1.8 Discussion of key concepts used in the study
1.8.5 Township contexts with multiple challenges
South Africa once experienced a segregated education system that ensured that resources were inequitably distributed amongst the groupings, with black Africans enjoying the least of the resources (Mampane & Bouwer, 2011; Samoff, 2008). The apartheid masters understood that a good education system was important not only for ensuring that the citizenry was well educated, but also for human development and for maintenance of socially responsive economic and political systems (Modisaotsile, 2012), thus they denied it to black people. Low cost housing development residential areas were established (known as townships) to house the black labourers closer to their work places in the cities and towns (Harber, 2001; Leoschut, 2006; Prinsloo, 2007; Mampane, & Bouwer (2011); Zulu, Bhengu, & Mkhize, 2019). The term township is best outlined by Zulu, Bhengu and Mkhize (2019) as an underdeveloped segregated urban area reserved for African, mixed race and Indian communities, previously known as non- whites. This formation of townships was instituted under the Group Areas Act, which was intended to separate residential areas according to their race colour (Prinsloo, 2007). The quality of education that was rendered to the black Africans learners was of inferior quality compared to their counterpart white learners (Spaull, 2013; Van der Berg, 2008). This was
20
purposely done to equip a few Africans with essential skills while the majority were exposed to education that limited their aspirations (Samoff, 2008). Sadly, the demographic and socio- economic distribution of the townships continues to sustain racial segregations and the scarcity of resources in the township schools (Mampane & Bouwer, 2011). However, the government has made numerous attempts to up-skill school leaders to cope with the reforms in the education system (Msila, 2008).
The township conditions were and are still characterised by contexts with multiple challenges, which are manifesting themselves even in the education sector (Modisaotsile, 2012). Hence, the quality of education remains very poor and the output rate has not improved. The education system remains sub-standard, especially in the township schools, due to multiple deprivations, which include violence. Chikoko, Naicker and Mthiyane (2015) document a few of multiple deprivations that school principals have to grapple with as they lead and manage schools.
Amongst others, these are: income and material deprivation; employment deprivation;
education deprivation; and living environment deprivation. Further, Chikoko, Naicker and Mthiyane (2015) highlight other forms of deprivations that include the high rate of alcohol consumption among both the youth and adults, generally low parental participation in school activities, large class-sizes, teaching and learning resources very limited and schools highly unionised. It is worth noting that ‘multiple challenges’ and ‘multiple deprivations’ have been used interchangeably here. The dawn of democracy in 1994 saw township school principals faced with numerous challenges (Setlhare, Wood, & Mayer, 2016). Quick changes regarding policy, laws, and rules were effected, which compounded the education morass for school principals to deal with (Modisaotsile, 2012).
Further, Modisaotsile (212) posits that the shift from the apartheid system, where resources where inadequately distributed to different races, to an inclusive education system presented numerous challenges for principals. Notably, some principals who were trained in apartheid ideology were administrators rather than leaders and managers as a result were tempted to resist the reforms (Msila, 2008), which also compounded their problems. However, the Department of Education made attempts to mitigate the education morass inherited by some principals by introducing an Advanced Certificate in Education specialising in school leadership to equip them for the democratic society and for efficient school leadership and management (Msila, 2008). The education arena became a highly contested terrain, as principals had to collaboratively work with various stakeholders who in the past had no say in the decision-
21
making processes. Notably, the school governance in South Africa had been characterised by a top-down approach, in which educators, learners, parents and communities were excluded from decision-making processes, while decision-making processes were the province of the principal and inspector (now referred to as Circuit manger) (Samoff, 2008). The transformation and reforms of the education landscape in South Africa, involving the introduction of South African Schools Act, the Constitution and the Employment of Educators Act, saw all parties invited in decision making processes which compounded the education chaos of the township school principals (Modisaotsile, 2012; Zulu, Bhengu & Mkhize, 2019). The advent of democracy opened the doors for the all-inclusive education system. This saw township parents taking their children to former model C schools, (which were the schools designated for whites or Indians only during apartheid era) since they believed that township schools were not doing justice in teaching their children (Msila, 2008). Meanwhile, the teacher unions became the worst nightmare for township school principals as they sharply contested power with the principals.
Their focus on practical issues of wages and working conditions led to treating teachers as workers and reduced their role in shaping and changing education.
This sadly weakened teacher accountability at the same time (Samoff, 2008; Zulu, Bhengu &
Mkhize, 2019). As principals are charged with the responsibility to lead schools and also manage them (Bhengu, 2005), leading and managing in a township context school is becoming more of a daunting task. As earlier stated by Chikoko, Naicker and Mthiyane (2015), leadership has as pivotal role to play in leading and managing schools, irrespective of the challenges.
Mampane and Bouwer (2011) assert that there are few learners who beat all the odds of historical disadvantage, poverty, poor quality schools and still excel. However, the protection and the support of the schools are much needed for those few learners to succeed under contexts with multiple challenges (Mampane & Bouwer, 2011). The advent of democracy has devolved powers to SGBs, SMTs, teacher unions and RCLs, mandating them to pull together towards improving the standard of education for all citizenry, yet power contestations appear to be taking the centre stage instead of the stipulated mandate (Zulu, Bhengu & Mkhize, 2019). It is against this background that attempts to help principals cope with the challenging contexts of townships need to take place.
22 1. 9 Demarcation of the study
Demarcation of the study is also called delimitations of the study. According to Leedy and Ormrod (2001), the delimitations of the study deal with what the researcher is not going to do.
They further surmise that a researcher may be easily beguiled or attracted by data that is intriguing but not pertinent, away from what the researcher needs to know more about. The researcher needs to select and formally delineate the geographic boundaries of the research study areas. The researcher must take into account three considerations: limiting the size, selecting the general location, and lastly, delineating the specific boundaries. These three considerations are significant for my study in that in South Africa there are nine provinces, each with thousands of teachers and hundreds of principals. Besides that, within each of the provinces there are numerous districts of education, and many schools within the education district located in urban, semi-urban, and rural areas.
Given the impossibility of addressing all these contexts, this study is located at six multiple- deprived township schools in the Pinetown District. The participants will be principals and educators from township schools. Three principals will be from township primary schools and the other three from township secondary schools. As for the PL 1 educators, two educators from each of the six identified schools have been identified as participants. The voices of the teachers are significant for triangulation purposes since more than one perspective will be shared in the same phenomenon. These participants are chosen on the grounds that they have a first-hand ontological perspective about their contexts. In purposive sampling, which is adopted in this study (see Chapter Four), the researcher must first think critically about the parameters of the population and then choose the sample case accordingly. The study is limited to the ethical leadership of school principals in township contexts that have multiple challenges. There are no rules for sample size in qualitative enquiry (Kumar, 2011). Further, Kumar (2011) explains that the sample size in qualitative study does not play any vital role since the purpose is to study only one or few cases in order to identify the spread of diversity not its magnitude. Sample size depends on what the researcher wants to know, the purpose of the research, what is at stake, what will be useful, what will have credibility and what can be done with the available time and resources (Strydom & Delport, 2005).