Research Findings and Discussion
4.3. What measures are taken by both schools to curb violence?
4.3.8. Discipline, Safety and Security Minute Book
In both schools the DSSC functions effectively. The committees comprise of parents, educators and non-educators. One school had just 2 meetings for the year 2011. The minutes were short stating that security measures are in place.
The meetings did not address the day to day violent activities of learners. These committees focus on the physical structure instead of finding solutions to the violent episodes that occur in the classrooms daily.
The information from the interviews and the school documents corroborated with the entries on the observation schedule under the heading “security measures” for Alpha Primary on 29 September 2011 and on 14 October 2011.
The Observation schedule and the security plans in the minute book corroborated as follows:
There is a security guard who is uniformed and carries a baton and two-way radio, appointed at the main gate. He records names and details of all visitors.
Then he escorts visitors to the office. The school’s security is tight. All gates are locked at 8h00 and opened at dismissal times when parents fetch learners. The school has an armed response alarm system. Panic buttons can be pressed in emergency to alert the guard and the security company that dispatches personnel to the school. The school is surrounded by high fences and walls.
Trespassers have tried to scale the walls on a few occasions. When school fees are collected at the beginning of the year the police escort the secretary to the bank. On special school functions extra patrols and policemen are called in to
176
assist. During every break 4 educators and 25 prefects watch the 550 learners in this school. The educators in this school have had staff development programs to deal with violent episodes and counseling. However they still refrain from bag searches unless very necessary because it is very tedious according to the legislation where 2 educators have to be present.
The information from the interviews and the school documents corroborated with the entries on the observation schedule under the heading “security measures” for Omega Primary on 30 September 2011 and on 15 October 2011.
The DSSC chairman stated this during his interview:
While there is just one main gate into the school, learners walk through the holes and broken down fences at various points. The main gate is never locked because the lock is broken. The administration offices are only alarmed. A parent assists as security guard that they were feeling exhausted because of the bad behavior of learners because there are no funds to employ one. Lack of funding has also not allowed for fence repairs. The educators do conduct frequent searches based on “tip-offs”
from other learners. The two educators on duty during breaks reported.
They have reached a point of fatigue where they are too tired to care.
This evidence is contrary to Prinsloo (2005, p.8) who states that learners have a constitutional right to study in a safe school environment. The findings of this study prove that many learners and educators are being denied their fundamental human right of being safe. The findings draw reflections on the three theories that formed the framework of this study. It agrees with the theory of Symbolic Interactionism: humans act towards things on the basis of the meanings they ascribe to those things, the meanings of such things is derived from the social interaction that one has with others and the society and these meanings are handled and modified through an interpretative process used by the person dealing with the things he or she encounters. The learners
177
were deriving their behavior patterns from the impoverished township communities in which they lived. Their role models were their parents and peers who were violent themselves. This theory also could have been used positively because by co-presence with positive valued people the perpetrators could have learnt good behavior patterns. This theory should be advocated in all schools firstly to improve learner behavior by them choosing good role models and secondly by all stakeholders working closely together for the improvement of learner discipline.
Also the behavior of learners and some educators coincide with the theory of power and social control. The many ways in which people are controlled are by family, schools, work situations, conscience, etc. is the way they react to others. The educators, who control them negatively, reinforce the violence in them. Their family and socio-economic factors could contribute to their need for power and control. As evidenced in the interviews with the perpetrators they enjoyed making fun of educators, they loved being recognized as leaders of groups or gangs and they came to school to have fun. This theory was evident in the way perpetrators used authority and violence to claim recognition among their peers. This theory will not be prominent in violent schools if educators and learners are trained to curb those who are power hungry.
The third theory underpinning this study is that learners could practice the Mahatma Gandhian and Martin Luther King's principles of non-retaliation and non-violence (Satyagraha) but as seen learners do not practice non-violence. At the slightest provocation they resort to violent behavior. The victims of violence have been taught non-retaliation or passive resistance by their parents and educators but with the continual violence against them, the good learners are being forced to retaliate. This principle must become the blueprint of every learner's behavior so that violence can be eradicated in all schools completely.
178