Fix the basics before adding the frills

THE row which is brewing between the Education Department and the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union is centred on the issuing of a circular which stated that Mandarin will be offered in South African Schools as an additional language from next year. But the teachers’ union (Sadtu) is having none of it, calling this colonisation in disguise.

Sadtu’s beef is that there are at least nine other foreign languages taught in South African schools, but the latest entry into our education armoury is the only language which has been introduced with an official circular from the government. The union’s general secretary, Mugwena Maluleke, has smelt a rat, and is reported to have said that the teachers’ union is opposed to the introduction of Mandarin into South African schools and rejects it ‘with the contempt which it deserves’.

While it is accepted that proficiency in Mandarin would be invaluable to business people engaged in trade with China, there is something about this which is a bit concerning.

Reports have stated that an implementation plan between our Department of Basic Education and China’s Ministry of Education was signed in March 2014 to strengthen educational ties ‘at an institutional and policy level’. The agreement will see the departments collaborating in mathematics, science and technology ‘where we have seen China excel’.

I cannot recall that the same agreements were signed with France, Germany Serbia, Italy, Ancient Rome, Portugal, Spain and the Indian states where Tamil, Telegu and Urdu are spoken, yet all these foreign languages are taught in our schools as additional languages, some having been a part of school curricula for decades.

If the Minister of Basic Education, Angie Motsheka, thinks that collaboration with the Chinese will see an improvement in our appalling record of incompetence in maths and science, she may be disappointed. South African society would have a hard time adapting to the rigours of a Chinese school day.

There are glaring differences between schooling in South Africa and schooling in China. For one, I am quite sure that Chinese teachers do not go shopping during school hours, I am quite sure that teachers do not add on a few more days off to public holidays and I am quite sure that weapons are not carried by Chinese pupils. Discipline is the difference, and only when we get that right, for pupils and teachers, will learning Mandarin be of any use to our school populations.

When there are still children who are spending each day learning under trees, or sharing desks, when there are schools which do not have the basic requirements, where necessities such as running water, electricity and hygienic sanitation are luxuries, the least of our worries is learning Mandarin.

We need to secure the foundation of our floundering education system. Simple things such as delivering textbooks timorously, stemming the drop-out rate and upping the standard of our matric certificate would be good places to start.

As English is the official language of the business world, perhaps a sustained effort to improve in this language should be where the department is concentrating its funding.

Talking of funding, who is paying for the teachers who are presently in China being trained to teach Mandarin? It was been said that to master the 80 000-plus symbols of Mandarin takes at least six years, but how long our teachers will be away studying is anyone’s guess. When a language being added to school curricula is driven (and funded?) by a foreign government, the populace of South Africa should be asking why.

It’s difficult to understand that when there is no money to introduce our official languages in to South African schools, where funds were found to teach Mandarin. I would rather my child learned Zulu.