The past eight months in the life of the Education Rights Project has shown over and over again that the right to basic education is for many children in poor and working class communities no more than a mere constitutional declaration.

During a process of collecting testimonies detailing the views and experiences of learners, teachers and community activists about their local schools, cold statistical data on school fees, transport, feeding schemes, child labour, infrastructure and facilities were given new meaning. The troubles and struggles of individuals and communities to educate their young in very trying conditions, to make the hard-won constitutional right to education a reality, are vividly portrayed in these testimonies.

Through its work in communities, the ERP has found numerous individuals and many organisations that have spontaneously and independently begun initiatives to deal with one or other aspect of the violation of the right to basic education. In order to strengthen local initiatives, the ERP has conducted workshops, focus group discussions and interviews, in places such as Gauteng, KwaZulu Natal, the Northern provinces and the Eastern Cape. In addition, a preliminary participatory research project has been conducted in the East Rand of Gauteng.

Numerous articles and publications are available on the virtues of participatory research. The ERP, in its very short existence, has observed the potency of this approach to research in capturing the imaginations of communities and in leading to social action. For instance, in Gauteng, a number of communities linked to social movements have designed or are in the process of designing and collecting data about their communities on basic issues such as the amount of school fees charged, costs of uniforms, books, transport, provision of meals in schools, household incomes and violations of their rights because of the inability to pay school fees. With the assistance of the ERP, the data is analysed and then presented at community meetings where a discussion is held regarding actions to be taken to deal with the problems identified. Thus far, actions taken typically involve a combination of attempts to communicate with schools and education officials, parents and School Governing Bodies (SGB), attempts at legal redress, and most importantly, planning and organising local education campaigns.

The importance of such a research process is that it promotes democratic and co-operative practices in the production and the designation of what constitutes knowledge; it demystifies the research and facilitates a social and active response to complex policy issues. The premise and outcome of such a research process is social action. The outcomes of the research inform the design of a campaign aimed at improving local education. This will ultimately contribute to democratising the debate on, for instance, the impact of government budgets on local education as communities themselves will have the data to challenge or support assertions made by the state or other organisations about provisioning for education. Expressed simply, until communities are able to tell their own stories, autonomously, powerful interests who are fundamentally opposed (wittingly or unwittingly) to the interest of poor and marginalised communities will continue to dominate debate on social policy.

There is a myriad of education challenges that poor communities face. Often, these challenges are intertwined with other debilitating social problems such as the high rate of unemployment or very low incomes. In order to focus the efforts of the ERP the project has identified five campaign areas as its immediate focus areas, namely, the cost of education, infrastructure and facilities, sexual harassment and violence, farm schooling and, adult basic education. Issue papers on the first four campaign areas have been written and debated in the ERP and its reference group, consisting of researchers and social activists working in education. An issue paper on the fifth campaign area, adult basic education, is currently being prepared.

There is a dialogical relationship between the research (qualitative and quantitative) conducted by communities and academic research conducted by people who are mostly based in universities and research centers. In this way the project ensures that scholarship makes a contribution to dealing with social challenges, and that without romanticising the capacity of communities to conduct research, that communities themselves profoundly inform, direct, own and use research produced through their efforts.

Many of the poor and working class communities are either unemployed or earn very little. In the case of the Rondebult community:

An overwhelming number of the parents are unemployed, that is 75% of the respondents. Only in a single instance are both parents in full-time employment, even in this case, these parents reported that they could not afford transport and school fees. For the rest of the parents who reported having some kind of productive employment, this involved informal trading, or work on a part-time or casual basis between 1-3 times per week (ERP Report, East Rand, 03-10)

In addition, the data set on Table 2 in Appendix B of the Rondebult Community tells an even more disconcerting story. A story of households that spend R391 every month on education on an income of R800 – that is 49% of their income. To compound matters, the data set further suggests that each household has an average family size of 4.5. That is, 4.5 people have to live on R409 per month, or R3 per day (These are the people that the United Nations refers to as living in absolute poverty, as they live on less than 1 U$ per day).

The data suggests that a narrow interpretation of the SA Schools Act on school fees exemptions, an interpretation that understands school fees to be exclusively tuition fees, defeats the motivation for and the spirit of the exemptions policy. The vast majority of poor people, as the argument will demonstrate presently, will never qualify for school fees exemption when this narrow interpretation is used in determining eligibility for a school fees exemption. It is obvious that, if at all, only learners who are in schools that charge very high tuition fees and whose parents have a low gross income per annum will ever qualify for a school fees exemption. It is our experience in the ERP that parents with low gross incomes simply do not send their children to schools that charge high tuition fees, and in any case, these schools conduct formal and informal assessments of the ability of the parents to pay fees before a child is admitted to the school. Thus, children who are likely to require and qualify for exemption in a high tuition fee school are barred from entering it.

Let us demonstrate how the school fees exemptions process is fundamentally flawed. The formula for a full school fees exemption is:

At the lower end of the schooling market, it would seem that no one would ever qualify for a school fees exemption. Even when it is apparent that they actually need it, given the very dismal level of gross income as demonstrated. Now let us look at more comprehensive accounting for school fees or the cost of education. The comprehensive accounting includes costs of tuition, uniforms, transport, textbooks and stationery:

The assumptions of the first formula are unacceptable, as they undermine the spirit of the SA Schools Act, which is to grant exemptions to those that need them most. The application of the narrow formula partly explains why so few people have applied for school fees exemptions and why so few have been issued. The increase in resource allocation through the Norms and Standards policy does not go far enough in benefiting this community.

In response to all this, the Rondebult community is emphatic that:

There should be no means testing in the decision to grant school fees exemptions. All parents should be granted exemptions on request, or even better, all children should be granted automatic exemptions from school fees – thus abolishing school fees. In addition, the state must provide free transport for all learners, learning support materials and food.

Infrastructure and Facilities

The reality on the ground confirms that the pace of infrastructural provision is glacial and that in some cases whatever facilities there were in the past have fallen into disuse because of the inability of schools to pay for services and maintain facilities. The Department of Education’s Register of Needs Survey (2001a) concedes that schools that reported weak or very weak buildings increased from 4 377 in 1996 to 9 375 in 2000. Also of the over 27 000 schools only 8000 have flush sewer toilets and 43% of schools have no electricity (Vally 2001:9). In a workshop conducted in the East Rand, the ERP was told:

Electricity and water in many schools do not exist. Schools in response are resorting to draconian and illegal measures to collect fees. Including demanding registration fees for admission, withholding of report cards and matriculation results to compel parents to pay up and forcing parents to do school maintenance in lieu of defraying part of the school fees. Schools are overcrowded, windows are broken, toilets are in a serious state of disrepair, and there are no telephone lines, science laboratories, libraries, photocopiers nor computers (ERP report, East Rand, 03-10)

Farm schools experience similar problems, but only more acutely:

The other problem here is that the children and myself have no toilet. The pit-latrine over there has been full for years now, and we have no other alternative. Some things are getting better in farm schools. We have this feeding scheme, for instance. But other things are getting much worse – there is no chalk, no paper. When I go to the circuit office, there is just nothing there. (Educator, Eastern Cape, 04-11)

There is nothing here with regard to infrastructure. Even water we get from the stream down there. It was better when the farmer was here, because the tap worked. But now we are trying to mould children in these difficulties. No electricity! (Educator, 04-11)

Transport

Children in urban and rural areas travel very long distances to school. Often this is about five kilometers in urban areas and up to twenty kilometers on foot in rural areas. In rural areas, in particular, children walk through deserted velds and along busy roads. Car accidents and more wilful acts of violence occur often.

We have no problems of sexual abuse of children in this school. The thing though is that children on their way to school walk through abandoned houses. I have been trying, without success, to get the farmers to demolish or seal these houses. I am afraid that children will be raped in there. (Educator, 04-11)

There is sexual abuse of children in the area. Even we adults are in danger. Last month, two women were raped on that path where we also walk. As a result, children are now afraid to walk through those shrubs. Before this I used to walk to school. But I am now compelled to hire transport that fetches and drops me off at school. Children are just not safe here, especially girls. We suggested that children should walk in groups so that they can protect each other. (Educator, 04-11)

In urban areas, especially in the “RDP housing” settlements and in squatter settlements there are often no schools. Parents have to bear the cost of transporting their children to school – failing which some parents have resigned themselves to their children not getting any education. In one sample ERP found that all the parents in the survey group have had their children denied entry into the bus because of the inability to pay for bus fares. Two parents’ children have not taken a bus ride for a total of seven months this year. The vast majority of parents have been unable to pay for the bus fare for between two to three months (the majority cited three months as the average for this year). Alternatives to the school bus that most parents utilise to get their children to school where they have money are in the order of most frequency: walking, riding a bicycle, staying with relatives or friends who live near the schools or not going to school at all.

Testimonies

Bongani and Mlungisi's stories

Bongani and Mlungisi are grade 10 learners. They respectively attend school at Madibane and Fidelitas, both schools are located in Diepkloof. Their schools are located approximately 12 kilometres from Durban Roodepoort Deep (DRD); the taxi fare is R13 for a return trip. The school provides stationary and textbooks. Uniforms costs between R80 - R300, and lunch is about R5. These learners simply do not go to school when they do not have taxi fares, and they know of children from DRD who have stopped going to school during the first term of school owing to an inability to pay taxi fares. The two learners would like to transfer to a nearby school. But schools will not give them their reports and transfer papers until they have paid in full the R150 school fee. Bongani and Mlungisi thought that it will probably take long for the state to build a school, and that in the meantime, containers should be set-up to house a primary school - so that smaller children do not have to travel far to school. They also believe that a clinic should be established because many people in DRD only go to clinics when they are extremely ill and this is a time when chances of recovery are slim.

Nowethu and Nolindile's stories

Nowethu has three children; all three are of school going age. Her husband works in Wynberg and spends about R100 on transport to work every month. Nowethu and her husband try with all the means at their disposal to get their children to school. Two of the children attend school at Thembelihle Primary. Door-to-door transport costs R300 per month for both children. The third child goes to Orola High (in Zola) and her transport costs are up to R200 per month. As a result, she does not have much money left for school fees, uniforms or food.

Nolindile also has three children. All three are at primary school in Braamfisher. Nolindile and her husband have been unemployed for a long time. She cannot afford any amount of school fees charged, no matter how little. During the time we were having this conversation, she had absolutely no food in the house and had no idea what she was going to eat that evening. She is very desperate and needs a job urgently.

Dipuo

Dipuo has a child at a primary school in Dobsonville. She pays R120 per month for a door-to-door kombi and R150 per annum in school fees. She can manage the transport and school fees, but then the school demands a blazer and tracksuit costs which she cannot meet. In addition she has to pay for stationary and textbooks (the textbooks she has not bought as they cost too much). She says that in DRD there are a number of children who do not attend school; this is especially prevalent amongst older children. She thinks the high levels of crime in DRD are related to low school attendance. She argues that if there were no schools fees charged and that free transport to school was provided, many more children from the area would attend school. When it rains many children do not go to school, and are in turn subjected to corporal punishment for non-attendance. As her contribution to education in the community, she has taken it upon herself to assist children of neighbours with homework.

Feeding Scheme Programme

Schools that are receiving food from the state are very grateful for this. Invariably, educators and learners complained that the food was not enough, not nutritious and that almost only lower grades got whatever food was available and that even in this case the supply of food was irregular. In almost every case educators often gave up their lunches to really poor and hungry children.

We get some food, but it is not enough. We don’t get it that often. It has been months since we received any food. So, we have to learn even when we are hungry. (Learners, 04-11)

The biscuits are provided only for grade 1 children. We don’t eat anything here at school. We try to eat at home before we leave for school and when we get back. (Learner, 04-11)

We have food. Previously, the food was for grades 1-4. Instead of bread, we are now getting biscuits, jam and peanut butter. We are perplexed regarding whether biscuits can be eaten with jam or peanut butter. But we give children what is provided. The biscuits have gotten very small now – the size of eatsomore. Previously, they gave bigger and square-shaped biscuits. It is so difficult to decide how many should be given to each child. Many children do not eat in the morning before coming to school, to an extent that last week I had no children in grades 1-3. Their parents work in the farms and they hadn’t gotten paid yet. The children said they slept without food and their parents told them to stay at home until they can get food. Starvation is serious in the farms. We have to give children our own lunch boxes – otherwise, they get headaches. We rather not eat. (Educator, 04-11)

Children are often illegally denied access to the food scheme. Some parents have mentioned that their children are denied food since a condition for being given food is paying school fees. From the ERP report on Rondebult we read:

At the Katlehong and Voslorus schools there is a feeding scheme programme for primary school children, but not all children are covered by it and those that are covered do not have access to the scheme on a continuous basis. Thandi gave an example: She had money for a few days for her children to buy their own school lunches. The school used this temporary effort at self-reliance to deny her children re-admittance to the feeding scheme programme arguing that she must continue providing lunch money as she clearly has money. She feels she is being penalised for attempting to provide for her children when she has the means to do so.

Child Labour

In many of the farm communities where the ERP conducted research, child labour was routinely practised. It soon became clear that the issue was more complex than just a farmer whisking off children from the classroom to the potato field – that it was a complex issue of poverty and survival:

Children usually work on farms during holidays. Children here do not attend school regularly. We are not sure whether it is because they are made to work during the potato-harvesting season. What we know is that during the potato-harvesting season, they are nowhere to be found. When pressed, they say they are helping their parents during harvesting. Harvesting can take up to 2 months. That is because it rains on some days and work can’t go on in the potato fields. They do this work, in part, to pay school fees. Right now, there is this child who only comes to school once a week. I was asking him the other day, “Hey wethu, why weren’t you at school yesterday?” He is a big boy, you know. In reply he says, “ Miss, I had no soap to wash my clothes”. Then I asked, “ Are you aware that you only come to school once a week, and there are five school days? Why is that you don’t wash your clothes on Saturday or Sunday?” To this he said, “ I have to look after my family’s livestock, Miss. I have no chance to wash my clothes. I only got time yesterday to do this.” So, it is difficult. But this cannot mean that he can only attend school once a week! I asked him what would happen in December when we write exams now that he only comes once a week to school. He just said. “ I don’t know, but I have to look after the animals”. Such things you cannot control, you hardly know how to respond to them. (Educator, 04-11)

Conditions in the farms are getting worse. Farmers do not care about the education of these children. The parents are afraid of the farmers. There are times at which children work on the farms – helping out with harvesting. At this time children do not come to school. This is usually around September, for two to three weeks. (Educator, 04-11)

Children are being used to plant and harvest potatoes, and as domestic servants for the bosses. When we come across such cases, we complain to the parents – and quite often, the child comes back to school. There are children who do not attend school at all, especially at the J.B Forster farm. Some just drop out of school because of adolescence – but not too many. I am not sure what are the real causes of all this. (Educator, 04-11)

Legal Literacy

As we have seen from the testimonies, learners' and parents rights in many communities throughout the country are routinely violated. A few common instances include schools not informing parents about fee exemptions; preventing learners from writing exams because of unpaid fees; withholding reports and refusing registration for the following year without prepaid fees. Some schools also use debt collectors who terrorise parents into paying. These violations exist because the national and provincial departments of education have done very little in educating parents and learners about their rights and because of the pressures schools face to generate revenue from parents. When the Department has attempted to inform parents of their rights, for instance through the pamphlet "A Public School Policy Guide: Rights and Responsibilities" (DoE 2002), this paradoxically has resulted in giving misleading information. Stuart Wilson, of the ERP contends that the guide is, in places, a confusing and equivocal document (Wilson 2002). Wilson argues that the document:

…waters down some of the protection and entitlements actually afforded parents and learners in law. Further, its rhetorical emphasis on the balancing of education rights with parental responsibilities to the government agencies, which deliver on them, is extremely problematic. Rights are commonly held to create duties for others, rather than responsibilities for rights-bearers themselves. Yet the Department of Education’s pamphlet risks creating the impression that a learner’s right to receive education is dependent on his or her parents’ discharge of certain responsibilities to the school. This is not so in law, nor should it be.

Section E of the Guide entitled talks about the “responsibilities” of parents. Section B, on school fees is particularly problematic. It is formatted as a set of questions and answers. Two of the questions are inappropriately phrased, making the answers to them misleading:

Question: “If exempted from paying school fees, can my child be refused access to the school?”

Answer: “No. No child may be refused admission to a school due to a parent’s inability to pay school fees”

Question: “If exempted from paying school fees, can my child be refused access to any school activities or have his/her results withheld?”

Answer: “No. The school cannot withhold your child’s results or exclude him/her from any educational activity if you cannot afford to pay school fees.”

This passage is clearly at variance with the Norms and Standards for School Funding. Section 53 of the policy states, “no learner can be denied admission or otherwise discriminated against, on grounds of the parent’s inability or failure to pay fees. [My emphasis]”. This implies that, even if a parent is not exempted from paying fees, the school is not entitled to withhold reports, exclude a child from any school activity, withhold any school facilities simply because a parents has not paid fees. This would appear to be so even if a parent is withholding fees, which, in terms of the formulae set out in the Schools Act and the particular school’s policy, they can actually afford to hand over.

Much of this Section is harmless enough, requesting that parents respond to school notices, liaise with school policies, assist with the discipline of their children and so on, but its also contains a number of injunctions, which, in the context of the rest of the guide, and the levels of poverty faced by most parents in South Africa, are inappropriate and misleading.

In places the document is too laconic to be useful or is even disingenuous in the information it provides. An example is the response to the question: "Can I get financial assistance to pay school fees?" The response is a mere: "You can get partial or complete exemption from paying school fees based on your income". There is nothing here that explains how exemptions should be calculated, how and when to apply to the SGB for exemptions, what should be done if difficulties are encountered including appeal procedures and much other useful information that parents encounter constantly based on information received by the ERP. The guide also informs parents in response to the question on school fees: "You can increase your income by claiming grants that you may qualify for". It then gives the examples of the Child Support Grant and the Foster Child Grant. Surely, as many parents have pointed out in our discussions with them, if the grants are to be used for the cost of education then there is very little that will remain for children's health, welfare and recreational needs.

Throughout the country, initiatives such as the ERP and the Campaign for Global Education have created a groundswell of support for free quality education. In the course of the ERP's work with communities we have heard numerous stories of hardship, dashed expectations and often of an uncaring, aloof and callous bureaucracy. Yet increasingly, silent apathy and hopeless resignation is giving way to creative initiative and courageous attempts by young people, their parents, some teachers and education officials to challenge the prevailing system. More and more people are realizing that ultimately real education transformation will depend on the capacity of the poor and their supporters in different sectors to mobilize, coordinate their struggles and become a powerful social movement.

Rights and Responsibilities in Education

Book Review: Educator workload in South Africa

Notes on the National Department of Education's "Public School Policy Guide: Rights and Responsibilities of Parents"

Eliminating sexual harassment

Bring human rights back into the classroom

Testimonies from the Education Rights Project