EDITORIAL
EDITORIAL
WE NEED A NEW TRIPARTITE ALLIANCE
www.tshikululu.org.za
ARTICLE BY SARAH MORRISON, KEY ACCOUNTS MANAGER AT TSHIKULULU SOCIAL INVESTMENTS (
WWW.TSHIKULULU.ORG.ZA)
“
The state, NGOs and the private sector have for too long worked in isolation from each other in education. What South Africa needs is an honest, open and deep partnership between them.
Three of the most critical players in the success, or otherwise, of our national schooling system are obvious enough: the state through its departments of education, business through its so- cial investment programmes, and non-governmental organisa- tions (NGOs) working in education. They are like three legs of a stool. But all three need to look again at their own roles, see where they can collaborate better, and be prepared to move out of their comfort zones to greater partnership.
Let’s look first to the many NGOs working in education. With- out underestimating their positive effects, we would do well to acknowledge that even well–intentioned and efficient NGOs can add confusion to a school environment if working with a silo mentality. This causes stress in the system and can under- mine the very public-private partnership in this area that is so needed.
For some NGOs, this requires a real shift in thinking. Many excellent organisations were established during the apartheid years where working with the state education system was sometimes an anathema and contrary to their objectives of providing a quality education to mainly black learners. They had to learn to work in explicit isolation from the system, es- tablishing parallel learning environments for black learners. But for some, this modus operandi has become so ingrained that the new realities of state education have not been allowed to intrude on how they work. For them, serious introspection is needed if they are not to be left out of the new, emerging, public-private partnerships that are developing in this space.
This is not to undermine diversity of practice, competitive ideas, and innovation in approach. Indeed, a straightjacket of confor- mity of practice could not serve South Africa well. Rather, it is about respecting everyone’s contribution, and then seeking out that which works best, and taking this forward in collaborative ways to best effect.
For example, a community of practice of educational NGOs established itself in the Western Cape to ensure that their collective impact would hopefully result in improved learner performance. Through a conversation facilitated by the educa- tion NGO “Bridge”, they were able to minimise unnecessary duplication of their efforts which had over-burdened the same schools and undermined each other’s programmes. By working together, they were able to widen their collective reach, bring- ing more tuition to more children and improving access to state resources for the NGOs themselves. It is a good example of what is called “impact networking”, and innovation and organ- isational independence is maintained.
British think tank New Philanthropy Capital recently produced a report called Impact networks: Charities working together to improve outcomes which notes that “As a third party inves- tor working with a number of small and medium-sized chari- ties, it was often the case that they were working towards the same outcomes but not in a coordinated way. For example, sometimes what was needed was not just the organisation we worked with to scale up but all the parts of the network to scale up in order to achieve a desired outcome.”
Then there is the KwaZulu-Natal-based NGO, MIET. This organisation takes the view that the sustainability of its pro- grammes can only be secured by ensuring government leader- ship and community ownership and participation. It therefore conceptualises, plans and implements its work in partnership with the education department at all levels.
At a school level, this means the ownership and participation in the implementation of NGO project activities by individual schools and their communities. This includes ensuring represen- tation of teachers, parents and learners on the project task team. On-the-ground work is translated into real, implementable poli- cies of the education department and school improvements re- main long after MIET has left the school.
“MIET Africa is a not-for-profit organization based in South Af- rica with a strong presence throughout the SADC Region. It realizes its purpose of improving the lives of children by con- tributing to quality teaching and learning. MIET Africa prides itself on being an African NGO and an innovator of education solutions that focus on the challenges faced by children in rural areas. It has pioneered many new models and programmes, and its influence now extends beyond South Africa and into Africa.
There are, of course, many more other examples of NGOs who take this collaborative and system-aligned approach. Com- panies should approach their educational programmes holisti- cally, rather than just opting for localised, ad hoc interventions. The latter is the easier, simpler approach but often has unin- tended negative impacts.
And an engaged, inclusive approach may mean harder work on sometimes difficult relationships and longer time horizons to achieving positive results for more people. But if the private sector wants to try to make a real, lasting positive impact in ed- ucation outcomes in South Africa, this more serious approach to education investment should be embraced.
Like any good investment, educational social investments re- quire decisions that are informed – informed by national edu- cational strategic plans, by the needs and assets of a school or a cluster of schools, and by how working with partners such as universities, NGOs and the education department can provide greater impact on the system as a whole.
This type of approach can be seen in the FirstRand and An- glo American Numeracy and Literacy Chairs initiative that has brought together a number of education partners, including the mentioned companies and the Department of Science
and Technology, as co-planners and funders. The National Re- search Foundation administers the initiative, working closely with Tshikululu Social Investments and the research “Chairs” at the relevant universities.
The Chairs in turn work with 10 public schools each, selected with the assistance of the Department of Education, to im- prove teacher and learner performance in numeracy. Their work will be undertaken over five years with the aim of sys- temic improvement across all schooling.
Companies can, and should, also engage with the national edu- cation department about the type of skills that learners need for their own and the country’s economic benefit. They must help shape the curriculum to meet the challenges of the 21st century workplace.
This approach requires that the third leg in the stool, the Edu- cation Department, creates opportunities for NGOs and the private sector to engage in meaningful ways with the state sys- tem.
The department should continue to communicate its strategic plan and priorities, provide structures for the private sector to offer their skills and voice and be open to a robust and honest engagement.
Moving out from their silos, accepting each other’s bona fides, and widening a conversation of partnership that doesn’t mean the subversion of debate and identity, will need far-sightedness on the parts of NGOs, state actors, and the private sector. Accepting that none can achieve our country’s full educational potential on their own, but that together we can get far more done, would be a good start.
” 66 CHAPTER 3 | TOWARDS IMPROVED COLLABORATION
www.ed.org.za www.ed.org.za CHAPTER 3 | TOWARDS IMPROVED COLLABORATION 67
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123