DBE RESPONDS TO PROFESSOR JONATHAN JANSEN’s OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER - TIME TO ADMIT SCHOOL YEAR OVER - BY ELIJAH MHLANGA

Oct 19, 2026

DBE responds to Professor Jonathan Jansen’s open letter published in TimesLive, arguing against abandoning the school year during COVID-19. The response disputes the fear-based framing of deaths and infections, emphasizes that reopening follows a carefully considered process guided by stakeholders, scientific and medical expertise, and concern for the most vulnerable learners. It outlines safety measures, altered responsibilities for higher-risk staff, and continued transmission-reduction strategies, stressing reopening is not a return to pre-pandemic normal.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages3

Reading Time8 min

AccessFree to download

Response to the open letter

Critique of the proposed school-year abandonment

Reopening approach and guidance

Balancing lives, livelihood, and education

Safety measures and continued transmission controls

Calls to consider UNESCO findings

DBE RESPONDS TO PROFESSOR JONATHAN JANSEN’s OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER – ‘TIME TO ADMIT SCHOOL YEAR OVER’ BY ELIJAH MHLANGA In his open letter to addressed to the Minister of Basic Education; Mrs Angie Motshekga, published in the TimesLive newspaper of 09 July 2020 , Professor Jonathan Jansen argues passionately for the School Year to be abandoned. He appears firstly to strike an encouraging tone with the Minister before he admonishes her with the words; “Unfortunately, minister you cannot dictate academic terms to a novel coronavirus”. The choice of words is not lost on the reader; the eminent Professor employs his skillful language punch to characterize the minister as a dictator in the eyes of those whose sympathies lie with the Professor’s argument. These sympathies are bought by fearmongering tactics that he so cunningly deploys. To drive his point into the trembling hearts of a public seized with uncertainty over a virus that morphs daily and evades medical science, he throws in a salvo; “ Teachers have died, Principals have been on ventilators. Children have been infected. Non-teaching staff have become seriously ill”. These are words employed by a crafty wordsmith to drive home a point that seeks to turn public sentiment against a hard-working minister committed to finding effective and all-encompassing solutions to not only salvage the academic year, which is not a crime by the way, but to also keep access open for the poorest of the poor in far-flung communities of the Republic who needs an open classroom if they are to take aim at a possible future free of ignorance and poverty. We are not convinced of the argument to roll up and close the school year, we are neither certain that this would be a desirable and responsible option for the many marginalized children, who rely on our schools. We will never tire from explaining that our approach to School reopening is a result of a carefully considered process listening to many different views from our stakeholders and respectfully paying attention to the fears and anxieties of parents and learners themselves. We have also listened to science and medical experts who pay careful attention to the evolution of COVID-19 and its implications on education policy and practice. At the same time an impression must not be created that we are trying to save the academic year at the expense of lives. The South African government is allowing various sectors to gradually resume activities to maintain the balance between saving lives and livelihood, needless to say that the provision of basic education is part of livelihood. Now that we clarified this point, it is time to refer Professor Jansen respectfully to visit his colleague at the same university Professor Martin Gustafsson; (an associate professor in the Economics Department of Stellenbosch University and senior researcher at RESEP, specialising in education policy and comparative education) and listen carefully to some of the findings the Professor has shared in trying to consider implications of the DBE School reopening program in the context of available data on COVID-19 and children of school-going age. We also would encourage Professor Jansen to listen to the findings of UNESCO, on the negative impact an extended school lockdown potentially has on the prospects of learners in poor communities. In their recent report on Adverse Consequences of School Closures , UNESCO explains that school closures carry high social and economic costs for people across communities. Their impact however is particularly severe for the most vulnerable and marginalized boys and girls and their families. The resulting disruptions exacerbate already existing disparities within the education system but also in other aspects of their lives. We have invested time in explaining that back to school doesn’t mean back to normal. Schools reopening does not mean a return to education as it was before. Other measures may also be put in place,

FAQs

What does DBE say about Professor Jansen’s argument to abandon the school year?

DBE states it is not convinced by the proposal to roll up and close the school year, especially for marginalized children who rely on schools.

How does DBE explain its process for school reopening?

DBE says reopening is based on a carefully considered process that listens to stakeholders, respects parents’ and learners’ fears, and pays attention to medical experts’ guidance on COVID-19.

What safety and risk-reduction measures does DBE describe for school reopening?

DBE mentions measures such as staggering lunch breaks, limiting face-to-face contact, regular hand-washing breaks, keeping symptomatic learners at home, and altering responsibilities for older teachers or those with underlying conditions.

Oct 19, 2026

Uploaded by Emma Wilson