Interpretation of Data
4.1 Reflective Writing tasks supported by relevant Questionnaire analysis
4.1.1 Discourses of Home and School
Gee (I996) states that the characteristics of any Discourse determine the social construction of identity, and bearing this in mind, the following characteristics of the
pnmary Discourse of the home were identified. These characteristics impacted directly on the secondary Discourse of the school and both Discourses articulated with each other to position the subject (see 2. 2).
Firstly, the way in which the family members interact with each other reveals the extent to which they mirror social conventions in terms of power and authority in the home. Although times are more permissive today, men are traditionally regarded as the heads of homes, and the family assigns power to the male, a practice which is normalised in society. In the absence of fathers, mothers would naturally fall into this role. There should also be clear directions from the parents in terms of discipline and duties. Parents are also charged with the responsibility of supporting the family financially, emotionally and academically. I reiterate sections ofWeinreich's premise regarding the role of the family in socialisation:
Parents and others provide models for roles and behaviour which children imitate. Third, the child identifies with one or both parents, a process more powerful than imitation., through which the child incorporates and internalises The roles and values of the parent or significant other.
(Weinreich, 1978: 20-21)
These characteristics are taken for granted in cases where socialisation into the home Discourse is attained by the subjects. Using this premise as a basis for further investigation, I traced the structure of the family from information in the questionnaires and identified the caretakers (see Appendix 3.2).
Secondly, I studied the reflections on what makes them good or bad students, and qualitatively assessed the level of support and motivation that their parents displayed through these revelations.
Finally, I examined all three tasks to determine how the information relating to role models in the questionnaire, and the opinions of participants towards their parents revealed the extent to which they identified with their parents and mirrored themselves on the values and norms upheld in the family. I hoped to draw conclusions about the impact of family structure, attitudes of subjects to their parents and the ways in which family economics and responsibilities impacted on the construction of the subjects' identities at home, at school, and within the discourse of friendship.
A quantitative analysis of the structure of the family unit revealed that 50% of the subjects came from homes that had both parents as caretakers. The rest were comprised of single parent families (mother only) and mothers with the support of other relatives (see graph 1.1 overleaf) . This in itself is not an indictment on single parent families: in fact, as Weinreich points out, children can become socialised through the influence of one or both parents, or a significant other. What interested me is whether these caretakers fulfilled their roles, or not, and the impact on the child's discursive practices.
Caretakers
50 45 40 ~8
25 20 15 10
5 0
Cl)...c c c
0 0
ID"-
"- "-
co ID ID
a.. ..c ..c
..c... ...0 0...
0 ~ "-
a::l ID
..c...
~0
I
ElCaretakersI
Graph 1.1 : Caretakers
Regarding the ability of parents to teach their children the requisite skills and behaviours for socialisation into the discourse of the school, I discovered that the participants were unanimous in their belief that the family affected their chances of success at school. Information from the dialogue journals and the reflections of home life reveal an urgent need for parents who take an active interest in the lives of their children; who are able to support them both academically and financially, and who set up clear rules relating to discipline. Learners who were in the position of having parents like this presented a confident image, and looked up to their parents as role models whom they did not want to disappoint. Parents' support, guidance and discipline were extremely important in helping them to be successful at school. Where this expectation was met, it became much easier for the subject to adapt to the secondary discourse of the school (quotes are not edited):
I don't really think there is much of a difference at home or at school.
My parents are like teachers, they teacher me right from wrong, they
incourage me in a lot, they always there in time of need, and most important they never, never hold my hand. They help me to do things ... but to lend a helping hand not to hold my hand.
(Reflections S 3)
However, in some cases, a culture of parental expectations had a negative impact on their self-image: some learners felt that they were forced to accede to their parents very high expectations and when they were not successful, they "looked like a stupid"
(Reflections, S4) and had almost daily arguments with one or both parents. In these cases, subjects mirrored the autobiographical example of Hall (1990) and rebelled against the aspirations of the parents since they are made to feel inadequate.
Those subjects whose parents were alcoholics or physically abusive, exhibited a clear sense of humiliation or embarrassment regarding their parents. They rejected them as role models, regarding them as abnormal, and blaming them for their failures and poor self image.
I feel like I am a lost one because she would not sit with me and help me like a normal mother would do or ask if there is any homework. I don't get enough encouragement from my mom, is that to much to ask.Itis not easy to get love from an alcoholic sometimes I wonder what I am living for. I feel embrass when I see her drunk my hockey friends can't come and I am shy to let them see her drunk.
(Reflections S 7)
These sentiments are echoed in other entries, such as "At home I have to help myself if there was some person to help me I would become a good student"(Reflections S
14). These parents have failed to socialise their children fully into the secondary Discourse, possibly because they themselves exhibit behaviour patterns, which do not have value attached to them by dominant Discourses.
Discursive practices at home also articulated with those of school, causing conflict within the subject. Daily chores are mentioned in a matter-of-fact way by the participants, without any hint of reluctance. However, when learners have domestic responsibilties to fulfil in the mornings or have to dress younger siblings and escort them to school, they sometimes arrive late at school, and are sent home or punished.
Consequently, they became resentful of what they regarded as unfair and uncaring attitudes of educators. This makes it easier for them to reject the Discourse of the school.
Further discursive conflict arises due to a shortage of money in the home. This impacts on the child's ability to become a full member of the school Discourse when he cannot afford to buy the school uniform.
Home is a place where I can stick to the rules, school is where I find it impossible to follow the rules. .... like uniform, it's not easy to were African shoes when only one person is working at home or brown paper and plastic when there's only money for bread and milk.
(Reflections S 16)
The lack of money also impacts on the children's attitude to their parents, especially their fathers. Fathers as individuals were not identified as role models by any of the 40 subjects. (see graph 1.2 and appendix 3.5). I was curious about learners' attitudes to their fathers, and whether this impacted on their subjectification in terms of the various power structures at home and at school. I decided to explore this aspect in more detail in the interviews. Mothers as individuals, however, were regarded as role
models by 20% on the grounds that they had dedicated themselves to their children, and battled to survive in the face of great challenges, mainly financial.
Role Models
4035 30 25 20 15 10
5
o ....
~ID
-
coLL
....
ID~
-
o~
-
enCID....a..co
~
-
oCD
....ID
o
~ID Co
Z
[El Role Models [
Graph 1.2 Role models
A telling indictment on their attitudes to family is the minimal time spent at home.
Family outings are not mentioned by the majority of the subjects (see appendix 2) and time at home is largely spent watching television. Subjects preferred to socialise with friends, which is perfectly normal in terms of adolescence! This is not done within the confines of the home, but outside on the pavements, at the "green box" (electricity box), at the shop in the centre of the suburb, or in the nearby taverns. Only 2.5% of the subjects mentioned evening prayers for the family.
Thus, the economics of the family, as well as the dynamics presented by one or both parents collude together to position the subject in a positive way in the school Discourse, or to alienate him. In the latter cases, school discursive practices are regarded as Other. The consequences of this othering will be explored in more detail in the interviews.