The new democratic government came to power in 1994 and one of its major missions was to change the system of education inherited from the apartheid regime by laying a foundation for a single national core syllabus to replace the erstwhile multi-tier system, which discriminated among racial groups. Under the apartheid regime, the curriculum was flawed by ‘racially, offensive and outdated content’ and the government embarked on a bold programme to cleanse it of these elements. The democratic government went about this through curriculum reforms. In 1997, it introduced Curriculum 2005 fondly called “C2005”, with the Outcome-based Education (OBE) principles. Despite the initial overwhelming support for C2005, it soon ran into trouble. In 2000, the Minister appointed a committee that reviewed the curriculum and in 2002, the Revised National Curriculum Statement (RNCS) was born. These curriculum reforms have been met with a lot of criticism and the government felt it was not serving its purpose. Some key stakeholders still felt that their non-involvement, non-participation and the lack of proper consultation in the curriculum process were partly responsible for teachers and subject advisers misinterpreting the curriculum and implementing it from their own perspectives. Subsequently, another review was done and the National Curriculum Statement (NCS) was launched in 2002. But the complaints did not cease, probably due to continuing poor performance at the Matric Examination which continues to feature low pass rates for many provinces, especially the Eastern Cape. Against this backdrop, the government streamlined the NCS curriculum yield, and an amended Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) emerged. The key issue raised by critics is the lack of sufficient involvement of stakeholders in the curriculum review processes. At the same time, government continues to insist that it has been consulting adequately with all relevant stakeholders. There are iii obviously different interpretations of stakeholder involvement and participation and there is urgent need to reconcile whatever differences of opinion and definition exist, in order to gain common understanding, which is the first step in reaching a solution. For instance, how are the stakeholders involved? More importantly, what is meant by “involvement”? Even if there is no disagreement about the meaning of “involvement”, is the stage in the process at which the stakeholders are involved an important element in whether or not the process is an inclusive and participatory one?.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:ufh/vital:29401 |
| Date | January 2014 |
| Creators | Obi, Uloma Nkpurunma |
| Publisher | University of Fort Hare, Faculty of Education |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Doctoral, Degree |
| Format | 355 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | University of Fort Hare |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds