Advertisement

How Can Learning Inequalities be Reduced? Lessons Learnt from Experimental Research in South Africa

  • Stephen TaylorEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Policy Implications of Research in Education book series (PIRE, volume 10)

Abstract

Most researchers would agree that the levels of educational inequality in South Africa are unacceptable and should be reduced quickly. However, there is less agreement on how these inequalities can be reduced or about how quickly they can be reduced. This chapter reviews experimental studies measuring the causal impact of specific policies or programs on educational outcomes in South Africa. The results are instructive about how to improve performance in the low performing part of the school system, but are also sobering with regard to how quickly one can expect to reduce educational inequalities. Programs and policies often do not noticeably improve learning or reduce inequality; and there is no evidence of anything reducing inequality terribly quickly. Frustration with how slowly things change in education should not prompt reckless implementation of untested radical interventions. The extreme levels of inequality in South African education may well justify more radical reforms than have previously been considered, but even then proper evaluation is required to avoid doing harm to the very schools and children who are meant to benefit from those self-same reforms. The most convincing and consistent South African evidence on how to improve learning and teaching in schools serving poor communities points to implementing a structured learning program in the early grades aligned to the existing curriculum, with additional materials integrated into the program, and with regular on-site support to teachers.

References

  1. Blum, J., Krishnan, N., & Legovini, A. (2010). Expanding opportunities for South African youth through math and science: The impact of Dinaledi programme. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  2. Böhmer, B. (2014). Testing numeric: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial of a computer based mathematics intervention in Cape Town high schools. Masters Dissertation, University of Cape Town.Google Scholar
  3. Bouguen, A., Gumede, K., & Gurgand, M. (2015). Parent’s participation, involvement and impact on student achievement: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in South Africa. https://halshs-01241957Google Scholar
  4. Branson, N., Garlick, J., Lam, D., & Leibbrandt, M. (2012). Education and inequality: The South African case. In A Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit Working Paper Number 75. Cape Town: SALDRU, University of Cape Town.Google Scholar
  5. Bruns, B., Evans, D., & Luque, J. (2012). Achieving world class education in Brazil: The next agenda. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  6. Department of Basic Education. (2017). GHS 2015: Focus on schooling 2015. https://wwweducationgovza/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2015Google Scholar
  7. Fleisch, B., & Schöer, V. (2014). Large-scale instructional reform in the Global South: Insights from the mid-point evaluation of the Gauteng primary language and mathematics strategy. South African Journal of Education, 34(3), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fleisch, B., Taylor, S., Schöer, V., & Mabogoane, T. (2017). Failing to catch up in reading in the middle years: The findings of the impact evaluation of the reading catch-up programme in South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 53, 36–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gustafsson, M. (2007). Using the hierarchical linear model to understand school production in South Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 75(1), 84–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gustafsson, M., & Taylor, S. (2012). The state of mathematics, science and technology in our schools. Internal DBE memo.Google Scholar
  11. Gustafsson, M., & Taylor, S. (2018). Treating schools to a new administration: Evidence of the impact of better practices in the system-level administration of schools. Journal of African Economies. https://doi-org.ez.sun.ac.za/10.1093/jae/ejy005
  12. Hellman, L. (2012). GPLMS intersen catch-up programme: Analysis of results. Unpublished report produced for the Gauteng Department of Education.Google Scholar
  13. Imbens, G. W., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 5–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Machin, S., & McNally, S. (2005). Gender and student achievement in English schools. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(3), 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Piper, B. (2009). Integrated education program: Impact study of SMRS using early grade reading assessment in three provinces in South Africa. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC Retrieved from https://www.eddataglobal.org/courses/survey/resources/Handout_3_FINAL_RSA_SMRS_EGRA_Impact_Study.pdf Google Scholar
  16. Sailors, M., Hoffman, J. V., Pearson, P. D., Beretvas, S. N., & Matthee, B. (2010). The effects of first-and second-language instruction in Rural South African Schools. Bilingual Research Journal, 33(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Spaull, N. (2013). Poverty & privilege: Primary school inequality in South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(5), 436–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Taylor, S. (2011). Uncovering indicators of effective school management in South Africa using the national school effectiveness study. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers. 10(11).Google Scholar
  19. Taylor, S., & Von Fintel, M. (2016). Estimating the impact of language of instruction in South African primary schools: A fixed effects approach. Economics of Education Review, 50, 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Taylor, S., & Watson, P. (2015). The impact of study guides on “matric” performance: Evidence from a randomised experiment. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers 13(15)Google Scholar
  21. Taylor, S., & Yu, D. (2009). The importance of socio-economic status in determining educational achievement in South Africa. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers.Google Scholar
  22. Taylor, S., Van der Berg, S., Reddy, V., & Janse van Rensburg, D. (2015). The evolution of educational inequalities through secondary school: Evidence from a South African panel study. Development Southern Africa, 32(4), 425–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Van Broekhuizen, H., Van der Berg, S., & Hofmeyr, H. (2016). Higher education access and outcomes for the 2008 national matric cohort. Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers, 16/16Google Scholar
  24. Van der Berg, S. (2008). How effective are poor schools? Poverty and educational outcomes in South Africa. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34(3), 145–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Van der Berg, S., Burger, C., Burger, R., de Vos, M., Du Rand, G., Gustafsson, M., Moses, E., Shepherd, D., Spaull, N., & Taylor, S. (2011). Low quality education as a poverty trap. Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers: 25/11Google Scholar
  26. Van der Berg, S., Girdwood, E., Shepherd, D., Van Wyk, C., Kruger, J., Viljoen, J., Ezeobi, O., & Ntaka, P. (2013). The impact of the introduction of grade R on learning outcomes. University of Stellenbosch: RESEP.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Basic EducationPretoriaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations