12 October, 2001

PRESS STATEMENT

On behalf of the members of Christians for Truth (which has a membership of 104,000) we would like to register our concern about the proposed New Curriculum Guidelines by the Minister of Education.

The document is huge (about 1400 pages) and is difficult to give detailed comment.

We therefore distill our arguments down to 7 points:

1. Is it necessary at all to have a new curriculum? Teachers and pupils are struggling to keep up with the present curriculum. A new set of changes (as radical as the proposed document) is bound to add to the confusion. Let teachers do the job which they were trained to do and allow them to teach the basics of education to children who desperately need stability and a sound academic foundation. Confused teachers (which this new curriculum is sure to cause) will only result in confused children.
2. The general tone of the document is one of State ideology and not sound education. It would seem that the useless ideals of `Transformational Outcomes" is the foundational belief system of the writers of the document. We find it ominous that the proposed curriculum vehemently insists on new values (such as appreciation for all religions, a "broad" concept of the family, human evolution, abortion, etc) being inflicted on our children who, after all, belong to families and not the state.
3. Despite the overwhelming detail in the document there are vast gaps which seem to be intentionally excluded. For instance, the history of Christian missions is left out but Islamic advances in Africa included. Slavery seems to refer to the stereotype of the Western form of this injustice but leaves out Islamic slavery in Africa. Is the Education Department wanting only certain aspects of history to be passed on to our next generation?
4. Having examined the Life Orientation and the Social Sciences Learning Areas we are shocked to notice that no mention is made of abstinence education. It seems that there is a heavy emphasis on sex education but not from a family-friendly point of view, which is the view held by the vast majority of South African families. We are very concerned that the Education Department, knowing their history of cooperation with the Planned Parenthood organisation, may be opting for this form of radical sexual information. There is no doubt that the promiscuous education of PPSA is totally rejected by families who seek to instill real values in their offspring.
5. The constant references to neutrality are disturbing in the light of the strong state values, which come through virtually every paragraph. This is an illusion and is in itself a truth-statement about reality. It is fundamentally religious, and is clearly not neutral, in direct contradiction to the document’s stated position.
6. The new curriculum seeks to instill a new value: sympathy towards homosexuality. It is outrageous that "sexual orientation" is to be taught to our children as being on a par with "race, gender, age, disability, culture and religion." To make matters worse our children will assessed and, to make the next grade, will be checked whether: "the learner is able to demonstrate an active commitment to constitutional rights and social responsibilities, and show sensitivity to diverse cultures and belief systems."
7. There is a clear attempt to redefine the family. Under the pretext of "integrating human rights" children (in Grade R) are encouraged to teach a "broad concept of family", which, we presume, may mean homosexual and lesbian marriages.

We suggest that the Revised Curriculum Statement be scrapped completely. For the Education Department to be progressive it may have to simply hold onto some tried and tested teaching techniques and content.

F. Sibisi (President of CFT) 083 2650302

K. Olsen (Deputy President of CFT) 032 4815512

www.cft.org.za