MAPPING THE THEORETICAL TERRAIN AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2.2 Review of scripts
2.2.2.2 Uncertainties of the roles of schools in society
(Gewer, 2001). This sector should comprise a diverse array of education and training provision, both public and private, to deliver the 29 NCS-FET curricula. However, there are only 50 registered FET colleges in South Africa. As a result, the NCS-FET curricula in the various learning areas currently take place in senior secondary schools. In other words, FET sits at the crossroads between general education and training and higher education, as well as providing access to the world of work (Gewer, 2001). In a way, this heralds new roles and responsibilities for schools in South Africa. The role that schools should play in society is contested by many theorists, and is interrogated in the next section.
and a particular disposition to go with it to suit the economy and the State. This implies a linear relationship between knowledge and power. Power is used to control what is deemed to be acceptable knowledge. This knowledge in turn reinforces those already in power (Freire, 1980). In other words, the State perpetuates power relations by distributing its citizens into various labour forces on the basis of the type of schooling they received and their educational qualifications.
Criticism has been leveled against capitalist theorists for foregrounding economic structure over agency by theorists such as Carspecken, 1998; Connell, 1996; Dewy, 1961; Freire, 1980; and Smyth, Dow, Hattam, Reid, and Shacklock, 2000. From the perspective of the above-mentioned theorists, schools are construed as being terrains of domination, which perpetuate an unequal society in terms of economic and social hierarchies and human resource development. In sharp contrast to capitalist theory is reproduction theory.
2.2.2.2.2 Reproduction theorists
Reproduction theorists (Apple, 1982; Bowles & Gintis, 1976; Carspecken, 1998; Connell, 1996; Dewy, 1961; Freire, 1980; and Smyth, Dow, Hattam, Reid, & Shacklock, 2000) foreground actors’ agency in their conceptualisation of the role of schools. This means that in the relationship between structure and agency, agency is favoured. From the perspective of these theorists, schooling is not merely about knowledge and skills but rather a process fostering values, attitudes and creative and emotional development, all of which contribute to
“responsible, active sound productive citizenship” (Apple, 1986, p. 107). For these theorists the premise is to preserve the treasures of civilisation within the process of socialising the members of each new generation.
In addition, these theorists argue that it is not the job of the school to prepare learners for the job market and reproduce the economic, social and cultural patterns of the Government. They base their argument on the foregrounding of agency over structure in their conceptualisation of the role of schools. These scholars are conscious of the dynamic relationship between knowledge and power; for them, the relational interplay between knowledge and power is highly conspicuous. Thus they perceive schools as tools used by the State to perpetuate power relations between industry, the State and its citizens, with the dynamism between these
What is worth noting about this perspective is how power is perceived. These scholars construe power as a control mechanism that is used to perpetuate domination and social injustice (Wang, 2003). In contrast to the reproduction theorists are the transformation theorists.
2.2.2.2.3 Transformation theorists
Transformation theorists (Aronowitz & Giroux, 1991; Giroux, 1991; and McLaren &
Farahmandpur, 2000) foreground both structure and agency as joint partners in their conceptualisation of the role of schools. What distinguishes these theorists from capitalist and reproduction theorists is how they view power. Of particular relevance is the notion of power as having a dialectical character; they see it as a mechanism that can be used to repress or control people - or to emancipate people. It is in this regard that Giroux (1991) argues for use of the curriculum as a tool to address issues of social justice, develop critical citizenship or address disadvantaged cultural and economic capital. From this perspective, schools are seen as vehicles for a qualitatively better life for all via the curriculum being taught.
South Africa, a relatively new democracy, has adopted a democratic, transformatory perspective on the role of schools. This perspective is strongly aligned with the transformation theorists, and sees power as having a dialectical character that can be used to emancipate people. Education is one of the few forces with the potential to mitigate the negative affects of apartheid and the inequalities it perpetuated. In South Africa schools are seen as vehicles to assist with the transformation agenda and in preparing learners for the world of work (Naidoo, 2007; Dugmore, 2006; Masango, 2007), address backlogs in human resources development to overcome the skills shortage (Bhorat, 2000), promote competitiveness in a global economy, develop critical thinking and address issues of social justice, equity and redress (DoE, 2003; Dugmore, 2006; Masango, 2007).
It is worth noting that the development of human resources is construed as a need - a commodity needed to improve quality of life directly (Sen, 1981). Curricula have been revamped in an effort to overcome the legacy of apartheid and redress imbalances in the context of racial, gender and human resources development. Within the democratic context the State is construed as an agent of change. In other words, it occupies the dialectic space
between socio-economic redress and economic growth. Since schools are seen as vehicles to assist with the transformation agenda as well as preparing learners for the world of work, in the section below I review literature on the preparedness of learners for the world of work.