By Aleta Makomeke
Recent deportations and voluntary returns of Zimbabwean families from South Africa have dominated
public discourse, largely from legal, humanitarian and economic perspectives. However, one critical
dimension has received far less attention—the impact on the education of children.
Every family that returns home brings with it school-going children whose education has suddenly been
disrupted. Many arrive in Zimbabwe during the middle of the academic year, when schools are already
well advanced with syllabus coverage, continuous assessment activities and examination preparations.
For these learners, returning home is not simply a change of residence; it is an abrupt transition into a
different education system with different academic expectations.
This issue calls for urgent attention from policymakers in government, education planners, school
authorities and development partners. Zimbabwe has made remarkable progress in reforming its
education system through the introduction of the Heritage-Based Curriculum (HBC). The curriculum
seeks to produce learners who are innovative, productive, culturally grounded and equipped with
competencies relevant to national development. It is an education model that rightly places emphasis
on knowledge, skills, values and practical competencies rather than relying solely on final examinations.
This national effort aligns with global and regional commitments such as the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which calls for inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong
learning opportunities for all. It also resonates with Zimbabwe’s own development frameworks,
including National Development Strategy 1 (NDS1), the forthcoming National Development Strategy 2
(NDS2), and the Education Sector Strategic Plan (ESSP) 2026–2030, all of which prioritise equitable
access, quality learning outcomes and inclusive education systems.
However, one unintended challenge now confronting the system is the reintegration of learners who
have spent years studying under different curricula outside Zimbabwe.South Africa provides the most
immediate example because of the large Zimbabwean population that has traditionally lived and worked
there. Learners returning from South African schools may have followed different curriculum structures,
assessment procedures and school calendars. Their educational experiences, while valuable, may not
correspond neatly with the requirements of Zimbabwe’s Heritage-Based Curriculum.
The same concern extends beyond South Africa. Zimbabwean children returning from other countries
may equally encounter differences in curriculum content, assessment systems, language of instruction
and competency expectations. Although the degree of difference varies from one country to another,
the challenge of educational transition remains real. The greatest concern relates to continuous
assessment. Unlike previous examination-centred approaches, Zimbabwe’s Heritage-Based Curriculum
requires learners to build assessment evidence progressively through school based projects, practical
activities and continuous classroom participation. These assessments contribute meaningfully to a
learner’s overall academic profile. The school based project process is done over a period of 24 months.

A learner who enters the Zimbabwean system halfway through the academic year inevitably misses
much of this assessment. Schools are then confronted with difficult questions. How should such learners
be enrolled in Zimbabwean schools to be assessed fairly and -for which form or grade should a grade
7/form 4 /form 6 learner who comes to Zimbabwe today should be enrolled in light of the Secretary’s
Policy Circular No 9/2024 on School Based Project Learning for the Heritage Based Curriculum
Framework for Primary and Secondary Education 2024-2030,related policy guidelines and syllabus
requirements for specific learning areas (subjects) .Which competencies should be recognised from
previous schooling? What bridging mechanisms should be put in place without compromising academic
standards? How best can the scholars be assisted before it is too late because we risk losing some of
them to early marriages, drugs and substance abuse and other ills of the world. These are critical
questions which need to be urgently addressed.
If schools are left to make these decisions independently, it will result in inconsistent practices across
the country. The financial realities facing returning families further complicate the situation. Many
deported or returning households arrive home after losing employment, businesses or stable sources of
income. Paying school fees, purchasing uniforms, textbooks and stationery becomes an immediate
challenge. Some parents simply postpone school enrolment while searching for livelihoods. The reality is
that most returning parents are likely to start sending children to school in term 3-September 2026
because of financial constrains Unfortunately, education cannot wait. Every week that a child remains
outside school widens learning gaps and increases the likelihood of permanent dropout.
This reality raises an important constitutional question. Section 75 of Zimbabwe’s Constitution
guarantees every citizen and permanent resident the right to basic state-funded education, while
Section 81 places the best interests of the child at the centre of all decisions affecting children. These
constitutional provisions demand that educational access should not depend entirely on a family’s
financial circumstances or migration history. The current situation therefore presents an opportunity for
government to demonstrate its commitment to inclusive education, in line with SDG 4 targets and
national priorities under NDS2 and the ESSP 2026–2030, which emphasise leaving no learner behind.
One practical intervention would be the establishment of a national Returning Learners Reintegration
Framework under the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education. Such a framework could provide
standardised procedures for learner placement, curriculum mapping, recognition of prior learning,
bridging programmes and continuous assessment support. Schools would then have clear national
guidelines and not rely on individual interpretation.
Secondly, Government should consider creating a special education support package for returning
learners from vulnerable households. This could be achieved by temporarily expanding the Basic
Education Assistance Module (BEAM) or establishing an emergency education support facility dedicated
to children whose education has been disrupted by deportation or forced return.Such support would
not represent charity.It would be an investment in protecting Zimbabwe’s human capital and advancing
national commitments to equitable education access as outlined in both SDG 4 and Zimbabwe’s
development strategies.

Thirdly, schools should receive practical guidance and professional development on managing learner
transitions from different education systems. Diagnostic assessments, bridging programmes and
targeted remedial support would help ensure that learners integrate successfully without lowering
curriculum standards.
There is also need for stronger collaboration between Zimbabwe and neighbouring countries on learner
records and academic documentation. Efficient transfer of school records would reduce delays in
placement and minimise unnecessary repetition of grades. Migration is likely to remain a feature of
Southern Africa’s socio-economic landscape for many years. Consequently, learner mobility should no
longer be treated as an exceptional occurrence requiring temporary solutions. It should become an
integral consideration in education policy planning, consistent with regional and global education
commitments.
Zimbabwe has consistently demonstrated leadership in expanding access to education since
Independence. The country’s challenge now is to ensure that this proud tradition extends to children
whose education has been interrupted by migration, economic hardship or deportation. The Heritage-
Based Curriculum seeks to produce productive, competent and patriotic citizens. That vision can only be
realised if every Zimbabwean child is given a fair opportunity to participate, regardless of where they
previously attended school.
As policymakers deliberate on immigration, border management and economic recovery, they should
remember that behind every deportation statistic is a child whose greatest hope is not merely to return
home, but to return to school. That child deserves more than sympathy. That child deserves a
deliberate, coordinated and compassionate education policy response.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, Aleta Makomeke, a senior
educationist and governance practitioner, and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position
of any institution or organisation with which she may be affiliated.

The African Union (AU) set an agenda for itself in 2013 with a central goal on peace, security, unity and development on the continent. This overarching goal seems to be lost to the designers of the Agenda 2063 given the xenophobic attacks taking place in South Africa currently. A scholar on leadership by the name John Maxwell intimates that everything falls and rises on leadership, hence African leaders through AU and SADC should quash what is happening in South Africa. It is the intent of this opinion piece to argue that while Agenda 2063 is potentially the elixir to Africa’s social, political and economic challenges, it will remain a pie in the sky for the everyday Africans whose livelihoods have been caught up in structural challenges leading to migration within and outside of Africa in anticipation of better lives because of xenophobic tendencies that are evidential in some African countries like South Africa. Why does xenophobia in South Africa specifically undermine Agenda 2063’s unity pillar?South Africa does not exist in a social vacuum. There is no such thing as absolute independence; it is a mirage. Independence is a function and a byproduct of coloniality that seeks out to create fissures between and among Africans. Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi and Zambia are neighbours of South Africa by history and geography. They all belong to SADC and AU, and what happens in these countries economically, politically and socially should be defined in terms of interdependence. These countries already have bilateral and multilateral relations based on comparative advantages. All these countries share a common history of colonialism and that history is a history that created opportunities for the colonisers to amass ancient wealth that created the Bretton Woods like the IMF and World bank that have facilitated the capture of Africa through debt colonialism and liberalism. Debt colonialism and liberalism have been the wheels in the colonial machine and have been used to set up Africans against one another. The 1884 Berlin Conference formalised the partition of Africa imposing artificial boundaries that compartmentalised the continent according to the expansionist interests of colonial powers. South Africa is itself a product of this partitioning. Therefore, when South Africans direct xenophobic violence towards other Africans, they are reproducing colonial logics of division rather advancing the pan-African unity envisioned in Agenda 2063. Between 2024 and 2026, Xenowatch recorded 59 documented xenophobic incidents in 2024 displacing 2,946 people, and 151 incidents alone in 2025. By May 2026, at least Ethiopian nationals and other African migrants were reported killed in a fresh wave of attacks. When South Africans attack and pooh-pooh foreigners who are victims of structural challenges of coloniality, they miss the point. Liberalism is at the heart of the conduct of South Africans, because it is liberalism that persuades them to think that they stand out as an independent and self-sufficient country. Liberalism is not African but European. It is a philosophy that has decimated the African philosphy of ubuntu. Ubuntu, romantices and essentialises the communal self. Africa from the yore has had an indelible characteristic feauture of collectivism. The values that have made Africa to be unique have been those values of majoritarianism. The moral economy of Africa is what liberalism has come to attack with concepts of individualism. Individualism is the thinking that individual liberties are more important than the values of groups. Africa’s fingerprint of the care economy came under attack with the advent of colonialism and this writer can safely argue that with what is happening in South Africa, colonialism is not over, but is all over now like a spirit. The logic of liberalism here treats South Africa as an isolated country whose liberty must be decoupled from the struggles of fellow African states. This attitude of independence which is born of colonial legacy is fuelling acts of xenophobia in the country. Fellow Africans are targetted even as Europeans, Asians and Americans who may lack the requisite documents are not treated the same way. This double standard shows how the colonial mindset still holds South Africans in its grip. It is important that the school system in South Africa should infuse into its curriculum a cross -cutting subject on understanding diversity and inclusivity with the success goal of moulding men and women of competence, compassion, commitment and conscience. This world will not be a safe place if, as humanity, we fail to appreciate and embrace the fact that no one owns any title deeds to it and that we should approach it with a stewardship mentality. The AU and SADC should be seen making the necessary decisive diplomatic steps to end the ill-treatment of fellow Africans in South Africa. Over 4 million foreign nationals live in South Africa, with Zimbabweans and Malawians making up a significant share of the SADC migrant workforce, hence the need for these continental supranational bodies to act accordingly to sustain their livelihoods. These acts of xenophobia in South Africa are happening during a harsh cold season. Human dignity is not determined by time, geography or borders and human rights are not reserved for South Africans alone- they are universal. Amongst those being deported in these winter conditions are children, who require protection from adults and governments. South Africa is a signatory state to the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, yet we are witnessing children being exposed to the cold in the midst of this growing hostility. Agenda 2063 should not remain a slogan. It must be made real through actions that lift Africans out of poverty and protect their dignity. As supranational bodies, AU and SADC have a responsibility to intervene in what is happening in South Africa. Where there are flagrant human rights violations, appeals to sovereignty cease to be sustainable. Ultimately, political, social and economic circumstances are never static. A country that is stable today can face crises tomorrow, just as one that is struggling now may recover later. For instance, South Africa’s unemployement rate in 2025 sat at 32.7% while Malawi’s GDP growth was projected at 3.2% for 2025, outpacing SA’s 1.8. Malawi’s current challenges and South Africa’s potential future decline show how quickly circumstances reverse. Recognising this shared vulnerability should push African nations beyond rivalry or indifference toward solidarity. In the end, the idea of being one another’s keeper is not just moral, it is practical : collective support today builds resilience every African country may need when fortunes change. By Dr. Aribino N- Country Director of ZIMCARE TRUST and former Vice Chair of Chikurubi Special Prisons Board. Writing in own personal capacity.