According to spokesperson for the Department of Basic Education Elijah Mhlanga, Curriculum Assessment Policy Statements (Caps) came into being as a response to the host of complaints raised by stakeholders in education, such as teacher unions, regarding the administrative burden and confusion brought about by the Outcomes Based Education ( OBE) whose approach and features were still prevalent in the implementation of the National Curriculum Statement ( NCS) introduced in 2008.The work the Ministerial Task Team appointed in 2009, led to the introduction of CAPS, and at the same time put the last nail in the coffin of OBE in the Basic Education Sector in South Africa.
Mhlanga highlited that Caps is not the total overhaul of the previous curriculum and the replacement with the new in all subjects and aspects. “This is essentially the strengthening of the NCS by specifying what should be taught (topics which should be covered per subject, grade, and per quarter of the school calendar year), and how assessments must be carried out,”said Mhlanga. He mentioned that there are subjects such as mathematics and business studies which had new content added to them. He also added that languages had certain aspects replaced by others. “In terms of physical science, some Grade 11 content was factored into the examination papers. History and geography had no new content at all.”
Mhlanga also said the increase in the cognitive rigour and demand which was brought about by new content such as the inclusion of paper three to paper one and two of mathematics, the nature of assessment items which marked the radical departure in the language used for assessment items and the level at which questions were pitched, like for instance, the increase in the number of high order questions in mathematical literacy and changes in the structure of the economics paper, from one to two, all these amounted to raising the standard in pursuit of quality education.
Chapter four in the Caps documents has solely been dedicated as part of the design elements of the curriculum to re-engineer assessment to form the core of the curriculum which drives quality, and this philosophy is predicated on the deliberate intention to increase high order questions across all subjects over time. “It is therefore not surprising that examiners started introducing these during the 2014 examinations. In the majority of cases, examiners phased these in gradually, but in some subjects drastic changes where brought in and these adversely affected the performance of subjects such as mathematical literacy and business studies,”said Mhlanga. He also said it is for this reason that even subjects which had no changes in the curriculum experienced changes in the assessment items and even language used for assessment.
“It is important to realise that change, no matter how well intended and small it might be, bring about uncertainty and instability in the system. Teachers, pupils, examiners, and moderation panels work better with what they know and used to already. Change to the curriculum then becomes a learning curve for a host of role players who are part of the value chain,”said Mhlanga. He mentioned that the uncertainty and instability in the performance of some subjects manifest itself as under- performance or decline in the results. There is enough literature and experts confirming this analysis. “In terms of 2014, this occurrence has been prevalent in a number of subjects. The raw marks of many subjects are worse than those of previous years. Over time these changes will be extremely beneficial to the system,” he concluded.
