The functions of School Development Committees

Sunday News

16 May 2010

By Lulu Brenda Harris

THE late Buzzie Bavasi, an American, put it well when he said: “We live by the Golden Rule. Those who have the gold make the rules.”

Many parents would testify Bavasi’s was right when it comes to those who set school levies. People who have been elected into School Development Associations or School Development Committees seem to serve the purpose of the rich. It is the public view that this is a deliberate ploy to have the rich spearheading the setting of levies at certain amounts as the trend is to choose those who are rich, the haves, while the have-nots are sidelined in these committees.
Mr Gibson Moyo a parent accused the bodies of not taking their views on board but adopting and implementing what suits the committee members, which mostly would be composed of rich people. “The committees should consider the communities at large and probably use the average income to peg their fees. The rich manipulate the process and I think even if we are to vote for who sits on the board the parent driving the Mercedes Benz would be voted in by virtue of the car he drives despite his capabilities,” he said.
Mr Mlibazisi Phiri, head of an SDAs in Mpopoma said their role was to look at parents’ capabilities against the needs of the schools. He, however, said the issue of incentives caused conflict between parents and school authorities, as the latter seemed to pursue their own ideals. “The issue of paying teacher incentives is a catalyst to all problems being faced by parents and schools. From the levies charged a certain percentage goes toward incentives so it is not surprising that school heads and teachers want high levies. High levies mean more incentives for them. Incentives have killed our schools. Headmasters and teachers have gone wild. I urge the minister to look at this issue urgently,” he stressed. Mr Phiri said it was unfortunate that some headmasters had forgotten what they were employed to do as they were focusing more on fees and levies.
“Some headmasters actually hire people to attend meetings so that when parents are voting, the decision weighs heavily from the hired hands. That is why parents have to attend meetings in their numbers to outnumber whoever would be hired. Headmasters and teachers should concentrate on teaching children while we the SDAs, the parents, look at the levies,” he said.
The head of SDAs encouraged parents to speak out during meetings and elect people who are capable of executing their duties well not necessarily the rich. “After the meetings are over, you hear parents complaining but they were mum inside. I know that sometimes parents elect somebody who is financially stable as they seem to have the idea that if he steals money from the SDC they can easly recover it but a the end of the day when things go wrong they complain,” he said.
Mrs Patricia Tshabalala, a patron of Vulindlela Guidance, a centre that looks after orphans, echoed Mr Phiri’s sentiments adding that incentives were the “root of all evil” as the love for money had caused teachers to stop teaching in class and conduct extra lessons. She called for the abolition of extra lessons because teachers were manipulating the process to make more money. “They are no longer teaching in class because they know teaching extra lessons is more rewarding. Look at the number of girls dropping out of high schools, i’s because they become pregnant at these so-called extra lessons,” she said.
Zanu-PF’s secretary for education, and educationist, Dr Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, said the concept of school development associations was established because of the problems and complaints arising in the school administration. He said before the headmaster and the deputy were facing problems when it came to resources, school fees and other additional amounts. “The ministry then decided to decentralise and opted to localise the paying of fees. For example schools fees in government schools were once paid to Central Government, but about 10 years ago they were decentralised and paid directly to the school. “This enabled schools to identify children who needed assistance for instance through the Basic Education Assistance Module (BEAM). The point is decisions were made locally and the people could charge their own levies and complaints that the government was delaying or there were numerous delays in Harare were done away with,” he said.
Dr Ndlovu said the SDA was a necessary branch of the education system because of the role they play. He said the bodies’ mandate was to build, develop and maintain school buildings and grounds and support teaching and learning. “SDAs know the needs of the school, as they work closely with the headmaster. The SDA knows what type of work needs to be done at the school, be it on the school grounds, how many books are needed to fill the library and so on. “The chairman of the SDA is not the headmaster but a parent. They are there to assist in the schools’ maintenance. If funds are availed by BEAM, the SDA knows what to do to help those who need assistance,” he said.
Usually parents do not understand the functions of their committee nor do they understand what constitutes one. The fundi dismissed the notion that SDAs and SDCs exist primarily to cause conflict between schools and parents.
“These bodies are parents’ associations elected by parents. The SDA looks at the needs of the schools and capabilities of the parents. The SDAs or SDCs are supposed to sit down with the parents and make paying arrangements,” he said.
Dr Ndlovu, however, put the blame on parents who he urged to attend meetings and debate levy proposals, which most of them do not do. “Before the SDA decides on an amount, the school calls for a meeting so that both parties can debate the issue. Parents have no one to blame but themselves, they should attend meetings. What makes them not to attend?” he asked.
The educationist said when meetings are called, the schools have registers that are filled in by parents so that the ministry could check the number of parents who would have attended and approved the proposed figure. “If parents are present at meetings, they can point out what they want. They should not play the blame game and say the permanent secretary said this because the procedure is local,” he said.
One parent said although they attended meetings, the meetings were held in an atmosphere that was not conducive to free debate, which makes it difficult for them to express their views. “The atmosphere is intimidating. If you object to whatever is said, your child will be neglected and I don’t want my child to suffer because I can’t afford to pay the levies. Is it a crime for a civil servant to have three children?” said a vexed Mr Farai Gumbo.
Another parent alleged that since the establishment of the SDAs and the SDCs, committee members and school heads have become “fat” an apparent sign that they are lining their own pockets instead of concentrating on the growth of schools.
A survey titled The Rapid Assessment of Primary and Secondary Schools done by the Minister of Education’s National Education Advisory Board (NEAB) , whose results were released last year, indicated that transparency was an important principle that enabled parents to know exactly how their money was being spent. The report cites that due to shortage of staff, the ministry has not been auditing school accounts regularly and indeed is only likely to do so if a serious anomaly is reported. “Instead audits should be required on an annual basis,” it reads.
Accountability makes those in whose care school funds are to be responsible while it enables parents to feel comfortable with paying additional sums of money for their children’s education.
“We are meant to carry out audits but due to inadequate funds we have not. The ministry doesn’t have enough vehicles so that officers can go around conducting audits. That is why we rely on the provincial education officers,” said Minister Coltart.
In rural communities, poor parents hate teachers demanding food and salary supplements. They believe teachers are better off already and should not be given additional incentives.
The Government has been blamed for folding its arms and letting parents battle it out for themselves, more so with the confusion surrounding the resolution of civil servants salary dispute.
“The Government always says it’s broke. How can it be broke if the ministers drive flashy cars, hold meetings in expensive hotels, eat good food and look at the number of trips they take outside the country, surely the Government has the money,” said Ms Loutte Miller.
Parents have argued that they are under financial stress and have many commitments that need their attention like the payment of bills. They resent paying additional amounts, which they suspect will end up in the teachers’ pockets.  “Schools have numerous levies that we have to fork out money for. Count them — sport levy, library levy, grounds levy and so on, not forgetting the civies levy.
“Schools have a tendency of having this civies day every two weeks. It’s a dollar if your child wears her dress, plus your child will say there is a disco in the afternoon, another dollar is gone. Khonapha babili bonke befuna ukuhamba, akulaplan,” said Mrs Sophie Tshuma.
In order to guide SDAs and SDCs, the minister said funds derived from levies should be spent in consultation with school heads in accordance with the following guidelines:
“Repairs or maintenance minimum 10 percent, sports or culture minimum 10 percent, administration minimum 15 percent, educational materials minimum 40 percent, teacher incentives maximum 10 to 20 percent, support staff maximum 10 to 20 percent.”
The education survey said the recommended percentages were not ideal, as a school charging a levy of US$25 per term and one charging US$250 a term would have very different outcomes.
That takes us back to the bottlenecks of yesteryear where the poor were clustered at the bottom while the rich are dispersed at the top.
The education report says a further difficulty is that former Group A schools (schools formerly reserved for white children) now had about 50 percent of their pupils coming from poor families, who are either domestic workers or from nearby high-density suburbs which have been zoned with the low density school.
“These low income families are definitely unable to pay high fees. One solution is to give the school fees subcommittees in low-density schools the power to decide which parents can be allowed to pay the high-density school fees,” reads the report.
Mr Wilson Moyo, the headmaster of Northlea High School, said SDAs are the backbone of schools. “The money collected from the SDA is the one running the school, from plumbing to transport. The SDA levy maintains the school,” he said. The amounts are more often than not out of the reach of low-income earners given the economic situation.
Zimbabwe seems to have obliterated the middle class tag to remain with the high and low classes. The majority are in the latter class — the low class — and have children in various schools that demand high levies. When the SDA or SDC is composed of the rich, their decisions as regards the level of levies are based on their own pockets, not the ability of the poor folks to pay such levies. Some of these rich people are privileged because their employers pay their children’s school fees while the poor struggle to eke out a living or barely make ends meet. Sadly, this has resulted in parents clashing with authorities and schools have been marred by confusion over levies and incentives. There is general animosity among parents, teachers, school development associations or committees and the ministry.
Last year, the Minister of Education, Sport, Arts and Culture, Senator David Coltart, issued a ministerial statement regarding approved tuition fees in Government schools and Zimbabwe Schools Examination Council examination fees for 2009.  This was in response to the difficulties parents had experienced in paying school fees in view of the need to respond to varied resources and needs in different communities.
The minister decided, with the approval of Cabinet, to decentralise decision making to SDAs and SDCs, to “enable them to determine, in conjunction with school heads, what is required to run their respective schools to the best of their ability.”
The Ministry of Education said the idea behind SDAs and SDCs was that parents would have a say on how much they would pay towards school development. Accordingly, Government set the standard school fees while schools in collaboration with parents set the levies. Despite the shift, parents are naturally confused about the double payment.
The process of setting fees is chaotic, as both the school administration and the parents lack proper guidelines and the problem of conflict of interest normally occurs.
An SDC member who refused to be identified said parents had to be reasonable, pay levies so that the schools could develop and keep the system going. “It is hard for everyone but the schools have to develop so that their children can actually learn something. Parents need to be sensitised that nothing can move forward if they want to pay $5. Schools that demand more money produce good results. It should be a tug of war on both sides,” he said.
At the end of the day parents are placed in a catch 22 situation. If they want their children to learn and enjoy the facilities of the school they have to pay.
Without levies it is difficult to run schools unless additional funding is available. The ball is now in the Government’s court.