Naledi Pandor says approving maths literacy for schools ‘was a disaster’

Nelson Mandela University chancellor Naledi Pandor has criticised mathematical literacy as an alternative to pure mathematics in the further education and training (FET) phase, describing its introduction as a disaster.

The subject was introduced in 2006 during Pandor’s tenure as basic education minister (2004–2009).

In an interview on the Renaissance podcast, Pandor admitted that allowing the subject to be approved was one of the biggest mistakes of her tenure.

“I suppose one makes mistakes,” Pandor said. “I didn’t support maths literacy because I knew it would be a disaster, but I allowed officials to persuade me.”

She explained that introducing the subject significantly reduced the number of pupils taking pure mathematics.

“What I suspected would happen did happen: a lot of students dropped pure maths in favour of maths literacy, which brought down our overall mathematics numbers.”

Despite her opposition to its implementation as a core substitute, Pandor acknowledged the value of the subject.

“I think it is important, but not as a replacement for pure mathematics. Basic numeracy is something all children should possess, but as a country, we need more mathematicians.”

Pandor also addressed the contentious issue of the matric pass mark, stating that she stood firm against lowering standards during her time in office. She noted that while current pass rates are higher than those during her tenure, the matric exams were tougher under her leadership because she prioritised exam quality.

The class of 2025 achieved an all-time high pass rate of 88% nationally under basic education minister Siviwe Gwarube. Pandor saw her lowest of 62.5% in 2008.

“I got into trouble because I insisted on quality matric exam papers, and perhaps they became too difficult,” Pandor said. “During my time, the matric pass rate went down, and naturally, people blamed the minister. However, the quality of the exam papers was excellent, meaning those who passed were top-tier. That is what we should aim to achieve. At the same time, it doesn’t make sense to have high failure rates; we should have explored other supporting options.”

Pandor suggested that low performance is not always a reflection of a pupil’s ability but often points to ineffective teaching. She suggested that the focus should shift toward evaluating teacher competence rather than testing only pupils.

“To drive real change in society, you sometimes have to confront uncomfortable realities. We often assume teachers understand the content, but there is sometimes a fundamental problem there. We must prioritise upgrading teacher training. Many older teachers were trained under the previous education system, which did not adequately equip them to teach foundational skills like reading and writing.”

Pandor defended the closure of teacher training colleges in the 1990s, emphasising that the change was necessary.

“We had many teacher training colleges. While a few were exceptional, a large number were substandard and cost the state immense amounts of money. Closing them was a necessary adjustment to ensure state resources were spent efficiently.”

She added that many of the colleges focused excessively on educational theory rooted in the Bantu Education framework, rather than subject matter expertise.

“We ended up with teachers who held education qualifications but lacked mastery in core subjects such as mathematics or English. Other successful education systems prioritise strong subject knowledge before professional teaching qualifications.”

TimesLIVE