom, or scap Afrikaans altogether and have English as the only language. Let’s hope for the school’s sake the prof is wrong, because if he is right, it will be a tragedy for the school.
I agee on the glass of wine. I’d give up much more than a glass of wine for the same reason.
Thanks Chris: Being a father of many children, I feel strongly that parents should be able to have their children educated in their mother tongue, with alternative second and even third languages available. For example I was raised in English but needed to study both French and Latin. However, it’s so obvious that in South Africa such an approach is not a realistic reality when the state cannot support even facilites, let alone language groupings.
I would much prefer that the State concentrate on quality education, rather than hassel the Afrikaaners for their superior education. And I might add, I’m English.
sirjay jonson says:
October 15, 2009 at 16:51 pm
“And I also think that the Black people in power have ulterior motives.”
……………………………………………………………………
Can you substantiate this statement bro?
sirjay jonson says:
October 15, 2009 at 18:24 pm
LOL. Nice one. I almost fell off my seat. Keep up the good jokes bro.
Chris, with respect, I think your logic is flawed. If there are currently 32 classrooms and 22 students per classroom that would make about 6 classes in each grade. If one reduces those classes to 4 per grade for Afrikaans kids (at about 35 kids per classroom) one will open up ten classrooms for English learners (2 classes per grade). Easy. Problem solved.
Pierre De Vos says:
October 16, 2009 at 8:51 am
How is the ave 22 learners per class calculated?
According to the judgment, in 2007 there were 587 learners, 32 class rooms – that should be just over 18 per class on average.
Pierre De Vos says:
October 16, 2009 at 8:51 am
“Chris, with respect, I think your logic is flawed. If there are currently 32 classrooms and 22 students per classroom that would make about 6 classes in each grade. If one reduces those classes to 4 per grade for Afrikaans kids (at about 35 kids per classroom) one will open up ten classrooms for English learners (2 classes per grade). Easy. Problem solved.”
Well Pierre, usually I usually agree with your reasoning, but in this instance I think you are patently wrong, probably because you don’t understand the system in a high school. It is not a matter of redusing classes per grade from 4 to 6. You need classrooms for each subject, for instance a matchs classroom, a German classroom, a science lab, etc. because 32 teachers have to present classes simultaniously. Now you double everyting because you present all the classes in English as well. 64 teachers with 32 clasrooms, every teacher teaching a class at the same time!
Problem solved? I think not. Go to any functional high school in the country, and discuss your solution with the principal, and he will tell you it just can’t work.
Chris, I do not understand your logic. If there are 22 learners in a class and six classes in each standard, many of the math, science, English etc teachers will be teaching the same material to more than one class. If class sizes were bigger, those teachers would have to teach the same material less often because instead of splitting classes into four or five or six, it will be split in two or three or four. Surely you cannot contend that this will not open up classrooms?
Pierre De Vos says:
October 16, 2009 at 11:19 am
Pierre
Please do not see my response as disrepectful, that is not my intention. (I see this a a healthy debate.) I have no intimate knowledge of the Ermelo school, but I ‘m not so sure that at a school the size of Ermelo the same material will be tought to different classes. Even if it is done, you still have the problem of learners with different choices of subject to accommodate. You simply need a certain number of classrooms, and sometimes a repitition of teaching, to allow a choice of subjects.
Where I went to school we had fewer classes, but the same subjects as schools with more learners and teachers. The result was what you suggest for Ermelo: Teachers teaching the same material only once, because there was just one session for Maths, one session for Science, etc. This had the practical effect of limiting the learners choice of subject tremendously. In my case we had a choice between Match and Business Studies – you couldn’t take both subjects. I could choose between Science and Geography. You couldn’t take both. We had to choose between Biology and History. We had to choose one subject between German, Woodwork, Accounting and Typing. You can take one of the four subjects, not two. No learner was able to have Matchs and Business Studies, or Accounting and Typing, or Biology and History as subjects. That is the practical result of teachers having to teach the same material less often.
My suggestion stands, ask a principal of a functional school to explain what the result will be if Ermelo is forced to do what the Department wants, without getting extra classrooms. I have the expert advice of my wife, a former school principal and school inspector (not principal of a predominantly white former model C school, but a functional school in a disadvantaged community) who sat for hours trying to get solutions to problems like this.
With that I do not claim to be an expert in education, except for one year courses in Afrikaans English and Latin I never studies anything but law. And a term as member of a school governing body, which I really regret.
Mouse, great post about your school.
You are a credit to South Africa. I wish we had more people with compassion, wisdom and the common touch, like you.
As one who had his rental property and pension confiscated for
challenging the municipal billing chaos, followed by multiple
logic errors in the SA courts, and when I ask accountants “if they
understand it” and they all say “yes of course, just tell your
lawer” and the accountants/bookeepers don’t believe me that
the law-people don’t/can’t understand; I take great interest in
anlysing the dialog of the 3 law-people here, fumbling with a
much more complex problem than mine. Part of law-peoples’s
inability to understnd simple logic/book-keeping is caused by
their training/insistence on clouding the argument with
redundant/ fruity phrases like “I respectfully submit”.
Perhaps this is because they charge by volume instead of validity?
PdV writes: “If there are currently 32 classrooms and 22 students
per classroom that would make about 6 classes in each grade.”
For law-people who are trained that all necessary facts/allegastions
must be exposed this is poor/bad, and Maggs Naidu acknowledges that
by, filling in the missing and essential fact: total-learners=58;
“How is the ave 22 learners per class calculated? According to the
judgment, in 2007 there were 587 learners, 32 class rooms – that
should be just over 18 per class on average.”
Then after trimming out his “fruit cake passing notes”, Chris’
relevant contribution is: “You need classrooms for each subject, for
instance a matchs classroom, a German classroom, a science lab,
etc. because 32 teachers have to present classes simultaniously.
ow you double everyting because you present all the classes in
English as well. 64 teachers with 32 clasrooms, every teacher
teaching a class at the same time! I think not.”
Effectivly he has shown that the:
32 buckets for 587 balls = 18.34 balls/bucket model is flawed.
The other attribute that I hate about law-people and politicians
is that they never conceed; they just morph their arguments.
PdV’s fatal flaw of not recognising that a history bucket can’t serve
as a science-lab bucket, is countered by Chris’ exagerated implication
that none of the buckets are interchangable.
Apparently the sheduling of teachers, classrooms, subject-grades is
a complex problem. OTOH, for a *GIVEN* teachers-classroms-subject
schedule, clearly more or less students can attend any/all of the
sessions. The problem is analagous to the econ 101 “factors of production”
problem. If the goal is to maximise the production of cooked-rice, then
any of the production-factors: rice, water, salt, heat, pot-capacity; can
be *THE* limiting factor. Some factors can be “diluted” like more students
per class, but teachers and class-rooms must remain matched one-to-one.
That the school-scheduling problem involves time and sequence, would really
throw the law-people who *ALL* thought that “admitting that the debt had
accumulated to exceed the default judgment claim *AFTER* the judgment,
constituted grounds to refuse the default judgment rescission application”.
And when you explain that cause can not come *AFTER* effect, they never
conceed, but just change the subject or try “Oh well, you’re out of time”.
—
The complexity of the school problem is interestly compared to the CC-free-water
decision where the Court appropriately found that they weren’t qualified
to “make the calculations”. And I also relate it to Kriegler’s report that
commercial litigation is increasingly turning to arbitrators, who I guess are
skilled in handling logic, instead of poetry — like wind-bag law-people are.