Matavele put poor performance down to "resistance to change", plus the fact that the new curriculum and school programmes had not been properly publicised.
"We have been following up and monitoring the implementation of the curriculum. When a new curriculum is introduced there is always some resistance to change to what is new and unknown.
Before you know something you will reject it, but as you improve your knowledge of it, you will embrace the cause", he said.
He rejected criticism of the overhaul of the examination system.
Today pupils do not have to pass exams at the end of every year to advance from one grade to the next in primary education - a change which has outraged conservative opinion. Matavele said the problem lay, not in this "semi-automatic promotion" of pupils, but in the management of the schools.
He stressed that, under the new curriculum, the school managers should have allocated the best teachers to grades one and two to teach children how to read and write properly. Some managers do this, but others do not.
"The teacher who leads his pupils through grade one should also go with them into grade two, because he knows the difficulties the children may have, and he can polish up their reading skills in grade two, so they can reach the level of 60 words a minute", Matavele added.
"That happens in schools attached to training institutes", he said. "But in schools where managers do not take such care, children have many difficulties".
He explained that, to correct this situation, the education authorities will invest more in teacher training and provide teachers with the necessary instruments, including the curriculum and programmes, which many still do not know.
He added that the curriculum for basic education was based on objectives that pupils must fulfil, and if pupils do not learn, the teacher should be held responsible. "We don't pay teachers to fail pupils", Matavele stressed. "The target is that the pupils should pass with good quality".
SOURCE: AIM
