Promoters and Barriers within the Occupational Therapy Discipline 6.1 Introduction
6.2 Promoters and Barriers
6.2.5 Mentality of the Oppressed
114 Thuli (A) : When we go out, we are not gonna be hopefully, only working with black or white or coloured or whatever type of people, so I need to know about her culture whether I like it or not. So whenever it’s group time I go to my black people, there is nothing new that they gonna tell me that I don’t know, so putting me, forcing me to go and listen to her culture and the white persons and the way they do their things at home is a big advantage for me, they are not doing for themselves, they are also doing it for me.
Intergroup/cross racial learning is promoted succinctly by the quote above as it highlights the need for this specific type of interpersonal relationship building on the health sciences with close contact between disparate people who are required to understand each other’s contexts amongst professional staff as well as professional client.
115 Zama (A): It also goes back to erm, white person inferior42 and I’m going to do everything in my power to be above them. That’s you kind of reinforcing that they still think their perception is still they are above me, you know. So I’m doing everything to be above them. So basically it’s still having that thought that a white person is more superior. Ja
This and the quotes below are examples of Biko’s “mentality of the oppressed”. Biko (1972) said: “At the heart of this kind of thinking is the realisation by the blacks that the most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed. Once the latter has been so effectively manipulated and controlled by the oppressor as to make the oppressed believe that he is a liability” (p.74).
Thuli (A): I am not talking about superior or inferior here. I’m talking about you as an individual. It doesn’t matter who what where .You have these subconscious boundaries…
Jabulani (A): The system that we are from, there’s always those boundaries that you don’t fit there ja you fit there because it’s still the social thing but when it’s academic you wouldn’t fit there, understand. So it is the system that is causing the boundaries.
Internalisations of liability type self-thoughts are evident in the ‘black’ focus group from
“subconscious boundaries” to “systemic boundaries”. Freire (1970) writes about this, supporting Biko and says “internalisation of the opinion of the oppressor” which is derogatory in nature causes resultant fulfilling of this opinion as a result of multiple sources feeding into these feelings. Unresolved or perpetuated feelings such as these will prevent occupational therapy students from reaching their capacity or believing in themselves.
Discussion
This chapter focuses on discipline specific promoters and barriers to integration however should not be seen as stand-alone, as related foci are found in chapter four and 5 five directly and indirectly. The foci are related to the practice of occupational therapy or the learning of occupational therapy and in most cases are very specific in their focus.
42 Inferior- participant is thinking aloud that ‘white’ people elicit feelings of being inferior
116 Generally the findings indicate that the University has transformed in terms of racial demographics amongst students without creating a transformative climate or experiences that foster social cohesion and transformation of embodying racial practices; while domains outside of university remain fractured and unequal. The profession of occupational therapy upholds human rights, and the “valuing of each person’s diverse contribution to the valued and meaningful occupations of the society and equal access….” (WFOT, 2006) which is the lens that is applied to the findings herein.
Important structural factors, both temporal and spatial, particular to the course and university life highlight the need to create the space and opportunities for interaction. This is mirrored in chapter four and five when participants referenced the Eid party, discussed no go zones, and where participants presented racialised space, which presented barriers to integration as well as opportunities to discover each other culturally. Specific issues such a timetabling, facilities and events speak directly to examples in the participant’s lived reality however also point to structural deficits within the discipline as well as the University as a whole. Buhle Zuma (2010) reminds us that having broad social and racial representation at university appears to create equality however this view is “naïve” and “false” as “structural issues influence and may shape everyday encounters” (p. 102).
These everyday encounters have been reported within these pages and demonstrate support for Buttney’s (1999) writing that ‘whites’ are seen to avoid ‘blacks’ in the following ways: being non-assertive, avoidant, assertive or aggressive for example, criticising integration. Examples of avoidance going out of your way to prevent interaction with the Other such as not visiting the
‘black residence’ assertive such as refusing to give a ‘black’ peer a good mark in peer evaluation as they had not worked and aggressive for example when one vociferously criticises diversity training.
Two focus groups queried staff consistency and facilitation of students, while staffing descriptors such as racial clustering and staff ratios were discussed in one. All examples within this sub- theme were reported as barriers, which is interpreted to indicate high levels of mistrust and limited role modelling of staff. Brewer (1997) suggests that misplaced trust results in decreased likelihood of integration and cooperation between ingroups and outgroups. Participant’s lived reality has created examples of misplaced trust without ensuing interactions that have ameliorated these initial experiences. Promotive interactions according to Brewer (1997) occur at both an individual as well as group level and can be viewed as a “reciprocity pact”. This
117 supports Chickering and Gameson’s (1987) good practice educational principles of encouraging contact between students and faculty, developing reciprocity and cooperation amongst faculty and students, and respecting diverse talents and ways of knowing. The findings support these authors and show clinical fieldwork in groups and growth games reported in chapter five were promoters within the discipline which is facilitated by staff. By the very nature of intensive supervision and liaison between staff and student on clinical fieldwork as well as the interactiveness of teambuilding and growth games, high levels of a reciprocity pact are seemingly embedded in these interactions through the meeting of the above principles.
Just as families were reported as influencing racial socialisation, in this chapter occupational therapy staff are perceived as being poor role models in terms of the perceived racial clustering and apparent lack of racial equity amongst the staff complement. This indicates a continued need for role modelling by authoritative figures perhaps as a result of the post-apartheid legacy or the continued divided social and formative opportunities. Role modelling could be seen as an intervention to breaking stereotypes, habitual and learnt behaviours as well as creating a milieu of non-racialism and co-operation amongst diverse groups of people. Transparency of appointment mechanisms and other practices and policies that guide the University’s transformation may be useful.
Throughout the transcripts and found within the sub-theme of Mentality of the Oppressed is an oft felt or alluded to feeling of self-segregation and self-depreciation by ‘black’ participants. This is seen in actions, where Thabo feels he will be like the self-segregating occupational therapy in a hospital; thoughts, (Jabulani above); as well as attitudes. As a reaction to feeling lesser or marginalised, perhaps ingroups are sometimes see as more “virtuous” than outgroups that prevents integration (Brewer, 1997, p. 206).
Understanding this mentality of the oppressed, is important as the ‘black participants’ all resonated with examples of experiencing racism that were discussed in the focus group. These experiences promote self-categorisation and may be the reason for social distancing between
‘black’ and ‘white’ participants in a sub-conscious effort to avoid such events through “racialised practices of entry and withdrawal, approach and avoidance…” (Durrheim & Dixon, 2005, p.
455). Self-categorisation, along attributions that are stable and fixed such as race and education, results in negative psychological feelings about oneself (Baron et al, 2009). This feeds into self-depreciation, self-fulfilling prophecy and confirmation bias (Brehm et al, 2005).
118 Jabulani’s example, speaks to all chapters where participants indicated that they see each other and themselves in racial boxes which Brewer (1997) states points to a curricular that has promoted “divisiveness” versus “those that have the goal of teaching children to become experts in more than one culture. The former promotes divisiveness, the latter multiculturalism as a shared value.” (p. 208). Vandayar (2008) criticises educational institutions for assuming that by
“establishing the physical proximity of members of different groups” they would promote integration without “interrogating the quality of the contact” or the “institutional arrangements, policies and ethos” (p. 287). The view that students are arriving at university with formed racial identities premised on racial socialisation and apartheid’s legacy is emphasised within both this study’s data and other research which creates the need to focus on these facets of the
“academy.”
Finally all five focus groups discussed group work and clinical field work experience as being promoters of integration. It needs to be pointed out, that in a full curriculum with diverse teaching, content and experiences these two examples alone were discussed, perhaps indicating a lack of an overt milieu of social cohesion through discussion and practice as well as content within the occupational therapy curricular which supports Vandayar and Brewer.
Chapter seven, the conclusion of this dissertation will report on the main study findings, establishing whether objectives and aims where met, presenting the limitations and making recommendations.
119