ECD development, education pathways, graduate transitions, and disability inclusion initiatives: engagement with stakeholder departments

Video The joint Portfolio Committee meeting focused on strengthening learner transitions from basic education into higher education, employment, and entrepreneurship, with participation from the Departments of Basic Education, Higher Education and Training, Employment and Labour, and Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities. The meeting resumed discussions initiated the previous year, and sought to assess whether government interventions aimed at improving educational pathways, skills development, and labour market outcomes, were producing meaningful results for young people. The Chairperson emphasised the urgency of addressing rising youth unemployment, and stressed the importance of coordinated government action to improve learner transitions into post-school opportunities, address skills mismatches, and strengthen access to early childhood development (ECD). Particular concern was also raised about learners with disabilities, many of whom continued to face barriers transitioning from school into higher education and employment. The joint presentation of the four departments outlined collaborative interventions intended to strengthen learner transitions across the education system and into employment. The presentation focused on ECD professionalisation, teacher development, the Three Streams Model, youth employment initiatives, inclusive education, technical and vocational Education and training (TVET) reforms, and labour market pathways. While departments highlighted ongoing progress, Members used the discussion to rigorously test whether programmes were translating into measurable improvements. A major focus of discussion centred on the Presidential Youth Employment Initiative, particularly the teacher assistant programme implemented in schools. Members questioned whether the programme was genuinely equipping young people with meaningful skills, or merely providing temporary employment before participants returned to unemployment. Strong concerns were raised about sustainability, with Members asking what happened to assistants once contracts expired and whether the government had systems to track beneficiaries after they exited the programme. Questions were asked about whether participants received accredited training, transferable workplace skills, or certification that improved future employability. Members also questioned whether teacher assistants were being properly utilised to support teaching and learning, or were simply performing administrative duties without gaining substantive experience. In response, the Department of Basic Education (DBE) acknowledged that the programme relied on temporary funding allocations rather than permanent budget baselines, making long term sustainability difficult. While many participants gained workplace exposure and practical experience, tracking long-term outcomes remained challenging. Members questioned whether the Three Streams Model had progressed beyond policy rhetoric into meaningful implementation capable of reducing learner dropouts and improving employability. Significant concern was expressed about the absence of clear evidence showing that academic, vocational, occupational, and technical streams were improving learner outcomes. Members requested measurable data on learner throughput, dropout reduction, and school participation in the programme. Questions were also raised about institutional readiness, particularly whether schools possessed the infrastructure, workshops, laboratories and equipment necessary to deliver technical and vocational subjects effectively. Members questioned the relationship between technical schools, TVET colleges, and labour market needs, asking whether sufficient partnerships existed with the private sector to ensure pathways into employment. Concerns were raised that learners could complete vocational programmes yet remain unemployed if qualifications were not aligned with actual labour market demand. Departments responded by acknowledging that implementation of the Three Streams Model remained gradual and resource-intensive. They conceded that infrastructure deficits, equipment shortages, and limited institutional readiness remained major barriers to full implementation. However, they maintained that despite slow progress, the model remained central to reducing learner disengagement and strengthening transitions into post-school opportunities. ECD generated extensive discussion, with Members expressing concern about quality, regulation, accessibility, and workforce development. They questioned whether the government had a coherent framework for supporting privately-owned ECD centres, particularly in poorer communities where many children lacked access to quality services. Serious concerns were raised regarding practitioner qualifications, with Members noting that many ECD practitioners lacked matric or formal post-school training. They requested measurable information on Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), bursary support, qualification pathways, timelines for professionalisation, and financial assistance for practitioners seeking qualifications. Safety and accountability concerns at ECD centres also featured prominently, with Members questioning vetting processes for staff and provincial implementation failures regarding subsidy distribution, despite national funding commitments. In response, departments outlined ongoing efforts to professionalise the ECD sector through training programmes, recognised qualifications, and workforce recognition frameworks. Officials explained that a mixed model involving home-based and centre-based ECD provision was being pursued to expand access, particularly in underserved communities. They stressed that while formal qualifications remained important, practical skills development and practitioner support were equally necessary. However, they acknowledged ongoing challenges, including low qualification levels, funding constraints, uneven provincial implementation, and barriers affecting practitioner access to training. Disability inclusion and support for learners with special educational needs featured prominently throughout the meeting. Members questioned how many learners with disabilities remained outside the education system and what measures existed to improve placement, retention, and progression into higher education and employment. Concerns were raised regarding inadequate access to Braille instruction, limited curriculum options for blind learners, shortages of specialised learning materials, and delays in completing infrastructure projects at special schools. Members also questioned the readiness of universities and TVET colleges to accommodate students with disabilities, and whether sufficient workplace opportunities existed to support transitions into employment. The departments responded that workplace exposure initiatives and partnerships were being explored to strengthen school-to-work transitions. However, they acknowledged persistent weaknesses, particularly around certification for learners leaving special schools. They admitted that delays in developing recognised certification pathways had created uncertainty for learners seeking further education or employment, and said that interim school reports were currently being used while formal systems were finalised. A broader and recurring issue throughout the meeting concerned youth unemployment and the notion of “skills mismatch.” Members challenged the government’s repeated reliance on the argument that unemployment stemmed from shortages of relevant skills, arguing that this explanation failed to account for wider structural challenges such as weak economic growth, corruption, poor labour market absorption, and maladministration. They questioned why many technically-trained learners, artisans, and graduates remained unemployed despite longstanding claims of skills shortages. Questions were also raised regarding which skills were oversupplied, which sectors experienced shortages, and whether government planning was sufficiently evidence-based. Departments acknowledged that labour market transitions remained complex, and agreed that skills mismatches alone could not explain unemployment trends. They said that improving coordination between education, training, and labour market institutions remained a priority, but admitted that limitations in data systems weakened planning and responsiveness. The effectiveness of TVET programmes, particularly the National Certificate Vocation (NCV) and National Technical Education Diploma (NATED) qualifications, also came under close scrutiny. Members questioned whether these programmes had successfully bridged the skills gap and improved employability, or whether reforms were needed due to poor outcomes. Questions were raised regarding qualification relevance, trade testing funding, transition into employment, and whether TVET institutions adequately responded to labour market demands. In response, education officials explained that the vocational certificate programme was being gradually phased out because it was not effectively serving its original target group. TVET colleges would increasingly shift toward occupational qualifications intended to better align with labour market needs. However, officials acknowledged gaps in available data, and indicated that written responses would be provided on student numbers, disability enrolments, transition rates, and programme outcomes. One of the strongest themes emerging from the discussion was criticism of fragmented and outdated government data systems. Members repeatedly expressed frustration at departments’ inability to provide comprehensive statistics on learner transitions from school into universities, TVET colleges, Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA) programmes, private institutions, entrepreneurship, or employment. They argued that the absence of an integrated learner tracking system undermined government planning and contributed to skills mismatches and youth unemployment. Departments conceded that tracking long-term outcomes remained difficult, and undertook to submit written responses addressing outstanding information requests. Consideration of an oversight report on schools in Mpumalanga led to Members proposing stronger recommendations relating to infrastructure maintenance, disability support, teacher vetting, financial accountability, school management, scholar transport, water shortages, and coordination with municipalities. Additional monitoring mechanisms were also proposed to ensure implementation of Committee recommendations.