Scenario 3 Coercive Pressure
4.2.2 Section Two: Accepting and Integrating Change
While section one of this chapter focused on the first form of sustained school language change which entailed relentless pressure to effect lasting change, this section focuses on the second form of sustained school language change.
The second form of sustained change that Douglas (1997) identifies occurs when the individual or system accepts and integrates the change. For change to be sustained, Douglas (1997) contends, it must become an integral part of the target. He adds that the formula for change has to be adapted and become personalized so that it is ultimately an instrument of the individual. In this way, Douglas (1997) argues, external change becomes but an adjunct of internal change and change does not become an exercise in conformity under some external pressure. The conditions for the second form of sustained change are encapsulated in the next sensitizing concept used to orient and guide the data analysis:
The salient feature of change is still the acceptance of the need to change, whether the effort comes mainly from others or from oneself. Without some such acceptance, change efforts tend to become an exercise in conformity under some perceived pressure.
Interrogation of the data, using this sensitizing concept to orient the analysis, revealed that while there was acceptance from some educators of the need to transform their language practices to address the linguistic diversity of their learners, there was also strong resistance from educators and some parents to school language change that embraced multilingual education. This thwarted the language change process in all four sample schools.
In light of these observations this section of the chapter focuses on the following themes:
Resistance to change from educators, Acceptance of the need to change, and Resistance to change from parents. This section also focuses on the differing conceptions of school language change held by different stakeholders in the school based on their ideological
positions regarding school language change which impacted on the school language change process.
4.2.2.1 Resistance to change from educators
One of the reasons why the change agents in all four schools had experienced difficulties in initiating and sustaining language change was the strong resistance from educators, both level 1 and management staff. The following responses from Agents L and R respectively are reflective of this position:
There is resistance. Big resistance, I am telling you right now. There is even resistance from the principal, I know you had your interview with her. She‟s a learned person, she answered the question to suit her, I am not saying she spoke lies but to camouflage it in such a manner to create the impression that the school is too good.
As far as policy changes, we have made some start but the challenges are many. You find that we had to do it very, very slowly. There‟s a lot of reluctance from staff members. And all of a sudden there‟s this inability to change.
The data revealed a range of factors contributing to educators‟ resistance to school language change. The main factors were related to fear of change, demographics (viz.
age), the perception that African languages have little linguistic capital and are consequently not worth acquiring, and financial and organizational constraints imposed on schools by revising school language policies to encourage multilingual education. This part of section two examines how these factors fuelled resistance to school language change from educators and how this disabled the language change process initiated by the change agents in their schools.
One of the factors, according to the data, was age. Three of the four change agents cited age as militating strongly against change. They asserted that older teachers have a stronger mindset against change than the younger teachers who they felt would be more receptive to change. This is illustrated by the following responses from Agents R, S and L and an educator in Willy Wonke Primary respectively:
I think probably maturity is a major factor there. When you have reached a certain age, it‟s very, very hard to change, so that is one of the major problems we are facing now. So I would think we need to look at a younger breed coming in, new teachers to start the change, to assist us. So that is a major problem.
There are times when we should have a breed of younger educators and a breed of younger management as well. Management in terms of being open to change, their mind set, and to accommodate pupils and educators who are critical in their views of education…there‟s a mindset against change.
In my opinion there are too many old teachers here that do not want to accept the change. Would not like the change to occur.
One person actually stood up at a staff meeting and said, I am too old to do this, I don‟t need to learn this.
The above responses speak of older teachers being set in their ways and resisting any progressive pedagogy or transformative policies and practices. The literature on educational change (Fullan 2001, Niemi 2002) reveals that older teachers are more conservative and have a stronger mindset against school reform and educational innovation than their younger counterparts. Niemi‟s (2002) investigation of the main obstacles to active learning revealed the perception held by all the teachers interviewed that the attitudes of older teachers were real obstacles to using active learning methods.
This perception is illustrated in the following response from a young teacher interviewee (Niemi 2002: 774):
The old teachers do not like to experiment with anything new nor do they have information about new methods or if they hear about new methods on in-service courses, they say: „It will not work, - not in our school!‟
The perceptions of older teachers held by younger colleagues in Niemi‟s (2002) study are similar to the perceptions of older teachers conveyed by the responses of all four change agents. However, older teachers do not as a rule resist change. In a study examining
teacher stereotypes as a factor in teacher resistance to school reform, Rusch & Perry (1993) argue that research informs practice in ways that often result in socially constructed stereotypes. Interviews with a large sample of Oregon elementary school teachers implementing democratic participatory practices revealed that the stereotyping of older, experienced teachers was very prevalent, with midlife teachers perceiving older, experienced teachers as resisters. However, older, experienced teachers described themselves as avid questioners but supporters of change and they frequently engaged in a learning experience with a new, young teacher. Three of the change agents themselves (Agents R, G and S) fall into the category of older, experienced teachers and far from being resisters to change are actually initiators and drivers of change. Hence, despite the above responses from the change agents, age is not an accurate indicator of resistance to or support for school language change. It would appear that the identity of the individual educator and his/her predisposition to change regardless of age determines whether the educator is open to change or not.
Another two factors contributing to resistance from educators were the threat of redeployment that Afrikaans teachers experienced and the loss of instructional time for English and Afrikaans accompanying the elevation of the status of isiZulu in the school.
Afrikaans teachers feared that they would become excess educators25 and be redeployed as isiZulu replaced Afrikaans altogether or as 1st additional language. English and Afrikaans teachers felt that their subjects were being compromised with the reduced time allocation to accommodate isiZulu. They added that there was increasing pressure on them to complete syllabus in a shorter time span. The following responses from Agents L, G and R respectively illustrate this position:
Before I came to this office I spoke to a teacher, his argument is that