ABOLISHING THE PSLE: BOTSWANA’S EDUCATION REFORM TEST

Botswana’s primary school leavers are entering a period of potentially profound change. The Ministry of Child Welfare & Basic Education (MCW&BE) has made a high-level decision to discontinue the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) from 2029 and the Botswana Examinations Council (BEC) has already begun preparing for the transition. This is not a proposal at the margins of the education system. It concerns an examination that has been part of Botswana’s public examination since the 1980s and has long marked the end of seven years of basic primary education.

For parents who grew up writing the PSLE, for teachers who have prepared generations of pupils for it, and for communities accustomed to following examination results, this is more than an administrative adjustment. It is a change in educational culture. The important question, therefore, is not whether the decision is bold. It plainly is. The harder question is whether Botswana is prepared to replace an established mechanism of selection and accountability with something evidently better.

Rationale for Abolition

The rationale for reform is without doubt understandable. Botswana’s education system has changed substantially since the period in which the present examination structure was established. Universal and expanded access to basic education has altered the conditions under which primary schooling operates, while the country’s curriculum reforms increasingly emphasize competencies, application of knowledge and broader educational outcomes. The government’s stated direction is consequently towards a system in which assessment supports learning rather than allowing a single examination to dominate it.

A distinction has to made between the fact that the PSLE is not simply a test taken at the end of Standard 7 and that its consequences are significant. It can influence what teachers teach, what pupils practice and what parents demand. Examination preparation can become particularly intense in the upper primary years. Yet it would be unfair to suggest that every teacher or school reduces education to examination drilling. Many teachers continue to teach broadly and creatively while preparing learners for the national examination. The issue is therefore not the existence of examinations as such, but the weight attached to one examination and the incentives created by that weight.

Potential Positives

If the reform is implemented well, the first potential gain is a broader conception of learning. Removing the PSLE as the main gateway out of primary school could create more room for teachers to devote sustained attention to reading, mathematics, practical work, creativity, problem-solving, communication and other competencies. This is consistent with Botswana’s wider curriculum modernization agenda, including the General Education Curriculum and Assessment Framework (GECAF) and the country’s increasing emphasis on competencies and 21st-century skills.

The second potential gain is a healthier assessment culture where learner’s achievement is not be inferred from a single examination sitting alone. Classroom performance, projects, practical activities, oral work, reading development and progress over time can provide valuable evidence. Continuous assessment, however, is not automatically more valid simply because it is continuous. Poorly designed classroom assessments can be repetitive, subjective and administratively burdensome. The reform will succeed only if BEC equips teachers to assess learning reliably and if schools are subject to credible moderation.

Legitimate Concerns

The PSLE has provided a common national reference point over the years. It has made it possible to compare performance across schools and educational regions and has supplied information for educational planning. Removing it without replacing those functions would create an accountability gap. Botswana should therefore distinguish between assessment for individual learners and assessment of the education system. Children do not necessarily need a high-stakes exit examination in order for the country to continue measuring whether schools are producing satisfactory learning outcomes.

A sensible replacement would combine teacher-based assessment with independent national monitoring. Botswana already has experience that can be developed further. The Botswana Educational Achievement Monitor (BEAM), developed with the BEC, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IAEEA) and the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), is a sample-based assessment designed to monitor learning at Standard 4. Such instruments are valuable precisely because they can provide system-level evidence without turning every learner into a candidate competing for a national rank. The Southern & Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Education Quality (SACMEQ) can provide an additional regional comparison. These assessments should inform intervention, resource allocation and curriculum improvement rather than become another high-stakes gatekeeping mechanism.

Continuous assessment requires teachers to design worthwhile tasks, establish clear criteria, record evidence, provide feedback and participate in moderation. It can increase workload if it is treated simply as additional paperwork. A teacher responsible for a large class cannot produce high-quality individual assessment records indefinitely without time, manageable class sizes, administrative support and appropriate digital systems. If the 2029 transition is to be credible, assessment literacy and moderation should be treated as a national professional-development priority from now, not as a training exercise introduced shortly before the PSLE disappears.

Continuous assessment can also appear more humane while quietly becoming less equal. A learner attending a well-resourced urban school may have access to books, computers, specialist teachers and extensive enrichment, while another may be assessed in a crowded or rural classroom with limited materials. If school-based results are used for progression without adequate moderation, differences in resources can become differences in grades. National standards therefore remain necessary even when national high-stakes examinations are reduced.

Placement into junior secondary school is another issue that cannot be left vague. The PSLE has been closely connected with progression and admission arrangements. Once it disappears, parents will reasonably ask how places will be allocated, particularly where demand exceeds capacity. The answer should be published before the new system begins. Criteria could include catchment arrangements, school capacity and evidence from moderated learner records, with transparent procedures for exceptional or specialized cases. Whatever model is adopted, it must be understandable, auditable and resistant to favouritism.

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS

International comparisons offer useful lessons, but they should be used carefully. Finland has no national standardized tests for pupils in basic education and teachers carry substantial responsibility for assessment. Their model rests on strong teacher preparation, professional autonomy, national curriculum guidance and extensive support structures. It is not evidence that abolishing tests alone produces good education. Kenya provides a more directly relevant African example. The Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) was last administered in 2023, after which the Kenya Primary School Education Assessment (KPSEA) became part of a competency-based system designed to monitor learner progress rather than reproduce the old ranking function. Botswana can learn from Kenya’s transition, but it should not copy it mechanically.

The same caution applies to Southern Africa. South Africa’s system should not be described as having simply replaced examinations with continuous assessment. Its Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) combine school-based assessment with formal examinations and standardized assessment arrangements. Namibia also uses continuous assessment for promotion, but its system retains formal assessment requirements at several stages. These examples demonstrate that the choice is not between examinations and no examinations. The real policy question is how different forms of assessment should be combined and what purposes each should serve.

The psychological argument also deserves precision because examinations can be stressful, particularly when their consequences are high. Thus, reducing excessive examination pressure is a legitimate educational objective. However, claims that the PSLE itself causes widespread anxiety, or that its removal will automatically reduce stigma, require Botswana-specific evidence. Reform should therefore be accompanied by baseline research on learner wellbeing, teacher workload, attendance, repetition, learning outcomes and parental perceptions. Otherwise, policymakers may know that the system has changed without knowing whether it has improved.

The transition should also protect learners who are falling behind. Removing the PSLE must not become an excuse for allowing pupils to progress without adequate reading, writing and mathematical foundations. Botswana already has experience with early assessment and remediation. The reform should strengthen these mechanisms, particularly in the first years of primary school, when learning difficulties can often be identified and addressed before they become entrenched. The central principle should be simple; early identification, timely intervention and evidence-based support.

Public communication will matter almost as much as technical design. The PSLE has acquired a social meaning beyond its examination function. Results are discussed by families, schools and communities, and the examination has become part of the rhythm of national education. If the government explains only that the PSLE is being abolished, some parents may understandably interpret the change as a relaxation of standards. The message should instead be that the standard remains, but the means of measuring it are changing. That claim must then be demonstrated through credible evidence.

THE ULTIMATE TEST

There is also a broader philosophical issue. Abolishing the PSLE can be understood as a vote of confidence in the proposition that education is more than examination performance. That is a defensible proposition. However, trust in teachers must be accompanied by investment in teacher quality, assessment systems and professional accountability. Trust without systems is weak governance; systems without professional trust become bureaucracy.

Botswana therefore has a limited but important window between the policy decision and full implementation. The country should use the planned pilot period to test new assessment arrangements, test placement mechanisms, consult teachers and parents, establish moderation procedures, strengthen early literacy and numeracy interventions, and publish evidence from the pilot exercise. The transition should be judged not by how quickly the PSLE disappears, but by whether the replacement system measures learning more fairly and supports better teaching.

The PSLE served an important purpose in Botswana’s primary educational history. Its abolition does not make examinations inherently wrong, nor does it make continuous assessment inherently superior. It creates an opportunity to build a more balanced assessment system in which national monitoring protects standards while classroom assessment captures the development of the whole learner.

The ultimate test of this reform will therefore come after the headlines have faded. Can Botswana identify a child who is struggling to read early enough to intervene? Can it recognize genuine mathematical understanding rather than memorized procedures? Can parents trust the placement system? Can a learner in a rural school receive the same recognition of achievement as a learner in a well-resourced urban school? Can policymakers tell, from reliable evidence, whether the education system is improving?

If Botswana can answer those questions convincingly, the end of the PSLE will be more than the disappearance of an examination. It will represent a shift towards a system in which assessment serves learning, national standards remain visible, and accountability is shared by teachers, schools, parents and the state. That is the reform worth pursuing.

Oabona Moses Sello

Teacher, Blogger & Writer

Grab a copy of his published book titled “CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOL: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH FROM AFRICA; BOTSWANA.”

obmsello@gmail.com/+267 73 352 030                                

 

 

Reinstatement of Corporal Punishment: A Response to Hon. Khan’s Motion

 Member of Parliament for Molepolole North, Arafat Khan’s motion calling for the reinstatement of corporal punishment as a regulated disciplinary measure in schools (Botswana National Assembly Order Paper; Motion #15 24/07/26), has immediately reignited one of Botswana's most divisive education debates. For some, the motion represents a return to an outdated disciplinary practice that conflicts with children's rights. For others, it reflects growing frustration among teachers and parents who believe discipline in schools has deteriorated since corporal punishment was suspended.

However, to view this motion simply as a debate about caning would be to misunderstand its significance. The motion is, above all, a reminder that education is inherently political. Decisions about schools are never confined to classrooms. They reflect competing ideas about authority, citizenship, culture, human rights and the role of government. Parliament is therefore not merely debating a disciplinary tool but a kind of society Botswana wishes to build through its education system.

Education & Politics Interplay

Education is often presented as a technical profession driven by research, curriculum specialists and educational psychology. Politics, on the other hand, is driven by public opinion, electoral accountability and competing social values. In reality, these two worlds cannot be separated.

Every major education reform in Botswana has been political. Decisions to expand universal basic education, revise the national curriculum, introduce inclusive education, reform examinations and abolish corporal punishment have all required political approval before becoming educational policy. Schools operate within laws passed by Parliament, budgets approved by politicians and policies developed by government ministries. Consequently, every classroom is influenced by political decisions made far beyond the school gate.

This explains why Mr Khan's motion deserves serious consideration regardless of whether one supports or opposes corporal punishment. It reflects an important democratic principle, namely that Members of Parliament are elected not simply to endorse government policy but to voice the concerns of their constituents. If teachers, parents and communities believe that discipline has weakened, Parliament is expected to provide a platform for those concerns.

The motion therefore illustrates a fundamental truth that education policy may be drafted by experts, but it survives only when it enjoys public legitimacy.

International Standards vs. Local Reality

The suspension of corporal punishment in Botswana was largely influenced by the country's commitment to international human rights obligations, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). The Ministry of Child Welfare and Basic Education argued that positive discipline better protects children's dignity while promoting safer learning environments.

This reasoning follows a global trend where countries such as Sweden, Finland and New Zealand abandoned corporal punishment decades ago. Research had linked physical punishment to increased aggression, anxiety and reduced trust between learners and educators. Many international organizations now regard corporal punishment as incompatible with modern educational practices. However, international standards do not automatically resolve local concerns.

Many teachers across Botswana continue to report increasing levels of learner indiscipline, disrespect towards educators, bullying and classroom disruption. Parents similarly express concern that some children no longer respond to traditional disciplinary measures. Whether these perceptions are entirely accurate is almost secondary. In politics, public perception often carries as much weight as statistical evidence because elected representatives respond to lived experiences rather than academic literature alone.

This is where Mr Khan's motion finds political relevance. Rather than challenging children's rights directly, it questions whether Botswana has adequately prepared schools for a post-corporal punishment era. It asks whether government has replaced the cane with equally effective alternatives or merely removed one disciplinary tool without strengthening others. That is a legitimate public policy question.

Understanding Parliament's Role

Some observers have dismissed the motion as political grandstanding. However, that interpretation overlooks the constitutional role of Parliament in a representative democracy. Members of Parliament exist to articulate the concerns of the citizens who elect them. They are expected to question government policy, scrutinize executive decisions and initiate debates on issues affecting their constituencies. Whether one agrees with Mr Khan's proposal or not, the motion performs an important democratic function by compelling government to publicly defend its policy and explain how schools will manage discipline without corporal punishment.

Education policy should never become insulated from democratic accountability simply because it is informed by expert knowledge. Equally, political popularity should not override educational research or children's constitutional rights. The task lies in balancing democratic responsiveness with evidence-based policymaking. If educational policy ignores communities, implementation then becomes increasingly difficult. If political pressure ignores evidence, policy risks becoming reactive rather than effective. Good governance thus requires both perspectives to inform one another. In this respect, the current parliamentary debate should be welcomed, not feared. Healthy democracies encourage rigorous public discussion before educational reforms become permanently embedded.

Beyond the Debate

Public debate has become increasingly polarized between those who insist that corporal punishment is inherently abusive and those who believe it is the only effective means of maintaining discipline. Both positions oversimplify a far more complex reality. The question Botswana should be asking is not whether learners should fear punishment. It is whether schools possess sufficient capacity to cultivate disciplined, respectful and responsible citizens through methods that are both effective and consistent with contemporary educational values. The long-term objective of education extends beyond maintaining order in classrooms. Schools are expected to develop critical thinking, responsible citizenship, emotional maturity and mutual respect. These outcomes are unlikely to be achieved through punishment alone, just as they cannot be achieved through permissiveness or inconsistent discipline.

Instead of revisiting old divisions, Botswana could use this moment to undertake a comprehensive national review of school discipline. Such a review should examine learner behaviour, teacher wellbeing, parental expectations, school leadership, counselling services, community involvement and the effectiveness of alternative disciplinary strategies. Most importantly, it should rely on Botswana's own evidence. Policy is strongest when it reflects both international best practice and credible local research. Decisions affecting Botswana's schools should ultimately be informed by Botswana's classrooms.

The Real Question

 The debate surrounding the motion is ultimately not about the cane but confidence in the education system. Parents want assurance that schools remain orderly and teachers want practical support to manage increasingly complex classrooms. Government seeks to uphold children's rights while modernizing educational practice and Parliament seeks to ensure that public concerns receive a democratic hearing. These objectives are not mutually exclusive. The real challenge is to reconcile them through thoughtful policy rather than ideological confrontation. If the parliamentary debate encourages government to strengthen counselling services, improve teacher training, invest in learner support and commission rigorous national research, then the motion will have served a valuable purpose regardless of its legislative outcome.

If, however, the discussion remains confined to a simple choice between restoring or rejecting corporal punishment, Botswana risks overlooking the deeper structural issues that continue to shape discipline in its schools. Education has always reflected the values of the society it serves. It is therefore unsurprising that disagreements about discipline have reached the floor of Parliament. Schools produce future citizens and citizens are shaped not only by what they learn but also by how they are governed. The question before Botswana is therefore much larger than whether the cane should return. It is whether the nation is prepared to invest in an education system capable of maintaining discipline, protecting children's rights and supporting teachers with equal determination. That is the debate Parliament should ultimately be having and that which Botswana cannot afford to avoid.

obmsello@gmail.com/73352030                                

Oabona Moses Sello

Teacher, Blogger & Writer

Look out of for his upcoming book titled “CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOL: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH FROM AFRICA; BOTSWANA.”

BOTSWANA'S SAFE SCHOOL TRANSPORT: WHY HON. HIKUAMA'S MOTION MATTERS

 

When Parliament adopted the motion by Hon. Hikuama, Member of Parliament for Maun West, calling for the development of a comprehensive national framework for safe and student friendly school transport, the debate extended far beyond the Parliamentary Accounts Committee (PAC) examinations. It addressed a fundamental question about Botswana's education system. Children cannot benefit fully from education if they cannot reach school safely, consistently and with dignity.

In supporting the motion, Hon. Mophuting-Dikoloti, Member of Parliament for Gaborone Bonnington North, observed that the motion was about protecting children and ensuring that distance or circumstance does not become a barrier to education. Her sentiment captures the significance of the motion. In that access to education is not determined only by classrooms, teachers and textbooks. It also depends on whether learners can travel to and from school safely each day.

A Historical Challenge

The motion responds to concerns that have existed for many years. As early as February 11, 2026 this year, Parliament was informed that some learners from Dintoroko, Gamononyane and Mmamhiko were still being transported to school in donkey carts. In response to a parliamentary question by Hon. Manyeneng, Member of Parliament for Mmopane-Metsimotlhabe, the Minister responsible for Local Government and Traditional Affairs informed parliament that he has directed councils to discontinue the practice and replace it with safer transport arrangements.

While that directive addressed an immediate concern, it also exposed a wider policy gap. A directive provides a temporary solution, whereas a national policy establishes uniform standards, defines responsibilities and creates accountability. Without such a framework, school transport arrangements may continue to differ significantly from one district to another, depending largely on the resources and priorities of individual local authorities.

Hidden Costs

School transport affects far more than daily student attendance. It influences punctuality, concentration, academic performance and student wellbeing. Teachers across the country regularly observe that learners who travel long distances often arrive at school tired, particularly during periods of extreme heat in summer or heavy rainfall. Some arrive late, while others miss school altogether when transport becomes unavailable or unsafe. Parents, especially in remote communities, may decide to keep younger children at home rather than expose them unnecessary risks.

Over time, these seemingly ordinary transport challenges contribute to absenteeism, lower educational achievement and, in some cases, increased risk of learners leaving school prematurely. Safe transport should therefore be regarded as an essential component of educational access rather a separate logistical issue.

Varied Challenges

A national transport policy, must recognize that Botswana’s transport challenges are not uniform but varied. In rural and remote areas, the principal challenges are long travelling distances, dispersed settlements and limited public transport. Some learners travel several kilometers each day from cattle posts, lands and small villages to and from schools.

Urban and peri-urban communities experience different problems. Although schools may be closer, many families face rising transport costs, overcrowded public transport, morning and afternoon traffic congestion. Learners frequently compete with commuters during peak hours, increasing the likelihood of arriving home late, delays and missed lessons.

These contrasting realities require flexible solutions rather than a single national model. Rural areas may require dedicated government supported school buses or expanded boarding facilities, while urban areas may benefit from regulated contracts with licensed transport operators and targeted subsidies for vulnerable households.

Safety, Dignity & Children's Rights

Safe school transport is fundamentally about protecting children's welfare. Botswana is a State Party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which recognizes every child's right to education and requires that the best interests of the child remain a primary consideration in decisions affecting children.

 

Students should never be placed in situations where unsafe transport, overcrowded vehicles or hazardous journeys undermine their educational experience. A child who arrives at school exhausted, anxious or exposed to unnecessary danger begins the school day at a disadvantage.

Providing safe transport is therefore not simply an administrative responsibility but a part of creating an education system that treats every learner with dignity and fairness.

Human Capital Investment

Whenever Government considers expanding public services, questions about affordability remain inevitable. However, the discussion should focus equally on the long-term benefits. A structured national school transport programme could stimulate local economic activity by creating opportunities for transport companies, small businesses and associations. Transparent procurement processes, clear safety standards and reliable payment systems would encourage responsible operators to participate while improving service quality.

Beyond the transport sector, regular school attendance contributes to improved educational outcomes. Better educated citizens are more likely to participate productively in the economy, thus reducing long term social and economic costs. Investment in safe school transport should therefore be viewed as an investment in Botswana's human capital.

Comparative Lessons

Many countries have recognized that school transport is an essential part of educational planning. South Africa operates a National Learner Transport Policy (NLTP) that provides subsidized transport for eligible learners who live beyond prescribed distances from school and lack suitable public transport. Although implementation has faced challenges, the policy continues to offer an important framework for ensuring equitable access to school since 2015.

In Finland and Sweden, learner transport is integrated into education planning, reflecting the principle that compulsory education should be accompanied by reasonable access to schools. Rwanda has also explored technology-based approaches, including improved monitoring of school transport services in some areas. While transport is not free, school buses used dedicated lanes and are fitted with GPS and RFID systems to notify parents when students board and alight.

 

Botswana need not replicate these systems exactly. However, they demonstrate the value of clear safety standards, sustainable funding and effective oversight.

National Policy Checkpoints

The success of the parliamentary motion will ultimately depend on an effective implementation of the national framework that should include several essential elements.

First, it should establish minimum safety standards covering vehicle roadworthiness, driver qualifications, background screening, first aid training and child protection measures. Second, it should develop transparent eligibility criteria for transport assistance, taking account of travelling distance, disability and household circumstances.

Third, Government should establish a dedicated funding mechanism rather than relying solely on already constrained city and district council budgets. Fourth, responsibilities among the relevant ministries, local authorities and transport providers should be clearly defined, supported by monitoring systems and regular performance reviews.

Finally, parents, school boards, Dikgosi and local communities should be actively involved in planning transport routes and identifying local challenges. Without these measures, even the best student transport policy risks remaining largely aspirational.

Legislative Role

In bringing this motion before the House, Hon. Hikuama placed safe school transport firmly on the national agenda. Further parliamentary support of the motion by Hon. Moalosi of Nkange also demonstrated that this concern extends beyond a single constituency. Parliament has taken an important first step. The challenge now is to ensure that the commitment made in the National Assembly is translated into practical improvements that benefit students in every part of Botswana.

The responsibility now shifts to the Government to consult stakeholders, develop an evidence-based policy, allocate adequate resources and report progress to Parliament. Equally, citizens have a responsibility to remain engaged and hold public institutions accountable for implementation.

 

 

Oabona Moses Sello

Teacher, Blogger & Writer

Grab a copy of his published book titled “CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOL: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH FROM AFRICA; BOTSWANA.”

obmsello@gmail.com/+267 73 352 030                                

CAN THE EDUCATION IFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT COMPANY (EIMC) BREAK THE CYCLE?

 For decades, Botswana has often approached school infrastructure like a leaking roof in the rainy season. Much of the work has been repairing what is immediately broken, reopen the school and move on. The difficulty is that a temporary repair is not the same thing as a maintenance system. A roof can be patched repeatedly while the structure around it continues to age.

That distinction matters now because Botswana is attempting something more ambitious than another refurbishment exercise. The Education Infrastructure Management Company (EIMC), established as a wholly government-owned Special-Purpose Vehicle (SPV) under the Ministry of Child Welfare & Basic Education (MCW&BE), has been given a national infrastructure mandate. Its role extends beyond construction to modernization, preventive and lifecycle maintenance, professional facilities and asset management, and digital and smart-school transformation.

The National Programme on Refurbishment, Modernization and Maintenance of Schools covers 1,020 public schools, comprising 779 primary schools, 207 junior secondary schools and 34 senior secondary schools. Government and EIMC have put the overall infrastructure requirement at about P7 billion. For 2026/27, government has allocated P1 billion to the wider programme, while the first EIMC refurbishment phase covers 22 secondary schools at P265 million between August 2026 and March 2027.

The P7 billion is an estimated national requirement, not a single expenditure commitment that has already been secured. Likewise, the P265 million programme is the first phase, not the cost of refurbishing all 1,020 schools. This distinction is important because public confidence in a large infrastructure programme depends not only on what is promised, but on what is funded, delivered, maintained and independently accounted for.

The question, therefore, is not simply whether EIMC can spend billions on buildings. It is whether Botswana can move from a culture of intermittent repairs to a coherent system in which school infrastructure is treated as a long-term public asset. The four services at the heart of EIMC provide a useful framework for asking this question.

TRANSFORMING SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE

EIMC's first national interventions involve refurbishing and modernizing existing public schools, while also supporting expansion where overcrowding requires additional space. The first 22 schools began receiving refurbishment attention in August 2026, with completion scheduled for March 2027.

There is ample evidence that the infrastructure problem is not imaginary. In March 2026, the MCW&BE acknowledged that several junior secondary school hostels had exceeded their intended capacity. Parliament was told that the standard design capacity was 96 pupils per hostel, while some schools were accommodating substantially more. Earlier cases have also documented science laboratories being converted into ordinary classrooms because of classroom shortages.

History demonstrates that Botswana inherited a relatively small formal education system at independence in 1966 and then expanded access rapidly. The Education for Kagisano (1977) reforms placed greater emphasis on wider access, self-reliance, development, democracy and social harmony. The expansion of community junior secondary education was part of this wider effort to make education available to more citizens. The Revised National Policy on Education (1994) subsequently reinforced the principles of access, equity, relevance and quality.

Expansion was a major achievement, but expansion creates an infrastructure obligation. Botswana's school system grew in response to demographic change, policy reform and rising expectations. When the junior secondary structure was extended from two years to three years in 1996, EIMC has explained that many schools designed around the earlier configuration acquired additional pressure without corresponding expansion. The result is now visible in overcrowding, inadequate specialist rooms and pressure on boarding facilities.

This history is important because it prevents the present crisis from being reduced to a story of neglect by individual schools. Botswana succeeded in widening access to education, but the physical structures did not always evolve at the same speed as the education system itself.

Modernization must therefore be judged by educational function, not by appearance. A science laboratory is not modern because its walls have been painted. An agricultural syllabus needs water, appropriate garden space and equipment. A digital classroom requires reliable electricity, connectivity, devices and technical support.

The shift towards STEAM-related learning makes this even more important. Infrastructure must follow curriculum intentions. If Botswana wants schools to produce learners who can design, experiment, build, code, grow, cook and solve practical problems, the school must provide the physical conditions in which those activities can take place.

PREVENTIVE & LIFECYCLE MAINTENANCE

The second pillar may ultimately be more important than the first. Refurbishment creates visible political and public satisfaction, but maintenance determines whether that investment survives. Botswana has experienced repeated examples of schools receiving major interventions and later requiring further repairs. The central issue is not whether maintenance happens, but whether it happens before deterioration becomes expensive and disruptive.

EIMC's model is to move from reactive repairs towards preventive and lifecycle maintenance. That means inspecting buildings, recording their condition, scheduling routine and cyclical work, replacing components before failure where appropriate, and planning expenditure over the useful life of an asset.

This is consistent with established international practice. In its 10 year infrastructure strategy, England's Department for Education, for example, expects responsible bodies to maintain asset registers, condition data, space-use information, compliance records and long-term maintenance plans. Its Condition Improvement Fund supports keeping school buildings safe and in good working order. New Zealand similarly uses regular, cyclical and specialist maintenance planning, including long-term property plans. These systems differ from Botswana's institutional arrangements, but the underlying lesson is similar: maintenance is a planned function, not an emergency response.

Regionally, South Africa's school infrastructure programmes have combined new construction, rehabilitation, basic services and maintenance. The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, for example, was designed to address inappropriate structures and deficiencies in water, sanitation and electricity, while provincial infrastructure programmes handle construction, upgrading and maintenance. South Africa's experience also demonstrates that large infrastructure programmes can remain vulnerable to implementation capacity, funding pressures, procurement problems and the sheer scale of the backlog.

Botswana should learn from both the successes and limitations of such models. A national maintenance system will need reliable condition assessments, transparent prioritization, service-level standards and predictable funding.

PROFESSIONAL FACILITIES & ASSET MANAGEMENT

The third pillar moves the debate from buildings to assets. A school is not simply a collection of classrooms. It is a portfolio of buildings, laboratories, workshops, hostels, kitchens, water systems, electrical installations, sports facilities, staff accommodation, ICT equipment and other physical assets. Each has a condition, a replacement cost, a useful life and a maintenance requirement.

EIMC's proposed asset-management approach includes asset registers, condition assessments, lifecycle planning and performance monitoring. This is a significant institutional shift because it creates the possibility of managing public schools according to evidence rather than anecdote. A national infrastructure authority should be able to answer basic questions quickly: Which buildings are in poor condition? Which schools are overcrowded? Where are the greatest water and sanitation risks? How much will the national estate cost to maintain over the next decade?

The answer to these questions should not depend on who happens to be the school head or regional director at the time. It should be contained in a reliable national asset-management system.

This is where Botswana can draw from international estate-management practice. England's school estate guidance recommends asset registers, condition surveys, utilization data, statutory compliance records and maintenance prioritization. New Zealand's school property system likewise combines property planning, project management and a central asset-management platform. The point is not to copy either country. Botswana's geography, fiscal circumstances and institutional arrangements are different. The principle, however, is transferable: government cannot manage what it cannot reliably measure.

DIGITAL & SMART SCHOOL TRANSFORMATION

Digital transformation is not the installation of a few interactive screens. It is the creation of the physical and technical infrastructure required for technology-enabled education to function consistently.

That includes reliable electricity, connectivity, appropriate equipment, digital learning platforms and technical support. It also requires buildings that can accommodate these systems safely. A school without dependable power or internet cannot become a smart school merely because it has been supplied with computers.

This pillar also connects infrastructure management with education policy. Botswana's education system has repeatedly attempted to make schooling more relevant to national development, from the self-reliance and practical orientation associated with Education for Kagisano to the relevance and quality objectives of the RNPE (1994) and the more recent emphasis on STEAM. Digital infrastructure should therefore be understood as part of the learning environment, not as a separate technology project.

If digital transformation is concentrated in better-connected urban schools, the infrastructure programme could unintentionally widen the very inequalities it is intended to reduce. Rural and remote schools need dependable connectivity, power and technical support if the digital pillar is to mean national transformation rather than selective modernization.

LESSONS FROM BOTSWANA’S EDUCATION HISTORY

Botswana's education history presents a paradox. Since independence, the country has achieved a remarkable expansion of educational access. The Education for Kagisano (1977) reforms sought to extend opportunity and strengthen the relationship between education and national development. The RNPE (1994) further emphasized access, equity, relevance, quality and effective management. Subsequent reforms and development plans have continued to expand the system and respond to a changing economy.

Notwithstanding this, access and infrastructure are inseparable. More learners require more classrooms. More practical subjects require laboratories, workshops and specialist rooms. More boarding learners require safe accommodation. More technology requires reliable electricity and connectivity.

This is why EIMC should not be judged merely by the number of schools it refurbishes. The deeper test is whether it changes the operating logic of school infrastructure. If the same buildings are repeatedly repaired without a credible maintenance cycle, the problem will return. If new facilities are built without accurate enrolment projections, overcrowding will return.

CAN EIMC BREAK THE CYCLE

The case for a dedicated infrastructure institution is therefore understandable. Fragmented responsibilities can make it difficult to plan, procure, maintain and monitor a national estate consistently. EIMC's integrated model attempts to connect these functions under one institutional roof.

However, centralization is not a guarantee of success since it can create its own risks. A national asset register is only useful if the data are accurate. A maintenance contract is only useful if performance is monitored. A large budget is only defensible if procurement is transparent and projects are delivered at reasonable cost.

The strongest safeguard will be measurable accountability. EIMC should publish, at regular intervals, which schools have been assessed, which projects have been approved, what they cost, when they are due for completion, what defects were identified after handover and how maintenance is being funded. Parliament, schools, communities and the public should be able to see whether the P7 billion estimate is translating into durable assets rather than short-lived improvements.

Botswana's own history of community involvement in education reminds us that schools are not isolated government properties. Parents, teachers, local authorities, businesses and non-governmental organizations all have a stake in whether infrastructure is protected and used well. EIMC's engagement with local artisans and communities is therefore potentially important, provided participation is accompanied by clear procurement rules, quality standards and accountability.

The final test is educational, not architectural. A refurbished school should make teaching easier, learning safer and practical education more realistic. A maintenance system, asset management and digital infrastructure should widen access to modern learning. If these outcomes become visible, EIMC will represent more than a new institutional arrangement. It will represent a change in how Botswana thinks about the physical foundations of education.

Botswana has spent decades building access to education. The next stage requires equal seriousness about preserving and modernizing the places in which education happens. EIMC has been given an opportunity to implement a system. Whether it succeeds will depend less on the acronym than on four disciplines: build intelligently, maintain continuously, manage assets professionally and modernize equitably.

The real question, then, is not whether EIMC can repair Botswana's schools. It is whether Botswana can finally build an education infrastructure system that does not need to be rescued every generation.

Oabona Moses Sello

Teacher, Blogger & Writer

Grab a copy of his published book titled “CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOL: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH FROM AFRICA; BOTSWANA.”

obmsello@gmail.com/+267 73 352 030                                

 

Is Educational Reform Inherently Political? A Botswana Perspective

Botswana's leadership has recently made bold pronouncements regarding curriculum reform from overhauling syllabi and introducing decolonized content, to emphasizing Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration in schools and abolishing corporal punishment. Yet, what has stirred the most debate is not merely the intent behind these reforms, but the platforms where they are being announced: mainly Kgotla meetings and institutional visits by political leaders.

As an education observer and engaged citizen, I wish to offer a few notable points for consideration. Yes, Botswana needs education reform but how reforms are communicated matters just as much as what they entail.

Educational reform is a complex and delicate process. It demands robust data, broad consultation, technical expertise and most importantly, stakeholder buy-in. Teachers, school leaders, parents, and learners themselves are critical agents in shaping what happens in classrooms.

However, when major reforms are announced informally at events like Kgotla meetings, it can signal a bypassing of key stakeholders. Many teachers first hear of these changes via social media, fostering confusion and a sense of exclusion.

Botswana’s education sector has witnessed landmark policies such as Education for Kagisano (1977) and the Revised National Policy on Education (RNPE, 1994). Both were visionary, yet their impact was blunted by implementation gaps, inconsistent political commitment and disruptions in policy continuity.

Without careful planning and genuine stakeholder engagement, even the most promising reforms risk failing. When reforms are announced without formal documentation or consultation, we may face real challenges like:

- Teacher resistance and confusion due to lack of clarity and training.
- Public mistrust, especially when reforms appear politically motivated.
- Inconsistency, as changes may be reversed or reshaped following election cycles.

Fortunately, Botswana has the institutional strength to manage reforms responsibly. Institutions such as the Ministry of Child Welfare and Basic Education, the Botswana Examinations Council (BEC), the University of Botswana, and teacher unions are well-positioned to design, pilot, and implement education reforms that align with international trends like AI integration, while maintaining Botswana’s cultural values.

These institutions can provide:
- Research-based insights
- Pilot testing of new initiatives
- Professional development programs for teachers
- Monitoring and evaluation frameworks to assess the effectiveness of reforms.

To strengthen education reform efforts in Botswana, we must:
1. Shift reform announcements into professional and public education forums rather than community gatherings.
2. Publish formal policy briefs explaining proposed changes in clear, detailed terms.
3. Consult broadly and meaningfully, especially with teachers, learners, and education experts.
4. Train and empower implementing teachers, recognizing that even the best curriculum will fail without prepared implementers.

There is no denying that education reform is inherently political, as education shapes the future of any nation. However, when educational reform expediency seems to override professional expertise and broad stakeholder engagement, the result is often confusion, mistrust, and policy failure.

If Botswana is truly committed to preparing its young people for a dynamic, tech-driven future, we must approach education reform as a shared national project anchored in consultation, transparency and a collective vision for success.

Only then can Botswana’s education system thrive in the 21st century and beyond.

obmsello@gmail.com/73352030                                

Oabona Moses Sello

Teacher, Blogger & Writer