CHAPTER 5: CARVING UNIQUE PORTRAITS OF TEACHERS’ PERSONAL-
5.2 STORIED VIGNETTE ONE
5.2.1 Scenario one: From poor rural boy to adept learner
Solomon was born and raised in a very big family in a rural area in Tongaat, on the North Coast of KZN. Solomon’s storied vignette of him as a rural boy offers us a glimpse into his personal history:
I would regard my family as being poor. My father was not working. Living in a rural area, I was not exposed to beautiful houses and cars. I remember that from Class One to Standard One I went to school without shoes.
Solomon’s narrative reveals life within a rural context, within a particular time and place in South African history. Living in a rural area had its hardships, and this context, as an external force, was an important influence on his identity as a poor rural boy (Rodgers &
Scott, 2008). Living a life of difficulty in a rural area was not by choice (Pateman, 2011).
The apartheid government’s Land Act had, since June 1913, dispossessed many people of colour of their land and their means of livelihood (Modise & Mtshiselwa, 2013). Hence the socio-economic injustice experienced by many Black South Africans like Solomon can be traced back to the colonial and apartheid land dispossessions and mistreatment of Black people (Helliker, 2011). Solomon’s experiences were also indicative of life in a rural context, where children had to carry out chores that were rooted in the larger system of community values, social customs and traditions, and were a vital foundation for developing tenacity, strength, and agency for children in their later lives (HSRC, 2005).
Solomon also learned very early in life that he had to earn his keep within the family:
As children, we had to take the cows to the fields. We had to go to the river and fetch water in the mornings and afternoons. As boys, this was our work.
According to Idang (2015), the economic principles of traditional African society are characterised by collaboration and teamwork, with children considered to be an important source of labour supply for the family. Solomon’s account of his experiences, therefore, provides a lens through which we can examine life within his family.
Solomon considered his family and his parents to be an essential part of his life. The benefits of parental influence on the lives of their children are well documented (Cheung
& Pomerantz, 2012; Didier, 2014; Gurbuzturk & Sad, 2013). This is further supported by Bornstein (2015), who finds that families, who display warmth, love, and care, and who
136
provide emotional support, helps to promote resilience within the family (Edgerton &
Roberts, 2014). Solomon grew up within such a family structure:
If we had a problem, we went to my mother. My mother knew how to show love. I also learned the importance of fairness and justice from my mother.
Solomon’s mother’s actions are supported by Li and Meier (2017), who found that maternal acknowledgement, adds to the socio-emotional advancement of the child.
Solomon’s life was also shaped as a result of his relationship with his father:
My father was also very strict. I was scared of telling him any of my problems. We were not allowed to speak to my father. He was not approachable and never liked to socialise with us.
In this scene, we get a glimpse of a stern father figure who kept his children at arm’s length emotionally. Thankfully for Solomon, the love and support that he got from his mother was a buffer against the behaviour of the other parent (Li & Meier, 2017). While Solomon was kept at arm’s length by his father emotionally, he also considered his father as a reason for his success:
So the values I learned from my father are the values I live by now. My love for education was instilled in me by my father. He told us that we cannot live a better life without education. This is what drove me. I took that advice. I knew for me to move forward I had to study.
Solomon’s father provided him with the cultural and social capital necessary to help him succeed as an educated male. Solomon’s experiences resonate with Fataar and Fillies’
(2016) findings on rural, working-class learners in South Africa. They challenged the notions that such learners are at a deficit when it comes to having the crucial cultural capital for educational success, and showed that learners capitalise on their family and community resources in their pursuit of educational achievement. Solomon’s security did not stem from his financial background but from his parents’ support and love. Thus, for Solomon, his parents’ help was important and made a unique contribution to the development of his worth as a child (Goncy & van Dulmen, 2010). This is also supported by Rodgers and Scott (2008), who saw identity as being relational and emotional, and formed through interaction within relationships.
137
Solomon, as a learner, also displayed resilience. Resilience has been described as when people use mental procedures and behaviours to shield themselves from the potential negative impacts of stressors (Robertson, Cooper, Sarkar & Curran, 2015). For Solomon, one of the most stressful experiences in his life was being born with a disability. He stated:
“As a child, I was crippled. I had a clubfoot.” This disability was to impact his life:
I loved sport, but I could not play because of my disability. I experienced a lot of discrimination as a result of this. Children used to tease me because of my limp. This made me unhappy, and I used to cry.
Hogg et al. (1995) described the self as being multifaceted and dynamic, but also as being constituted by society. Hence, for Solomon, his meanings of self were also shaped by his secondary socialisation and his experiences in the community within which he lived (Bonnewitz, 2005). According to Agnew and Drummond (2011), participating in sport can offer one a sense of belonging. However, Solomon’s disability and his being treated differently created particular meanings for him. He was made to feel like an outsider within this community of people. According to SIT, people’s sense of who they are is based on their group membership. One can be part of either the in-group or the out-group (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). However, Solomon fell into the out-group. His disability opened him up to emotional abuse from other children.
Being treated differently from the rest of the boys was a stressful time in Solomon’s life and created in him a desire to succeed by using his intellect. Solomon as a resilient, self- actualised person had a purpose (Sze, 2015), and his ambition was to be seen as more than just a disabled boy:
My mother used to tell me that I was only disabled in my legs but I was not mentally disabled. So I could hit the children with intelligence. This was a motivating factor and made me want to learn more and achieve more than the other children.
Although Solomon was born with a disability, he did not allow this identity to direct his life and define him. He did not allow the meanings people ascribed to him to shape his future (Jacklin, 2001). He attempted to develop a winning mentality to enable him to be the best learner he could be.
138