CHAPTER 2: TOOLS REQUIRED TO CARVE A MASTERPIECE AROUND
2.5 THE DILEMMATIC SPACE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AS THE
2.5.2 Educational reform policies as contributing to teacher dilemmas
The educational environment is dynamic and complex (Maarman & Lamont-Mbawuli, 2017). In addition, political and administrative changes, for example, new socio-political or managerial ways of governing the educational system, can have consequences for the educational system and for teachers’ work (Furlong, Cochran-Smith, & Brennan, 2008).
44
Fransson and Grannäs (2013) and Grimmett, Fleming and Trotter (2009) support the view that organisational changes have the potential to present teachers with dilemmas as they strive to meet the mounting expectations of society, parents and learners. One of those changes has been the decentralisation of the school’s financial administration to schools.
2.5.2.1 Decentralisation of school financial administration
The need for equity and redress in South Africa was signalled as the reason for the decentralisation of school financial administration to schools. In response to this, the South African Schools Act (Republic of South Africa, 1996a) placed more authority and decision making at the level of the school. The school governing body (SGB) is now required to take charge of a school’s financial affairs (Mestry, 2016). While greater power has been delegated to local institutions to manage their finances, overall power and control are still vested in the national government at the central level (Lynch, 2014).
However, the transfer of financial control to schools is an area of contention that has had far-reaching consequences (Mestry, 2013).
To meet their financial challenges and obligations, schools and teachers now have to market themselves (Weber, 2007) and present themselves in a favourable light to compete for fee-paying children (Sayed, 2002). The marketisation of schools has resulted in the commodification of education, with an emphasis on output and what it means to have a quality education (Yang, 2006). Thus, quality public education has been reserved for organisations that are able to promote themselves to those learners who can afford the fees to attend (Ross & Gibson, 2007). Consequently, learners can now choose the school that they wish to attend, and parents are able to choose which school to send their children to, based on the school’s performance. These changes mirror policymakers’ confidence in markets and competition, rather than in teachers and learners (Vally & Motala, 2017).
A negative consequence of this practice, according to Shalem and Hoadley (2009), is that schools that were previously disadvantaged are restricted in their ability to attract wealthier parents. Shalem and Hoadley (2009) further indicated that instead of levelling the playing field, the commodification of education is entrenching inequalities, as schools that are perceived as successful are able to decide on the learners they wish to enrol (Shalem & Hoadley, 2009). This financial gap between rich and poor, according to Smyth
45
and Shacklock (1998), speaks to the pertinent question of educational affordability. They added that financial self-reliance has become a reality in most schools, which is problematic. The challenge is that school teachers are required to fundraise to keep schools financially afloat (Mestry, 2006), which in turn contributes to an intensification of their work (Smyth & Shacklock, 1998). According to Taubman (2009), teachers are now increasingly called upon to assist with the financial viability and educational outcomes of their schools, irrespective of whether they have the necessary contextual conditions to reach their objectives and ends, and irrespective of whether they should be accountable or not. All that teachers can do within such dilemmatic spaces is act for the best (Honig, 1996).
2.5.2.2 Curriculum reforms
While financial self-reliance is one dilemma, another is the constant curricular reforms that plague the South African educational system. Post-apartheid South Africa has witnessed a barrage of policy reform and curricular changes (Ramatlapana & Makonye, 2012). Changes to the political landscape resulted in the introduction of a new curriculum in 1997, known as Curriculum 2005 (C2005). However, according to Botha (2002), this curriculum was politically charged and was considered neither successful nor transformational, as it failed to acknowledge South African classroom realities. These curriculum challenges resulted in the DoE’s review of C2005, which led to the introduction of the Revised National Curriculum Statement (RNCS) in 2002. However, despite assurances that RNCS would deliver, it failed to do so. The Minister of Basic Education then announced the end of the RNCS, and presented a repackaged curriculum known as the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) in 2012 (Singh, 2015).
While change for the betterment of education is good, programmatic reforms such as curriculum changes usually give rise to new requirements, such as new assessments, the introduction of new textbooks, and revised record-keeping systems (Samuel, 2009). The new requirements introduced by the CAPS curriculum have proved to be problematic.
Msibi and Mchunu (2013) found that the CAPS assessments force teachers to implement teaching that does not align with their vision of best practice. This view was supported
46
by Ramatlapana and Makonye (2012), who find that the guidelines provided by the CAPS policy document and annual teaching plans are markedly prescriptive and restrictive.
Teachers also lament the unrealistic assessments, which create a dilemma for them in terms of how to use their teaching time (Smith & Kovacs, 2011). The increased administrative work demanded by the CAPS curriculum erodes teachers’ available time;
as a result, they are not able to collaborate, and often work in isolation (Badugela, 2012).
However, the dilemmas faced by teachers within the South African educational landscape are amplified when all schools are treated the same, without due consideration for the specific contextual challenges that some schools confront, such as a lack of resources (Adendorff et al., 2010) and an increased necessity for fundraising (Mestry, 2016). These responsibilities take time away from teaching, yet schools are still expected to adhere to the curriculum timeframes as stipulated by the CAPS document (Msibi & Mchunu, 2013).
Such demands have resulted in the intensification and de-professionalisation of teachers’
work (Kostogritz, 2012).
2.5.3 Race, class and location as a contributing factor to teachers’ dilemmas