Monday, July 19, 2010

ISER Paper abstract Day

ISER – Day

Each Child, Every Child:
The Story of the Council for Better Education,
Equity and Adequacy in Kentucky’s Schools


Support for an efficient system of common schools has been a serious problem throughout Kentucky’s history. The General Assembly has long been content to allow Kentucky’s schools to rank among the least supported in the nation. This study attempts to put the struggle for adequately funded public schools into an historical context, focusing on the Kentucky Supreme Court’s decision in Rose v. Council for Better Education. The study examines this decision in light of present efforts to define and assure a proficient education for each and every child.

Substantial litigation emerged in the late 1960s to challenge state systems of school finance. Plaintiffs seeking to provide equitable public schools were frustrated in their attempts to use the U. S. Constitution as a basis for overturning funding schemes, but found more success later using education clauses from the various state constitutions. Among these plaintiffs was a group of Kentucky public school administrators who formed the Council for Better Education and won a landmark case that launched a new wave of American school finance litigation focused on equity and adequacy.

This study chronicles the activities of the Council for Better Education and provides insight into the effort required to bring about this historic result.

Council members met with hostility from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and legislators who did not want to be blamed for the existing conditions. The Council greatly benefited from powerful outside forces including the press, the Prichard Committee, and a host of civic, business and education groups - all pressing for better schools. When lobbying efforts failed, the Council filed suit.

Former Governor Bert Combs agreed to serve as counsel for the plaintiffs. He knew there was a separation of powers problem and appropriate relief would have to be suggested carefully so as not to intrude on legislative authority. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that the present system was unconstitutional, that the governor must call a special session, and that the legislative leaders must present legislation that would increase funding to an amount that was equitable and adequate.

Defense attorney, William Scent argued that inequities would not exist if the plaintiffs had not mismanaged funds and had passed permissive taxes in their districts. He claimed the General Assembly had done the best they could since the people of Kentucky did not want more taxes and Kentucky is a poor state.

In a momentous decision on May 31, 1988, Franklin Circuit Court Judge Raymond Corns decided that the legislature had failed in their duty to provide an efficient system of schools. The case was immediately appealed to the Supreme Court.

The heart of the Rose case was the court’s definition of an efficient system of common schools: one established and maintained by the General Assembly to be substantially uniform throughout the state, free to all Kentucky children, and one that provides equal educational opportunity regardless of place of residence or economic conditions. An efficient system must also be sufficiently funded, free of waste, duplication, mismanagement, and political influence and it must have as its goal the development of seven specified capacities.

The Court declared the fundamental right of each and every child in the Commonwealth to an adequate education and declared the entire system of schools unconstitutional, which lead to the most sweeping education reform in Kentucky history.

Rose v. Council for Better Education can best be seen as a pioneering effort to alter Kentucky’s history and as a move toward more social justice for all children of the Commonwealth and enhanced economic prosperity for the state.

~

Find Richard Day’s complete history of the Council's work leading to the Rose decision and the Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990. Please note that the file is 4 MB in size, and a separate file for the appendices is listed below. Download PDF File

Each Child, Every Child - Appendices - provides supporting information for Dr Day's dissertation noted above. This file is 1.2 MB. Download PDF File

Find Richard Day’s blog, Kentucky School News and Commentary at www.theprincipal.blogspot.com.

ISER Paper Day

EACH CHILD, EVERY CHILD:
THE STORY OF THE COUNCIL FOR BETTER EDUCATION, EQUITY AND ADEQUACY IN KENTUCKY’S SCHOOLS
Richard E. Day, Ed. D.

WELCOME
Good day to all of you attending the 6th International Symposium on Educational Reform in the Republic of South Africa.

Let me begin by thanking Dr Lars Bjork and Dr Justin Bathon of the University of Kentucky for making this presentation possible. I would also like to extend greetings to South African educational governing boards leader, Paul Colditz. I wish I could be with you at this most exciting time in South Africa - and this most challenging time for educators hoping to provide a stronger workforce and better economy for all the people.

INTRODUCTION
• People Interested in school reform – interested in the 1989 Kentucky Case - Rose v. Council for Better Education
o cited 380+ times in US
• WHY the interest?
o Because Kentucky had NOT been seen as a leader in education before that time.
• When the Kentucky Supreme Court found the entire system of schools to be unconstitutional – it provided the political will for the legislature to write a new school law in 1990 called the Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA)
• Metaphor –
o Imagine the worst football team in the best league
o Like other US states, Kentucky has shared in the benefits of universal education
 Economy has advanced
 People’s lives improved

• But compared to other US states - support for the schools has been a serious problem throughout Kentucky’s history.
o Kentucky’s Constitution requires our state legislature to provide “an efficient system of common schools throughout the state”
 define “efficient”
 define “common”
 “throughout the state” refers to equity

• But our state lawmakers have been content to allow Kentucky’s schools to rank among the least supported in the nation.
o This is about $.
o Out of 50 states, Kentucky ranked 49th so often - Thank god for Mississippi

• Today, I will attempt to put that struggle for adequately funded public schools into an historical context, focusing on the Kentucky Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Rose v. Council for Better Education.

• I examine this decision in light of present efforts to define and assure “an adequate education for each and every child” which is our state’s standard.

o This is a new standard that came out of the Rose case.
o Now declared a fundamental right

• The Council for Better Education began as a collection of local school superintendents from the poorest schools districts in the state.
• The activities of the Council for Better Education were part of a national effort to determine a set of judicially manageable standards for equitable and adequate school funding.
o Because American courts operate under the separation of powers doctrine, judges are reluctant to tell the legislature what to do about anything.
o If one is going to go to court – one must help the court by presenting a way for judges to determine whether the legislature has met its Constitutional obligations - or not.
o This has led to a standards movement in American education
o Equity refers to a relative balance of the financial resources made available to Kentucky’s school districts.
o Adequacy is an issue of whether schools have the resources necessary to meet the goals set by the state.
o When schools are inadequately funded, equity and adequacy are forced to compete.

• When our expectations of the schools are low, we don’t have to spend much money on them. However, Kentucky’s assertion that “every child can learn and most at high levels” is no easy standard.
o In this sense, an adequate education for Kentucky’s children is thought of as sufficient in quality and quantity to ensure that all schools satisfy the fundamental rights of all students.

• I spent several years studying the Council for Better Education – a group of local school superintendents
o Focusing on 1984 through 1993 as Kentucky sought to implement a new system of common schools.
o Bert Combs - Council’s efforts “were of sufficient merit to warrant an historical treatment,” and that “future lawyers would benefit from a chronology of Council events.”
o Interviewed the members of the Council, the judge, the attorneys, and others
o some insight into the effort required to bring about this historic result
 Local school superintendents sued the state legislature
• The state superintendent of schools threatened their jobs
• Legislators were mad at them and put pressure on local board members
• It required personal courage to sustain the suit
o Kentucky Education Reform Act is – a true exception in Kentucky’s long history of modest support for its schools.
o Rose v. Council for Better Education can best be seen as a pioneering effort to alter Kentucky’s history and as a move toward more social justice and economic prosperity for all children of the state.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

• For reasons owing to Kentucky’s traditionalistic political culture and agrarian attitudes, the Commonwealth was slow to develop a system of common schools and once finally established, support over the years was weak.

• The achievement of Kentucky’s children suffered as fiscal support for the schools languished among the poorest in America along with the rest of the South.









• Litigation emerged (1968 – 1973) to challenge state systems of school finance.
o Plaintiffs were frustrated in their attempts to use the U. S. Constitution
 Rodriguez (1973) education not a fundamental right under the US constitution
 “Equal protection” under the 14th amendment applies to individuals not governmental entities
o found more success using education clauses
• The Kentucky Supreme Court, in Rose v. Council for Better Education
o Declared education to be a fundamental right
o Reaffirmed the Legislature’s sole responsibility to provide an efficient system of common schools and defined the elements of that system.

• HERE’S HOW IT HAPPENED

• On December 31, 1983, incoming State School Superintendent Alice McDonald, released Arnold Guess

• This act freed Guess
o He called together a group of twenty-eight School Superintendents
o With outstanding technical consultants
o legal counsel
o the Council lobbied the legislature for change
o and threatened to sue using $.50 per child in school funds
o The Council met with hostility from legislators who did not want to be blamed for the existing conditions, and from the State Superintendent
o When lobbying efforts failed, the Council filed suit.

• The Council greatly benefited from powerful outside forces
o the press,
o the Prichard Committee,
o and a host of civic, business and education groups - all pressing for better schools.
• But despite this groundswell, the legislature tried to stop the districts from using school funds to sue the state
o did not go far enough to satisfy the Council or forestall litigation.


• Plaintiff’s attorney Bert Combs would have preferred a federal court,
• the appropriate plaintiffs
o the children
• and who were the defendants,
o there was no precedent for suing the state
o Do you serve every member of the legislature?
o They decided to follow the model for suing the US Congress by suing the legislative leaders
• and by determining the individuals whom would best contribute to the case.
• Separation of powers problem
o Appropriate relief would have to be suggested carefully so as not to intrude on legislative authority.
• The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that the present system was unconstitutional;

• Defense attorney, William Scent
o argued that the inequities would not exist if the plaintiff had not mismanaged funds
o and had passed permissive taxes
 It is true that local officials did not want to raise taxes either
o the Legislature had done the best they could since the people of Kentucky did not want more taxes
o and that Kentucky is a poor state.

• Meanwhile, a statewide election produced a new Governor (who had promised no new taxes) and State Superintendent (who was a member of the Council for Better Education) while the Prichard Committee continued to forge new coalitions with business and education groups.
o The best example of the Prichard Committee’s activity may be their Town Meeting
 20,000 people meeting at the same time
 in 140 locations
 representing every school district
 tied together by a program on Kentucky Educational Television
 with local activities after the program
o Or their Institute for Parent Leadership
 They now have 1,500 people across the state who have been trained to become active in their local schools
 Maintain contact with about 1,350 of them

• May 31, 1988, Franklin Circuit Court Judge Raymond Corns decided that the legislature had failed in their duty to provide an efficient system of schools.
o Following a principle used in a West Virginia court, Corns established an Education Committee to advise the court
o the Legislature punitively called for audits of the plaintiff school districts.
o Audits showed that schools were managing their resources fairly well.
• Immediately appealed to the Supreme Court
o Scent argued that the Legislature had as its goal the best system possible in Kentucky.
 recent legislative changes had a positive effect
 “efficient” means doing the best with the dollars one is given.
 He challenged the standing of the plaintiffs, calling the Council for Better Education a funding vehicle created solely for the purpose of suing the state using tax dollars.
 He claimed that school districts could not sue their creators
 that Corns’s Education Committee was simply a “dog and pony show” which violated the separation of powers doctrine.
o Bert Combs and Debra Dawahare focused most of their effort on confirming the lower court’s conclusion
o Combs was particularly careful arguing the separation of powers issues and guiding the court to conclude the system was unconstitutional without demanding specific remedies of the legislature.


• The Kentucky Supreme Court came to its landmark decision
• activist Chief Justice, Robert F. Stephens
• Stephens decided to assign the writing of the opinion to himself and after hundreds of hours of study at the University of Kentucky, and a late night vodka and tonic, he changed the course of the opinion from one closely crafted to finance issues only, to a broad declaration that the entire system was unconstitutional.

• The heart of the Rose case was the court’s definition of an efficient system of common schools.
o The Supreme Court discussed the characteristics of an efficient system of schools:
 one established and maintained by the Legislature
 to be substantially uniform throughout the state,
 free to all Kentucky children,
 and one that provides equal educational opportunity regardless of place of residence or economic conditions.
 must also be sufficiently funded,
 free of waste, duplication, mismanagement, and political influence
 and it must have as its goal the development of seven specified capacities. These capacities enumerated a substantial set of skills that each student must learn.

• Stephens was most concerned about the court’s ability to require anything of the Legislature when only the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate were actually before the court. After the fact, he advised that if he was the attorney in such a case, and even if it took a month, he’d serve every member of the legislature.

• Reaction to the ruling was initially shocking to the Legislature

o a brief flirtation with defying the court,
o the legislative leaders embraced the decision
o used its political capital to reform the public school system
o followed by a series of public proclamations where various members of the legislature began taking credit for the reform.
o But, it was the combined efforts of the Council for Better Education and its allies that persuaded the courts and gave the legislature the necessary courage to reform Kentucky’s schools.
• By 1993, Kentucky was spending approximately $5300 per pupil and its standing among southern states rose from 12th to 7th while continuing to lag about $1000 per child behind the national average.
• By 1999, Kentucky had risen from 49th to 36th in the nation.

• After Bert Comb’s death, and concerned by the erosion of education’s share of the state budget the Council for Better Education reemerged in 2007, suing the state again. (Young v Williams: 03-CI-00055 & 03-CI-01152)
o The Council commissioned an adequacy study
o Claimed that funding is an “essential and minimal element” of an efficient system of schools
o And that a standards-based system is a rational way for the court to look at the schools
o But the Council specifically asked the court to require the legislature to raise taxes
o the Franklin Circuit Court refused to “pierce the separation of powers” and rendered summary judgment for the defendants.

CONCLUSION: From Rose: Each child, every child in this Commonwealth must be provided with an equal opportunity to have an adequate education... The children of the poor and the children of the rich must be given the same opportunity and access to an adequate education.

The landmark Kentucky Supreme Court decision in Rose v. Council for Better Education is singular event that not only changed the state’s system of schools, but also started a third wave of national school finance litigation based on equity and adequacy claims and education clauses in state constitutions. Without the political cover provided by such a judicial ruling, combined with strong grassroots citizen advocacy, history strongly suggests that the legislature would have happily contented itself to under-fund a modest system of schools for the benefit of most students.

THANK YOU:

Before taking questions, via Skype, let me thank you again for this opportunity to share with an international audience, our experience with school reform in Kentucky.

Complete information on my study is available online at http://www.kycbe.com/ Find the heading for “The Rose Case” and click on “More Reports.” There you will find my study, the listing of school finance cases, and a chronology of Council for Better Education activities.

And now, we’re ready for questions.

Friday, July 16, 2010

ISER Paper Mampane

Effective appointment of teachers in the South African public schools: Does equity and representivity matter?

ABSTRACT

This paper is based on my PhD study on school governing bodies’ (SGBs) understanding of the legislation (Education Laws Amendment Act (ELAA), Act 24 of 2005 on teacher appointment). This legislation focuses specifically on the principles equity and representivity in the ELAA for the selection and recommendation of teachers for appointment. The Act encourages the appointment of teachers from diverse groups so as to establish a staff composition that is an appropriate balance between all races. The participants in this qualitative study comprised of parents, teachers and the principal members of the SGB in the Tshwane South District of the Gauteng Province of South Africa. Learners, however, were excluded since they are never involved in the selection and recommendation of teachers for appointment. Semi structured interviews were used to collect data. The constructivist and interpretivist approach used in the study acknowledged that the implementation of equity and representivity in teacher appointment is controversial in both conception and application. The findings show that while the government is committed in theory to equity and representivity in the selection and recommendation of teachers for appointment in general, the achievement of that commitment by SGBs in public schools remains elusive. While SGBs indicated that they knew the process and procedure for the selection and recommendation of teachers for appointment, most of the SGBs’ understanding and interpretation of the Act revealed the importance of school culture when implementing changes in the Act for staff integration. Further findings were that representivity in teacher appointment should be preceded by cultural interactions rather than imposed teacher integration, an emphasis of school culture rather than equity and representivity.

KEY WORDS: equity; representivity; teacher appointment; legislation; school culture.

INTRODUCTION

When the new ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), came to power in 1994, equality and equity in education were the major concerns for the government and the education authorities. The new government’s goal was to create a unified national education system (White Paper, 1996). In terms of this goal and contrary to past apartheid practices, all schools would in future be fully integrated. By implication any learner and any teacher, irrespective of race, ability and gender would be given the opportunity to attend or work at any school of his/her choice. Informing this goal was the vision of a new, truly united, South Africa where all people would be equal. Both the goal and the vision required a commitment to the key values of equality, non-discrimination and social justice, which lie at the heart of the new Constitution (Section 195(1)) of South Africa.

The key instrument the new ANC government used to attain its goal was the promulgation of a series of Acts that prohibited the use of unfair discrimination on the one hand and promoted affirmative action on the other. Key amongst these Acts were , in order of appearance, the Labour Relations Act (LRA), Act No. 66 of 1995; the National Education Policy Act, (NEPA), Act 27 of 1996; the South African Schools Act (SASA), Act 84 of 1996; the Employment of Educators Act (EEA), Act 76 of 1998 and the Education Laws Amendment Act (ELAA), Act 24 of 2005. Together, these Acts opened the door of equal opportunity and access to all educators, irrespective of race or gender, to apply for any position at any school provided that they satisfied the requisite employment criteria.

BACKGROUND

Despite the strive to create a radically non-racial democratic society based on the principles of equity, redress and representivity, unfortunately, more than a decade later, South African teachers still remain divided in schools (Jaruzel, 2004). There is a clear disconnection between legislation and actual change. Schools are still shaped by the ethos, systems, and procedures inherited from apartheid past and disparities still remain persistent and present (Jaruzel: 2004). Notwithstanding legislative stipulations to this effect, very little has changed with regard to staff composition of public schools. Black schools, previously under the administration of the Department of Education and Training (DET), are still primarily appointing black teachers; white schools, previously under the administration of the Department of Education and Culture, House of Assembly (DEC: HoA), are still primarily appointing white teachers, while schools previously reserved for Indian and Coloured learners, although appointing a few teachers of other races, also remain mostly mono-racial as far as staff composition is concerned (Motala & Pampallis, 2001; and Naidoo, 2005). This is especially disturbing given that the learner composition of all these schools, with the exception of black schools, has become increasingly multi-racial (DoE, 2004).

The South African government on recognizing that guaranteeing equity through racial segregation was increasingly complex called for the amendment of the Employment Equity Act by the Education Laws Amendment Act of 2005 to redress these inequities. It was however, important that the way in which this was done was sensitive to the history and nature of all it would most directly affect. An intrinsic part of the ANC ethos that was meant to infuse legislation and policy development at all levels was the ideal of participative governance. In terms of the South African Schools Act (SASA), Act 84 of 1996 the governance of public schools would, therefore, be the responsibility of elected school governing bodies comprising parents, educators, non-educator staff and learners. One of the responsibilities devolved to such school governing bodies was the selection and recommendation of staff for appointment at the schools they governed, on behalf of the State. There was a proviso, though. The selection and recommendation of staff by school governing bodies had to adhere to specific procedures and requirements determined by the Minister of Education. One of these requirements was that selection procedures and criteria should reflect a commitment to equity, redress and representivity in the workplace (SASA, 1996).

It was assumed, the devolution of the responsibility to select and recommend teachers for appointment at public schools would contribute to racial integration in the staff components of schools (Jansen, 2005). Without such integration, according to Soudien (2004:95), members of different cultures and races might never have the opportunity of interacting with one another on an equal footing. By implication, they might never come to realize that they are all equal and, therefore, entitled to equal opportunities and equal treatment. Noticing that initial legislation did not seem to have had the desired effect that the staff composition of public schools remained largely mono-racial, the South African government, used its power to amend the Employment of Educators Act (Act 76 of 1998) in such a way that the State would have a greater say in the selection and appointment of public school educators. These amendments, first submitted to Parliament in the form of an Education Laws Amendment Bill (2005), were promulgated in the Education Laws Amendment Act (ELAA), Act 24 of 2005. In terms of this Act, the provincial Head of Department (HoD) would not necessarily have to accept the recommendation of a school governing body concerning the educator or educators regarded as most suitable for a specific post. It is these amendments that lie at the heart of my paper. According to Wong (2000) and Jansen (2005), research has shown that people typically interpret legislation in terms of their own unique frames of reference. It is not impossible, therefore, that the lack of transformation could be the result of different interpretations of the law, interpretations informed by different histories, different cultures and different contexts.

CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

In determining the ways in which the governing bodies of selected public schools in South Africa understand and implement changes in government legislation with respect to the appointment of teachers, this paper, based on my doctoral study, focused on three specific aspects, namely (a) the extent to which school governing bodies’ understand the new legislation on teacher selection and appointment (b) the effect that the legislation has on the equitable distribution of teachers across all public schools, and (c) the factors that contribute to variations between policy and practice in this regard. Using a qualitative research approach, I interviewed SGBs from five Tshwane South public schools in the Gauteng Province of South Africa. The sample consisted of former disadvantaged and former advantaged public schools.

As a black educator, having experienced apartheid in South Africa, I started off with the assumption that the lack of transformation was the result of white racism, that is, unwillingness on the part of white South Africans to share their resources with others less advantaged than themselves. Informed by this assumption I first wanted to include only white schools from the Tshwane South District of the Gauteng Province. However, insights gained from literature, coupled with my own observation that township schools had not changed either, I not only had to adjust my initial assumption but also had to reconsider the exclusion of black schools from my sample.

Informed by the above insights I adopted as my working hypothesis the assumption that differences in the interpretation of the ELAA amendments regarding teacher selection and appointment may well be the result of past governance traditions and/or expectations. More specifically, I suspected that differences in the operational contexts of white and black schools respectively, different school cultures, the different education histories of those who serve on formerly white and black school governing bodies and the differences in white and black governing body members’ capacity to govern their schools, could all play a role in the way legislation is interpreted and/or implemented. I decided therefore, to investigate for myself whether or not there were, in fact differences in the way the governing bodies of formerly white schools and those of formerly black schools interpreted and implemented the amendments to the Educators Employment Act (Act 76 of 1998) as promulgated in the Education Laws Amendment Act (Act 24 of 2005) and if so, to what these could be ascribed.

I would like to point out that interventions aimed at the promotion of equity and redress is not unique to South Africa. Rather, they reflect ‘a worldwide trend, featuring specifically in countries with multi-racial/multi-cultural populations’ (Bush & Heystek, 2003:127). In these countries school governance not only tends to be hierarchical but is also informed and directed by notions of democracy and school effectiveness on the one hand and the espoused aim of promoting equity and equality on the other (Boyd & Miretzky, 2003: 59; Gilmour, 2001). While current government actions in South Africa meant to enforce equity, representivity and redress in the selection and appointment of public school teachers might well have been fuelled by injustices and inequities of the past, the limited devolution of power to school governing bodies suggest that the South African government is in step with what is happening in the rest of the world (Levin, 1998:132).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This qualitative study aimed at finding answers to the research questions posed in the study. To answer these questions I collected sufficient data from more than one source, using more than one data collection instrument from participants who had the requisite knowledge and expertise (McMillan 2000). Informed by my research purpose, I formulated my research question as follows:

Are there any differences in the way the governing bodies of selected formerly white schools and black schools respectively interpret the amendments to teacher selection and appointment promulgated in the Education Laws Amendment Act (Act 24 of 2005), and if so, to what could these be ascribed?

Purposive sampling was used to select the five schools and the participants were SGB members, to enable me to get information-rich data (Merriam, 1998: 61). The criteria I used in selecting the participants were (a) previous involvement as SGB member in teacher selection processes (b) SGB members’ willingness to participate in the study, and (c) ease of access and minimal financial costs. In addition to these three general criteria I also selected schools and participants that would be representative of public schools and teachers in general. To this purpose I included schools that were both historically advantaged and historically disadvantaged. To ensure that the perspectives of different categories of SGB members were represented I included principals (ex-officio members), parents (nominated and ad hoc members) as well as teachers in the sample. Learners were not included because they do not participate in the teacher selection and recommendation processes. The inclusion of historically advantaged as well as disadvantaged schools was of importance to me since I wanted to determine the ways different racial groups interpreted recent amendments promulgated in the Education Laws Amendment Act of 2005. The study was thus limited to five Tshwane South District 4 schools in the Gauteng Province, three former advantaged and two former disadvantaged schools. Their status as primary or secondary schools was irrelevant since the role functions of all SGBs are the same.

Noting the increased role of the government in promoting equity and representivity in public schools through legislative interventions I explored differences in the way the governing bodies of historically white schools - and those of historically black schools understood, interpreted and implemented amendments to legislation on the selection and appointment of teachers at public schools. Focusing specifically on the school governing bodies of five schools in the Tshwane South, I used one on one semi structured interview questions to look for answers to the recent legislation on teacher selection and appointment, within the SGBs’ life context (Yin, 2003:22-23). The semi structured interviews gave me the opportunity to consider factors such as variations in school structure and culture, governance capacity and resources, all of which have historical and cultural roots, as other factors that might affect the SGBs’ understanding of legislation. The five case studies allowed me to consider multiple and varied responses (Merriam, 1998:9)

The comparison of the responses of the different racial and governing body membership groupings as well as their different operational, cultural, political and educational contexts (Yin, 1994:21) were done after using exploratory, explanatory and descriptive questions, what Berg and Stake, in Denzin & Lincoln (2000), call an instrumental case study approach. Exploratory questions focused on the possibility of selecting and appointing teachers from different racial groups; explanatory questions helped to reassess and refine issues to interpret and frame key findings; descriptive questions revealed the significance and impact of SGBs’ implementation of legislationin an attempt to advance equity and representivity in the schools (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000:388-389).

The following questions were asked:

• To what extent do race, language and culture play a role in the SGB’s short listing process?
• Do you think the criteria used by your SGB reflect the criteria in the legislation? Explain.
• Bearing in mind the thinking behind the legislation, and considering staff composition, do you think your SGB selection process is effective? Give reasons.

RESULTS/FINDINGS

Race, language and culture role in the SGB short listing process

RACE: In devolving certain governance responsibilities to school governing bodies (SASA, 1996) the State assumed that these bodies understood their roles and responsibilities and the legislation and would be willing and able to take appropriate action to ensure that their schools promoted equity and representivity. This, however, was not the case. Most SGBs interviewed gave the following response with regard to race:
We consider not only qualifications and expertise but also personality and we are aware of government requirements that we have to create a workforce that is representative of all the people of the country even if, for various reasons, we are unable to meet these expectations. Race is not a ‘school issue’, since it is the responsibility of the provincial Head of Department to ensure racial equity at school level.
Though indicating that they do not discriminate, they however, see no need to transform and they view the new legislation as an external imposition from government to create racial equity among teachers.

Both black and white SGBs had excuses for not appointing teachers from another racial group. For example a black SGB member commented that:
Scarcity ‘and ‘non-availability’ is due to - ‘other races that will never avail themselves to be appointed at our schools’ – and ‘because we are also having segregated residential area, different races are found more in their local schools, in their vicinity; and fear’. ‘Whites are scared to come to our schools, because of the problems in the township’, but ‘we can consider other races.

This comment implies that some SGB members still carry a baggage of racial segregation from the historical past of South Africa and this influences their decision when it comes to appointing teachers from another racial group. Ethnic and racial segregation in both formerly white and black schools is still perpetuated because former black and white schools have remained mono racial with regard to staff composition.

A white SGB member, similarly, commented that:
Each group of people in the country tends to have ‘own race schools’. They blamed ‘ethnic and racial segregation’ created by apartheid’

It seems that both groups, black and white, blames the historical past for their racial segregation.

Language: All SGBs in the single and parallel or dual-medium schools indicated the importance of proficiency in both instructional languages. They stated that the Language of Instruction (LOI) is decided by the SGBs’, and it is their responsibility to ensure that the staff they select is able to implement this policy effectively. One white SGB member commented that:
Language proficiency is crucial for learning and communication and it is considered in terms of the language of teaching and learning in a specific phase or a specific school.

A black SGB member from another school also emphasized the fact that:
‘We need teachers who speak indigenous black languages to teach Foundation Phase learners. We look at the experience of the teacher and the language of the schools since it is important for the teacher to be able to relate to the children. If the teacher suits the post requirement we will employ any teacher who can communicate in the school’s language.

Language here is being used as a barrier for not employing multicultural teachers.

Selection criteria and procedure

In recommending teachers for appointment, the SGBs feel that the government should allow them to have their own selection criteria due powers devolved to them in the South African Schools Act. This is reflected in this statement made by one of the SGB members:
The selection criteria used is aimed at ensuring that the teachers who are selected for recommendation to the provincial Head of Department are the ones most likely to add value to the school.

This means that SGBs not only consider qualifications but need someone who would be effective in the day to day running of the school. This indicates that the outcome of the process reflects multiple interpretations to the selection criteria. They further indicated that:
We operate in ‘strict adherence to law’, ‘interviewing all applicants’ to ‘choose the best candidate’, and according to ‘what the principal said in the briefing’.

This means that the selection criteria may be influenced by other factors such as knowledge, preference and authority of the principal.

Legislation and staff composition

All SGBs feel that staff composition/integration should not be forced upon people because it even occurs in people of the same race, a disturbing factor considering that the majority of former Model C (white) schools now have a mixed learner population, and the teaching staff and school governing bodies are still predominantly white. The following was said:
The person to address the issue of representivity is ‘the employer when they employ people. The best the SGBs can do is to go for ‘the best teacher, irrespective of colour.

There are indications of a gap between legislation expectations at national level and legislation realities at school level. This could be ascribed to the fact that both black and white SGBs are aware of legislation expectations at national level and legislation realities at school level that could be ascribed to a mismatch between what the government’s intentions of racial representivity among teachers and what the school wants. For exmple, emphasis is placed on the language of the school by all SGBs, an indication that they want to retain their own culture in the schools and by doing so they exclude other teachers from other racial backgrounds. This implies that SGBs feel that the state should allow SGBs the legislative authority bestowed upon them as equal partners in decision making, instead of interfering and undermining their authority (Naidoo, 2004). Because all SGBs agree that there should be willingness and not coercion for integration, they still want to remain segregated.

DISCUSSION

Since legislation on teacher appointment emphasises implementation of equity and representivity principles at school level – the responsibility rests with the SGBs. Based on the above, SGBs believe that their understanding of policy gives them the right to select the best teacher because they were trained by the principal. Because SGBs know that the principal represents the DoE, they base their knowledge and understanding of legislation on the principal’s trust, and view any failure from their side as a failure from government’s side. Because SGBs are democratically elected to their position, they maintain their right to democratically maintain control over decision making in their schools, and regards the state’s intervention as a political move that values race more than quality (DoE, 2005). Although they all understood legislation this did not in any way make them accept and implement legislative stipulation with regard to teacher appointment.

In the implementation of the new legislation it seems as if SGBs still appoint people they prefer and need, an indication that reception of ‘the same legislation is not only open to different interpretations’ but allows for exclusion of members of the other racial background. This is supported by Wong, (2000) and Jansen, (2005) who indicate that different school governing bodies ‘apply different criteria’ in the selection and recommendation of teachers for appointment at the schools for whose governance they are responsible (Wong, 2000; Jansen, 2005).

For this study culture emerged as a strong influence on the way in which SGBs understand and implement legislation for teacher selection and appointment. Dominant cultural practices shape school culture, and culturally and linguistically diverse races find it challenging to function and participate in such a school (Erikson, 2001). This indicates that the good intention of legislation to integrate races might cause more harm than good if cultural issues are not taken into consideration.

Another issue that emerged from the study was the issue of race. The findings from this study revealed that most schools included in the study are still ‘own race schools’ with only one of the formerly white schools being multicultural. There are several reasons for the lack of equity and representivity in some of the former black and former white schools. The main reason was that the black schools are mostly situated in high problem filled areas. Black SGBs absolved themselves from all blame, claiming that no teachers from any other race have ever applied for a post in their schools. The white SGBs, on the other hand, gave excuses for not recommending teachers from other races because of economic and cultural issues. There is also the perception that there was a lot of crime in the townships. If these barriers could be overcome, there will be more equity and representivity as intended in legislation. Bloem & Diaz’s (2007) acknowledged that representivity can only be realistically achieved to a degree since functional adjustment is often related to cultural norms and values.

It seems that both black and white SGBs are using language to justify exclusion of teachers from other racial backgrounds. They used interviewing of candidates from different ethnic backgrounds and different languages as equity but do not appoint them if they cannot speak their language. This is acknowledged by Sayed (2002a) who indicates, however, that the development of current government legislation does not necessarily result in effective implementation, as a result, it may in fact, undermine moves aimed at equity and representivity and lead to a controversy between schools and the department (Sayed, 2002a) over criteria for the selection and recommendation of teachers for appointment.

Without evaluation, even good policy intervention practices may not result in improved practice outcomes and may continue to result in non- representivity of staff in schools. Culturally responsive instruction could address this problem since it builds on the existing school culture, the ways people reason about and make sense of their worlds, and the language and communicative patterns typical of the school concerned (Van Wyk: 2006). Programmes should be developed to engage SGBs in capacity building that will lead to culturally competent practice. Effective SGB development requires attention to cultural self-awareness, attitudes/expectations, beliefs, knowledge, and skills.

CONCLUSION

Policy implementation is a complex process, especially if the implementers are people outside the classroom, and change should be carried by the school itself (Mortimore, 2000: 143). Elements of school culture are particularly important because schools are now open for all races. The issue of culture and language emerged as influencing factors on the short listing, interviewing and recommendation of teachers for appointment, in this sudy (Ubben, Hughes and Norris, 2001: 116). SGBs have be trained in diverse cultures to become competent in diverse teacher selection and recommendation for appointment. Collaborative relationships with culturally and linguistically diverse schools can be the starting point for effective appointment of diverse teachers because they influence SGBs’ efforts to understand and implement policy aimed at integrating culturally- and linguistically-responsive teachers (Ortiz, 2002).

Grieves et al (2005: 24) partially agree with the above point of view, acknowledging that it is important to appoint a diverse workforce but only if there is already an established school culture and if efficiency and effectiveness are integral to the way the school operates. Rushing (2001: 32) agrees, arguing that education is not a neutral activity but functions in the context of political, cultural and social inequities within the broader society. Hence the consequence of interventions aimed at redress and/or racial integration might be either positive or negative (Garcia, 2002). One of the reasons for this unsatisfactory outcome could be that individuals are naturally biased towards their own interests, implying that conflicts of interest are more often than not a consequence of controversy over the principles of equity and diversity (Mormar, 2004). It follows that failure to consider the common good of a particular group may result in conflicts between group interests and individuals’ own distinct interests. As in the case of this study, the conflict seems to be between SGBs’ criteria for selection and recommendation of teachers in their schools and the government legislation on teacher appointment.






REFERENCES
Boyd, W.L. and Miretzky, D. (2003). American educational governance on trial: Change and challenges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bush, T. & Heystek, J. (2003). School governance in the new South Africa. Compare, Vol. 33(2). pp127-138).

Bush, T. & Gamage, D. (2001). Models of self governance in schools: Australian and the United Kingdom education Management. Vol. 15(1). Pp 39-44.

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000). (2nd Ed). Handbook of Qualitative Research. London, Thousand Oaks. Sage Publication.

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2003). Strategies of qualitative enquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Department of Education. (2005). Speech by the Deputy Minister of Education Mr. M.E. Surty, MP on the Education Laws Amendment Bill. South African Business Information. 15 September 2005.

Department of education. (2004). Government Printer, Pretoria (White Paper 1).

Department of education. (2000). Report on values, education and democracy. Pretoria: Government printers.
Department of Education (1995a). Education and training in a democratic South Africa. First Steps to develop a new system (1995). White Paper on Education and Training, South African Government Gazette. Vol. 357, No. 16312.

Department of Education (1996b). National Education Policy Act, No. 27 of 1996. South African Government Gazette, Vol. 370, No. 17118. Government Printer, Pretoria.

Department of Education (1996). Education Labour Relations Council. National Education Policy Act,No. 27 of 1996. Pretoria: Department of Education, South Africa.

Grieves, J. and Hanafin, P. (2005). Human resource management: the Achilles heel of school governance. Employee relations journal. Vol. 27 (1). pp20- 46.

Jansen, J. D. (2005, August 01). When will white schools transform? The Star, p10.

Jansen, J. (2005). Leading in an Unequal World: Is Capability Enough? Outline of Keynote Address to the 7th International Convention of Principals. Cape Town International Convention Centre, Monday 11th July 2000.

Jansen, J. (2004). Race, education and democracy after ten years: how far have we come? Prepared for Institute for democracy in South Africa (IDASA). Lessons from the field: a decade of democracy in South Africa. University of Pretoria.

Jansen, J.D. (2001). The politics of education performance in South African education: autonomy, accountability and assessment prospects. Vol. (4) pp 554-564.

Jansen, J.D. (2001). The race for education policy after apartheid. In Y.Sayed & J.D. Jansen (eds.). Implementing Education Policies: The South African Experience. Cape Town: UCT Press.

Levin, B. (1998). An epidemic of education policy: (what) can we learn from each other? Comparative education journal. Vol. 34(2). pp 131-141.

Mormar, A. (2005). Authority, Equality and Democracy. The School of Law & the School of Philosophy. Volume 18(3). pp 315 – 345.

Motala, E. and Pampallis, J. (2001). Education and Equity: The impact of state policies on Southafrican education. Johannesburg: Centre for Education Policy Development.

Naidoo, J.P. (2004). Educational Decentralisation and School Governance in South Africa: From Policy to Practice. A Thesis presented to the Harvard Graduate School of Education in partial fulfilment of the requirements of degree of Doctor of Education.

Naidoo, J.P. (2005). Educational Decentralisation and School Governance in South Africa: From Policy to Practice. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.

Ortiz, A. A. (1997). Learning disabilities occurring concomitantly with linguistic differences. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Vol. 30. pp 321–332.

Ortiz, A. A. (2002). Prevention of school failure and early intervention for English Language Learners. In A. J. Artiles & A. A. Ortiz (Eds.), English Language Learners with special education needs: Identification, assessment, and instruction (pp. 31–63). Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems Co., Inc.

Rushing, W. (2001). Inequality and education reform - formulating a macro-historical sociology perspective: Race Ethnicity and Education. Vol. 4(1). pp 29-44.

Sayed, Y. (1997). Understanding educational decentralization in post-apartheid South Africa. The Journal of Negro Education 66, no. 4: 354_65. 1999. Discourses of the policy of educational decentralisation in South Africa since 1994: An examination of the South African Schools Act. Compare 29, no. 2: 141_52.

Sayed, Y. (2001). Post-apartheid educational transformation: policy concerns and approaches. In Yusuf Sayed and Jonathan Jansen (Eds.) Implementing education policies:The South African experience. Cape Town: UCT Press.

Sayed, Y. (1995). Educational policy developments in South Africa, 1990-1994: A critical examination of the policy of decentralization, participation, and power. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Bristol, 1995.

Sayed, Y., and N. Carrim. 1997. Democracy, participation and equity in educational governance. South African Journal of Education. Vol. 17(3). pp 91 -99.

Sayed, Y. (2002). Democratising Education in a decentralised system: South African policy practice. Compare. Vol 32(1). pp 35-46.

Sayed, Y. (2002). Democratising Educational Governance in South Africa: Policy problems and prospects. Available from: http://www.edfac.usyd.edu.au/projects/wcces96/papers/sayedy.pdf. Accessed 3 July 2007.

Van Wyk, N. (2004). School governing bodies: the experiences of South African educators. South African Journal of Education. Vol. 24(1). Pp49-54.

Van Wyk B. (2006). Response to K Harley: Teacher education in South Africa: social change, quality assurance, and democracy. Symposium: Higher Education Quality assurance in South Africa: Widens democracy or not? Faculty of Education, Stellenbosch University, 10 August 2006.


White Paper. (1996). White Paper on the organisation, governance and funding of schools. GG 16987. Vol. 368. pp 10-11.

Wong, K.K. (2000). Big change questions. Chicago school reform: From decentralisation to integrated governance. Journal of Educational Change. Vol. 1. pp97-105.

Yin, R.K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. (Revised Edition). London: Sage Publications.

Yin, R.K. 1993. Application of case study research. Newbury : Sage Publications.

Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research. (2nd Ed). London: Sage Publications.

Yin, R. R. (2003). Case Study research: Design and methods (3rd Ed). New Delhi: Sage Publications Inc.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

ISER Paper Joubert

6th Annual International Symposium on Educational Reform (ISER)
“Effective schools in effective systems”

Sub- theme
Effective schools in ineffective systems


Principals as the professional managers of teaching and learning in their schools: Policy and practice

Introduction

Managing teaching and learning is one of the most important (if not the most important) activities for principals and other school leaders. The South African Schools Act (1996) in section 16A clearly defines the role of the school principal as the professional manager of a school. As the professional manager of a school, a principal is accountable to the Head of Department (HoD) for the academic performance of the school and the effective use of available resources. If the level of performance of learners is below standard, or if there has been a serious breakdown in the way the school is managed or the safety of learners or staff is threatened, the school must submit a plan to the HoD for correcting the situation. Furthermore, the HoD must take all reasonable steps to assist underperforming schools and if necessary implement the incapacity code and procedures for poor work performance referred to Employment of Educators Act, 1998. These legal provisions in section 16A of the South African Schools Act have serious implications for principals as the managers of teaching and learning in our schools.

The terms and conditions of employment of educators are determined in terms of Section 4 of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998. These terms and conditions of service are described in the Personnel Administrative Measures (PAM) (Department of Education, 1999). According to the PAM the “core process in education is curriculum delivery and the strategic levers for curriculum delivery”. The PAM clearly spells out that the professional responsibilities of school principals are to ensure that the school is managed satisfactorily and in compliance with applicable legislation, regulations and personnel administration measures as prescribed. Furthermore, principals must ensure that the education of the learners is promoted in a proper manner and in accordance with approved policies. The aim of jobs at district offices is to “facilitate curriculum delivery through support in various ways”.

The PAM also states that education specialists (office based educators) must assist educators to identify, assess and meet the needs of learners (provide professional leadership) to implement systems and structures and present innovative ideas that are congruent with policy frameworks and plans.

This article argues that policy as written often fails to inform implementers what they need to know to implement policy. Instead, a network of policy professionals—professional associations, academics, trainers, and consultants—disseminate policy and its entailments to implementers, acting as resources for getting policy implemented. These "implementation resources" may interpret and publicise legislation, formulate and recommend the organisational or individual practices needed for implementation, or train implementers in the skills needed to do their jobs differently (Hill, 2003:17). By offering reasons for putting policy in place, the Department of Education may also convince implementers, whose work environments are typically crowded with competing demands for action, to get policy implemented. This article examines how resource inadequacy, working conditions and attaining goals impede on the management of teaching and learning in South Africa.

Lipsky’s theory of street-level bureaucrats will be used to frame this study to investigate how discretion, autonomy and coping mechanisms of school principals and district officials affect the implementation of the provisions in section 16A of the Schools Act.


The legislative and policy trail

The transformation of the South African education system implies profound changes in the culture and practices of schools. There is a fundamental need to establish a clear and agreed understanding of what the education system expects of those who are entrusted with the leadership and management of its schools. In South Africa the task of the school principal has changed irrevocably. The question is no longer whether the principal has a management or leadership task, but rather how the principal should be trained or prepared for the task of principalship (Van der Westhuizen, 1988:378; Hallinger, 2006:1). The Department of Education (2005) states unequivocally that no national standard or structure exists for the training and accreditation of school principals. The issues mentioned in departmental policies relate, in particular, to the main characteristics of a profession, i.e. core qualities which principals need, educational and social values, personal and professional attributes Department of Education, (2005).

Education Management and Leadership Development draft policy framework (Department of Education, 1st draft 2003, 8th draft October 2004) provides the context for a multi-faceted national strategy for education management and leadership development. From this point of departure the policy framework aims to provide a conceptual “map” that is rooted in the contextual needs and realities of South African schools for building capacity in management and leadership and, by doing so, to build excellence throughout the South African education system, Van der Westhuizen and Van Vuuren, (2007). The policy framework intends to define the roles and responsibilities of the national Department of Education, provincial Departments of Education, and school management teams. The premise is that without this policy framework, school management, per se, will remain unco-ordinated and directionless with limited leverage available to hold school managers accountable. The vision for the professionalisation of principalship in South Africa emerged from a reliance on the potential effectiveness of decentralised, site-based management for the achievement of transformation in the education system ( Van der Westhuizen and Van Vuuren, 2007:433). The national education management and leadership development programme implies a collaborative approach that involves the national Department of Education, the provincial Departments of Education, the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs), professional associations, educator unions, and the private sector.

The Standards Generating Body registered a qualification called the ‘Advanced Certificate in Education (School Management and Leadership)’ for the rofessionalisation of school principalship with the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). This qualification was subsequently developed as a National Professional Qualification for Principalship within the National Qualifications Framework (Department of Education (2004a ).

The Department of Education published a discussion paper in August 2005 suggesting a South African Standard for Principalship. The Department of Education believes that there is an imperative to establish a mutually agreed understanding of what the country’s education system expects of those who are entrusted with the leadership and management of its schools.

In 2007 the South African Schools Act was amended to include provisions on the professional management of a school. The principal must in undertaking the professional management of a public school as contemplated in section 16(3), carry out duties which include, but are not limited to the implementation of all the educational programmes and curriculum activities; the management of all educators and support staff; and the management of the use of learning support material and other equipment.

In terms of Section 16A, the principal must prepare and submit to the Head of Department an annual report in respect of the academic performance of that school in relation to minimum outcomes and standards and procedures for assessment as prescribed by the National Curriculum Statement and the effective use of available resources.

The Head of Department must annually identify schools that are underperforming and must issue a written notice to the school that the standard of performance of learners is below the standards prescribed by the National Curriculum Statement and is likely to remain so, and that there has been a serious breakdown in the way the school is managed or governed which is prejudicing, or likely to prejudice, the standards of performance; or the safety of learners or staff is threatened.

In such a case the principal must at the beginning of the year, prepare a plan setting out how academic performance at the school will be improved. The academic improvement plan is a short-term plan or programme of action which the school develops in response to the findings and recommendations made in the evaluation reports. This plan is aimed at effecting improvement in the school’s areas of need as highlighted in the evaluation reports compiled by the district officials. The academic performance improvement plan must be presented to the Head of Department and tabled at a governing body meeting. The Head of Department may approve the academic performance improvement plan or return it to the principal with such recommendations as may be necessary in the circumstances. If the Head of Department approves the academic performance improvement plan the principal must, by 30 June, report to the Head of Department and the governing body on progress made in implementing that plan. It is unclear how a school principal whose school has underperformed will be able to develop an academic improvement plan within months and successfully execute this improvement plan without serious interventions supported by the education authorities.


The professional management of teaching and learning

The Department of Education now requires principals to carry the primary responsibility for the management of teaching and learning. They must effectively promote and support the best quality teaching and learning and enable learners to attain the highest levels of achievement.

The Department of Education, in its Education Leadership and Management Development Policy Framework in 2005 proposed a South African Standard for Principalship (Department of Education, 2005). It is the Department f Education’s itention that this Standard for Principalship will define what is expected of its principals, and that it will serve as a template against which professional leadership and management development needs will be addressed.

The Standard for Principalship clearly identifies the principals’ primary role as the promotion of effective teaching and learning. The six interdependent areas of principalship are all subsumed within the principals’ responsibility to enhance the quality of teaching and learning and to raise levels of learner achievement.

Our nation’s underperforming schools and learners are unlikely to succeed until we get serious about the professional management of our schools. As much as anyone in public education, it is the principal who is in a position to ensure that good teaching and learning spreads beyond single classrooms, and that ineffective practices aren’t simply allowed to fester. The continuing professional development principals get once they are hired and throughout their careers, has a lot to do with whether school leaders can meet the increasingly tough expectations of these jobs.

That schools should be focused on teaching and learning, is a platitude. But the truth of the matter is that in some schools learners learn and progress, and in others very limited teaching and learning take place. The South African government places much emphasis on providing high-quality education for all learners. However, equal opportunities and quality mean different things to different people.

In South Africa school principals and educators face the challenge of producing results in an increasingly complex education environment. Transformation of the education system, changing financial priorities, shifting education needs and new teaching strategies require that education managers at all levels take on new responsibilities. Muijs and Harris (2003:440) point out that evidence from school improvement literature consistently highlights the fact that effective educational leaders exercise a powerful influence on schools’ capacity to improve learner achievement.

Elmore (1995:356) argues that the organisational conditions of a school, in particular the approach taken to staff development and planning, as well as the way teaching and learning is conducted determines the effectiveness of teaching and learning. Leithwood and Jantzi (1990:253) emphasize the importance of the behaviours of teachers as they engage in activities directly affecting the performance of the learners.

Knowledge of how principals manage curriculum in South Africa is limited (Hoadley & Ward, 2009:4). Studies on the availability of training and the needs of school managers dominate the field (Taylor 2007; Van der Westhuizen, Mosogo and Van Vuuren 2004; Bush et al 2006). One of the key findings is that resources are important, but the effective use of resources “is a central problem in South African schooling and one we know least about” (Taylor, 2007:536). There is consensus in research literature that school managers play a crucial role in creating conditions for improved instruction (Spillane 2006; Taylor 2007). What is less understood is how the principal contributes (Hoadley and Ward, 2009:4).

Hallinger and Heck (1998:187) argues that the principals’ primary influence on schooling outcomes is creating the conditions of possibility for teaching and learning. They propose three sets of management dimensions – defining the schools mission, managing the instructional programme and promoting a positive learning climate. Leithwood and Riehl (2005: 6) identify that we need more robust understanding of management practices, responses to external policy initiatives and local needs and priorities.

Managing teaching and learning involves active collaboration of the principal and teachers regarding curriculum, teaching and assessment. The principal seeks out ideas, insights, and expertise of teachers and works with teachers towards improving learners’ achievement. Principal and teachers share responsibility for staff development, curricular development and supervision of teaching tasks (Marks & Printy, 2003).

There is no way that a school principal alone can perform all the complex tasks of a school. Responsibility must be distributed and people must understand the values behind various tasks (Bush & Glover, 2003:25). Effective management also depends on having the authority to hold people accountable to produce results. Capacity building initiatives mean that careful attention should be paid to developing management skills of others in a school. Professional management then becomes a distributed responsibility. Effective professional management requires routines and management tools of various sorts in the school, such as scheduling procedures, evaluation protocols and sharing of information (Spillane, 2006). The culture of schools and the diversity of those that lead them have not always kept pace with the growing diversity in the educator and learner population.

Practical implementation of legislation and policies pertaining to the management of teaching and learning

Street-level bureaucracy, a term coined by Lipsky (1980: xi), refers to "public service workers who interact directly with citizens in the course of their jobs, and who have substantial discretion in the execution of their work". Since they account for a substantial proportion of the personnel in any bureaucracy and enjoy wide discretion in the execution of public policy, street-level bureaucracy determines how policy is implemented in practice.

Lipsky(1980:xii) argues that legislation and policies are not interpreted and implemented in the offices of high-raking officials, because it is actually made in the offices and daily encounters of street-level workers. Street-level bureaucrats make policy in two ways. First, by exercising high levels of discretion in decision-making and second by their relative autonomy from organisational authority. For the purpose of this paper, district officials, school principals and educators in their classrooms are seen as street-level bureaucrats.

District officials and school principals have considerable discretion in determining the nature, amount and quality of benefits and sanctions provided by their offices. For example, principals decide to take action against staff members who do not fulfil their day-to-day duties. To the extent that school principals are professionals, the assertion that they exercise considerable discretion is obvious. Section 16 A of the Schools Act theoretically attempts to standardise the norms and practices that informs the day-to-day decision-making of school principals. The district officials and principals both desire to maintain and expand their autonomy. Principals are not neutral public servants, they also have ideas, values, beliefs, interests which they use to shape policy Their superiors try to restrict their discretion in order to secure certain results, but principals often resist their restrictions (policies) successfully.

There are clear differences between the objectives of the policy-makers and those who have to implement these policies and laws, namely the street-level bureaucrats. Political leaders and Heads of Educational Departments are interested in achieving results consistent with their political views and aspirations. Street-level bureaucrats are interested in processing work consistent with their own preferences and experiences. If everything receives priority, nothing does (Lipsky, 1980:19). Policy-makers and politicians are concerned with performance and those aspects that expose them to critical scrutiny. Street-level bureaucrats (district officials and principals), on the other hand have a role interest in securing the requirements of completing the job.

Lipsky (1980:16) asserts that educators in general will conform to what is expected of them. However, one can expect a degree of non-compliance if the principals’ interests differ from the interests of their superiors (or policy-makers) and the incentives and sanctions are not sufficient to prevail. Some of the ways the street-level bureaucrats withhold cooperation with their superiors include personal strategies as excessive absenteeism, cheating, stealing, deliberate wasting, and negative attitudes such as alienation and apathy.

How the problem of resources impede on the management of teaching and learning

Resource inadequacy is not only about the lack of learning and teaching support materials. It is also about lack of information, large work-loads, lack of time and inadequate personal resources.

Bureaucratic decision-making takes place under conditions of limited time and information. The management of teaching and learning typically are constrained by difficulty in obtaining relevant information, the principals’ capacity to absorb information and by the unavailability of information. Principals of township and rural schools rely on their district offices to provide them with the necessary documentation and to assist them in understanding the implementation thereof. Principals often work with a high level of uncertainty because of the frequency and rapidity with which decisions have to be made. Typical examples would be guiding staff members when curriculum changes take place or developing an academic performance plan within a month after they have been informed that the school is underperforming.

Educators characteristically have large classes. The actual numbers are less important that the fact that they typically cannot fulfil their mandated responsibilities with such large classes. For teachers over-crowed classrooms mean that they are unable to give the kind of personal attention good teaching requires. High learner-teacher ratios also mean that teachers must attend to maintaining order and have less attention for learning activities. Principals also have to spend more time on resolving conflict between teachers and learners than developing positive strategies for more effective teaching and learning.

Principals may also lack personal resources in conducting their work. They may be under-trained or inexperienced. The effective management of teaching and learning cannot be done properly, given the ambiguity of goals and the lack of support they receive form their superiors.

How conditions of work impede on the management of teaching and learning

School principals are consistently criticised for their inability to improve learner achievement. They work in an environment that conditions the way they perceive problems and frame solutions to them (Lipsky, 1980:27). The persistence of rigid and unresponsive patterns of behaviour experienced by school principals result from the substantial discretion exercised by the district officials. Thus the work environment of school principals is structured by common patterns of practice of ambiguous, vague or conflicting decisions taken by their superiors.

In terms of Section 16A, school principals must account for the management of the use of learning support material and other equipment. Schools in general work with inadequate resources. Within these constraints they have broad discretion with respect to the utilisation of resources. In the allocation and application of resources such as learning support material, they are confronted by their own lack of knowledge and experience or ambiguous goals that guide their decision-making.

A salient condition of work is that the educators employed by the school are not always committed to their teaching. Thus school principals have considerable responsibility in managing effective teaching and learning but little external support in how to achieve learning objectives. Dealing with incapacity and poor work performance does not form part of the key areas of principalship discussed in the South African Standard for Principalship. Knowledge and skills in the interpretation and implementation of the basic aspects of labour legislation are not included in the Advanced Certificate in Education (Education Leadership) that was developed by the National Department of Education.

School principals develop their own school policies to deal with the complexity of their tasks. In the development of these school policies, school principals have to interpret and implement legislation and departmental policies. In this way school principals and district officials “make” policy. These policies based on procedures and routines are often biased and often have unintended consequences. For example, principals who are under constant pressure to improve results face being fired or demoted if their schools consistently produce poor matric results deliberately hold back weak learners in Grade 11 in a bid to boost their matric pass rate (Govender, Sunday Times, 21 March 2010).

How goals and performance measures impede on the management of teaching and learning

School principals have conflicting goals. Is their role to communicate social values, meet the need of employers in South Africa or meet the aspirations and ideals of politicians? The reason for amending the Schools Act to define the roles of the school principal as the professional manager are inundated by power struggles between the education authorities and school governing bodies. The exact role of the principal as the professional manager of teaching and learning may be ambiguous, because it is defined by accretion and have never been rationalised. Defining the functions of the school principal in the Schools Act could be seen as part of the education authorities not to confront its goal conflicts. Typical claims in education policies that actions are “in the best interests of the child” is an attempt by the Department of Education to support their coercive modes of compliance with their policies. A fundamental dilemma school principals’ face is to provide individual responses to the educational authorities and not be subjected to mass treatment. This is a classic example of goal displacement. Goal displacement takes place when the norm of the individual school becomes subordinate to the needs for mass processing (Lipsky, 1980:44).

Typical goal conflicts arise from the contradictory expectations that shape the role of the principal as the professional manager of teaching and learning in a school. Role expectations are generally determined by peers, reference groups and public expectations. The most important dimension, the learners, are often not considered in the determining of the role of the principal in the management of teaching and learning. In South Africa the emphasis is currently on matric results. Although Sections 16A and 58B refer to learner performance, the achievement of learners is only measured at matric level. The decline of the number of learners progressing from Grade 11 to Grade 12 and the poor performance of South African learners in the international Pirls and Timms assessments demonstrate that political leaders and Heads of Educational Departments are mostly interested in achieving results consistent with their political views and aspirations.




Conclusion


Managing teaching and learning involves active collaboration of the principal and teachers regarding curriculum, teaching and assessment. Leithwood and Jantzi (1990) emphasise the importance of the behaviours of teachers as they engage in activities directly affecting the performance of the learners.


The South African Schools Act, the Employment of Educators Act, PAM and proposed South African Standard for Principalship attempt to change the culture of the management of teaching and learning. Unfortunately with principals and education authorities there is a greater familiarity with the jargon of transformation than practical understanding of what it means to manage teaching and learning. There seems to be general lack of knowledge and skills about the role of the school principals in the process of strategic planning and implementation of teaching activities.

School principals lack experience in the utilisation of resources such as staff, time and existing knowledge. The proposed Standard for Principalship does not refer to the knowledge and skills required to manage staff, resources and time as fundamental actions required for effective management of teaching and learning. There is also a need for a process of role clarification, including definition and development of the working relationships between district officials and school principals. In terms of the Schools Act (section 58B (4) the Department of Education must take all reasonable steps to assist the underperforming schools in addressing their teaching and learning challenges.

What then should principals be able to do as the professional managers of teaching and learning in their schools?

• As school managers with formal authority for visiting classes and controlling staff preparation and learner assessment, principals can easily see these functions as their main or sole contribution to the management of teaching and learning. But principals need to re-interpret their role as that of strategic planning and support of teaching activities.

• Management of teaching and learning asks more of principals than
overseeing the division of labor among teaching staff. Rather, their professional management work means creating working partnerships with various staff members teaching in different grades or phases.

• Principals need to find ways to establish conditions of trust, openness to critique, and focus on teaching to enable teachers to do their work.

• Principals’ management of school resources is vital to creating a school-based infrastructure for learning improvement. The managerial work of allocating resources, managing time for the school, improving facilities, managing discipline and safety, and managing staff development are vital to ensuring that an environment for learning improvement is in place.

• Principals need to be comfortable exercising greater discretion and acting
more entrepreneurially in a context of accountability. Principals are compelled to make decisions regarding the vision, mission, functioning and resources of the school within a context of increasing accountability for school performance.


References

Bush, T. and Glover, D. (2003). School Leadership: Concepts and evidence. London: NSCL.

Department of Education. 1999. Personnel Administrative Measures (PAM) Government Gazette, 19767, 1999 as amended.

Department of Education (2004a). South African National Professional Qualification for Principalship (SANPQP). Directorate: Education Management and Governance Development. Concept paper, September.

Department of Education (2004b). Education Management and Leadership
Development. Directorate: Education Management and Governance
Development. Draft policy framework, October.

Department of Education. (2005). Leading and managing South African schools in the 21st Century. The South African Standard for Principalship. Directorate:
Education Management and Governance Development. Third draft, August.

Elmore, R. (1995). Teaching, learning and school organization: Principles of practice and the regularities of schooling. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31 (3) 355- 374.

Govender, D. Mar 21, 2010. The massive matric fiddle. http://www.timeslive.co.za/sundaytimes/article365934 (accessed 9 July 2010)

Hallinger, P. and Heck, R. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 9 (2) 157-191.

Hallinger P. (2006). Scholarship in School Leadership Preparation: The untapped challenge. Electronic journal: Journal of Research on Leadership Education,1:1-3.

Hill, H.C. (2003). Understanding Implementation: Street-Level Bureaucrats' Resources for Reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13:265-282.

Hoadley, U. and Ward, C. (2009). Managing to learn – instructional leadership in South African secondary schools. Cape Town: HSRC Press.


Leithwood, K. and Jantzi, D. (1990). Transformational leadership: How principals can help reform school cultures. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1 (4) 249-280.

Leithwood, K. and Riehl, C. (2005). What do we already know about educational leadership? In Firestone, W. and Rhiel, C. A new agenda for research in educational leadership. New York: Teachers College Press.

Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Muijs, D. and Harris, A. (2003). Teacher Leadership – Improvement through Empowerment. Educational Management & Administration. 31(4) 437-448.


Republic of South Africa, (1996). South African Schools Act, Act 84 of 1996. Pretoria: Government Printers

Republic of South Africa. (1998). Employment of Educators Act, Act 76 of 1998. Pretoria: Government Printers.

Spillane, J. (2006). Distributed Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Taylor, N. (2007). Equity, efficiency and the development of South African schools. In Townsend, T. International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement. Springer.

Van der Westhuizen, P., Mosogo, M. and Van Vuuren, H. (2004). Capacity building for educational managers in South Africa: A case study of the Mpumalanga province. International Journal of Educational Development 24:705-719.

Van der Westhuizen P. & Van Vuuren H. 2007. Professionalising principalship in South Africa. South African Journal of Education. Vol 27(3)431–445

ISER Paper Ogina

Proposal for a Paper

6th ISER Symposium, South Africa: 18 - 30 July 2010

Dr T.A. Ogina

Lecturer, University of Pretoria

taogina@up.ac.za, Tel 0124202445/0721289958, Fax 0124203581.



Title: TEACHERS AS CAREGIVERS: MANAGING THE NEEDS OF VULNERABLE CHILDREN.

Abstract
This paper discusses a study that explored the way in which teachers perceive and describe their roles in responding to the emerging needs of orphaned learners to evaluate whether the teachers are able to cope with the challenge of caring for the orphaned learners. The participants in the study were three secondary and two primary school teachers in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa. The data on the teachers’ experiences were collected through semi-structured interviews. The study identified a lack of material, social and emotional support for grieving learners. The findings revealed that, there was lack of consensus among the teachers about their caregiving role. Although some of the teachers attempted to fulfil some of the needs of the orphaned learners, most were unable to cope with the combined roles of teaching and learning and care giving. The implications of the findings are that there is a need for teacher development in terms of preparing teachers to provide pastoral care for orphaned learners and other vulnerable children. The paper argues that in order for the teachers’ efforts to be more fruitful, there is an urgent need for supportive and effective school leadership. In addition, more counsellors and social workers need to be appointed to work in collaboration with the teachers to better provide for the needs of the vulnerable children.
Key words: teachers role; care giving; vulnerable children; orphaned learners; needs; effective leadership; pastoral role.
Introduction
Evidence in literature indicates that child-headed families and orphanhood are becoming common phenomena in many African countries as a result of the increased death rate among young parents (Makame, Ani & Grantham-McGregory, 2002; Nyambedha, Wandibba & Aagaard-Hansen, 2003; Abebe & Aase, 2007; Cluver & Gardner, 2007; Kidman, Petrow & Heymann, 2007; Oleke et al., 2007; Van Wyk & Lemmer, 2007; Robson & Kanyanta, 2007; Taylor & Kvalsvig, 2008; Thurman et al., 2008). It has been estimated that 14 million children have been orphaned by HIV/AIDS, the majority (95%) in sub-Saharan Africa (UNAIDS, 2004). The increasing number of orphans in most African countries presents certain challenges in the absence of parents who are generally expected to fulfil their children’s physical, social and psychological needs, such as providing love, affection and a sense of belonging (Berger, 2000; USAID, 2000). Furthermore, parents play a supportive role in their children’s learning experiences (Epstein, 2001; Jarolimek, Foster & Kellough, 2001) such that, when a child is orphaned, a gap may be created in the child’s support structure and learning experiences. Some studies have described children without parents as being vulnerable and usually traumatised by their parents’ death, which is often followed by a change in their living conditions (Makame et al., 2002; Nyambedha et al., 2003; Chitiyo, Changara & Chitiyo, 2008). Orphaned children are frequently deprived of material and psychosocial support (Cluver et al., 2007; Foster & Williamson, 2000; Giese, Meintjes, Croke & Chamberlain, 2003; Robson & Sylvester, 2007; SCOPE-OVC/Zambia, 2003; Van Wyk & Lemmer, 2007) as a result there is a need to address some of these concerns to ensure that these children gain the full benefits of their educational experiences. Teachers are at the coalface of the orphan situation. Increasingly, teachers and schools in most African countries are expected to respond to the changing educational, social and economic environment and the contextual realities of schooling, and this includes caring for the orphaned learners. The South African Department of Education Norms and Standards for Educators (2000) stipulate pastoral role as one of the seven roles of an educator. Despite the expectation of caregiving role, the way in which teachers understand their role in terms of pastoral care, and their willingness and readiness to take up this role needs further research due to different contextual realities and the emerging needs of orphans (Schierhout et al., 2004: McBride, 2002). The purpose of this paper is to explore the role that teachers play and the support provided by the school principals in providing for some of the orphaned learners’ needs, based on the experiences of the five teachers interviewed.

Care for the orphans
In most African countries, including South Africa, the majority of orphans are cared for within the extended family and the community, especially in rural areas where the traditional culture of child rearing is sustained (Urassa, Boerma, Ng’weshemi, Isingo, Schapink & Kumogola, 1997; Foster & Williamson, 2000 Nyambedha et al., 2003; Oleke et al., 2007). However, more recent studies on orphan care in Africa have revealed that the extended family networks are becoming weaker as both the number of orphans and the high mortality rate among adults increase (Foster & Williamson, 2000; Beard, 2005; Freeman & Nkomo, 2006; Kidman et al., 2007; Heymann et al., 2007; Van Wyk & Lemmer, 2007). In addition, extended family members seem increasingly unable to balance meeting the orphans’ need for essential care with work in order to survive economically. A survey carried out by Heymann and others (2007) on the way extended families balance providing orphans with care with their work revealed that nearly half of the extended families had difficulty in meeting the orphans’ needs in addition to those of their own children owing to the demands of their work, economic and social needs.
There is consensus in literature regarding the role that the school could play in providing care for the orphans in the absence of family support (USAID, 2001; McBride, 2002; Giese et al., 2003; Richter, 2003; Loots & Mnguni, 2006; Van Wyk & Lemmer, 2007), yet what seems inadequately addressed in these studies is the role of teachers as caregivers, and the conflict that ensues when attempting to combine the role of providing care with that of teaching and learning. The assumption underpinning this study is based on the views of Epstein (2002) and Miller (1990) who theorised that, in educating a child, one cannot separate the emotional and social factors from cognitive factors, as they are interrelated. This implies that during the teaching and learning process teachers are expected to be able to deal with the intellectual, emotional and social aspects of a child’s development. In cases of orphanhood, teachers may be the adults to whom the orphans can turn to for the fulfilment of the needs normally met by parents (Zappulla, 1997; Van Wyk & Lemmer, 2007). Moreover, “Teachers are in contact with the learners throughout their working day and often have to deal with problems when they arise before seeking a specialist’s help” (Cleave et al. 1999), hence, the need for pastoral care becomes crucial in schools with orphans who are experiencing the absence of parental care and unfulfilled needs.

Pastoral care is not a separate activity but is part of teaching practice, which recognises that intellectual and social development, cannot be accomplished without taking account of both internal factors (personality, character and emotions) and external factors (social and environmental) (Best, 2007). The South African Department of Education (2000) Norms and Standards identify seven roles for the teacher and the competences within each role. The Community, Citizenship and Pastoral role is one of the seven roles and it requires teachers to “demonstrate the ability to develop a supportive and empowering environment for the learner and respond to the educational and other needs of learners and fellow teachers”. The practical competences of the pastoral role include demonstrating care, protection and the holistic development of the child. Despite the fact that the Norms and Standards stipulate the role of pastoral care, support initiatives for orphaned learners needs to be further investigated (Schierhout et al., 2004).
Contextualising the study
This paper is based on data collected for a doctoral study from five teachers between the ages of 35 and 45 who were purposely chosen by means of a snowballing process. The process involved interviewing first one teacher who then recommended another teacher to be interviewed and so on. The teachers involved in the study were teachers known by other teachers to be involved with orphaned learners. Two participants were drawn from a primary school and three from a secondary school, with 112 and 126-orphaned learners respectively. The two schools are situated in a rural area of Mpumalanga province in South Africa. According to the teachers interviewed, the mortality rate in the community is high. A 2000 antenatal survey (South Africa HIV & AIDS Statistics Summary, Department of Water Affairs, 2007) reported the HIV/AIDS prevalence in Mpumalanga to be the second highest in South Africa (29.2%). The majority of learners in this area come from households with an income of less than R18, 000 per annum (State of Environment in South Africa – Mpumalanga – Poverty and Vulnerability, 2005). Other poverty indicators are unemployment and a lack of basic facilities such as sanitation, electrification and water.

Method
Face-to-face in-depth interviews and follow-up interview questions were used to capture data on the ways in which teachers describe their caring role while responding to the needs of orphaned learners. The interviews were used in order to understand the experiences of the teachers and the meaning they attach to the experiences through probing and obtaining feedback from the participants. In the initial interviews, The researcher asked the teachers to talk about their experiences with orphaned learners. Other interview questions were:
1. How do they identify the orphans?
2. Do the orphans talk about their experiences or not?
3. What do the teachers do when the learners tell them about their needs?
4. Are school principals and other teachers involved in helping orphaned learners?
The questions were open-ended to elicit the teachers’ perceptions and stories of their experiences. The researcher interviewed each participant twice for approximately 45 minutes to an hour. In the second interview, the researcher modified the interview questions based on the themes that emerged from the first interview. The follow-up interviews were carried out for verification and clarification of the data. The interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed. The verbatim transcripts produced from the interviews were coded and the codes grouped into categories. From these categories a number of themes emerged, including identifying the needs of orphaned learners, teachers’ perceptions of their roles, role conflict, and the perceptions of leadership involvement in managing the needs of orphans. To enhance trustworthiness of the data, the teachers who were interviewed were given interview transcripts and the emerging themes to verify the accuracy and interpretation of the data. Transcripts of data analysis were also peer reviewed to verify the integrity of the data.
Results
Identifying the needs of orphaned learners
The majority of the teachers interviewed identified food, school uniforms and money to pay for school requirements as being the learners’ most basic needs. One secondary school teacher described the situation as follows:
When I arrived in this school, I noticed that during break a lot of the kids were not eating and after break others were playing truant. When I tried to find out why they were not at school after break, I discovered that most of them were hungry.
This finding is consistent with the report of De Witt and Lessing (2005) derived from their quantitative study using questionnaires administered to 120 teachers from a number of different schools. Their findings revealed that lack of food and clothing was the most pressing problem. However, emotional needs are not as visible as material needs and teachers revealed that they struggled to identify the orphaned learners’ emotional needs and had to rely on what the learners tell them. Unfortunately, not all learners are willing to talk to teachers about their experiences, perhaps as a result of the stigma and discrimination associated with death in the context of HIV/AIDS. The case study of Chitiyo and others’ (2008) on psychological support for children orphaned by AIDS reported that all the children in the study showed signs of emotional deprivation and this affected their learning. Providing orphans with emotional support seemed to be a challenging task for the teachers in the study under discussion. One of the teachers explained as follows:
There is only one that I know who is very sensitive about it. I think that reason is that it is not too long since they have been orphaned. She is still feeling it just as raw as it is. The others most of them were orphaned at an early stage, when they were still not aware of what life is. They had to accept the fact that they do not have parents and granny is taking care of them. In fact all of them are not acknowledging it. They are trying to keep it inside. They try hard to be like other learners, in fact that is what we emphasise to them.

The extract suggests that the teachers’ understanding of the grieving process is that it is a temporary emotional state. The fact that the learners are being encouraged to hide their emotions may mean that the teacher is attempting to avoid their experiencing further trauma as a result of possible stigmatisation by other learners. A study conducted in northern Uganda on the constraints to orphans’ educational opportunities reported that teachers interviewed were of the opinion that providing special support for orphans in school could foster stigmatisation (Oleke, Blystad, Fylkesnes & Tumwine, 2007). Another possible explanation of the teachers’ response could be a lack of emotional capability to support the learners. Abebe and Aase (2007) describe emotional capability as the willingness and the ability of a caregiver to give psychological and emotional support. In relation to the orphaned learners’ emotional needs, several of the teachers indicated that a number of orphans had behavioural problems. The following narration illustrates this:
Some become violent. Maybe you find that their friends are teasing them when they are playing. They will take the teasing seriously. It seems that there is anger inside them. So, when they start teasing, the learner will react violently and automatically somebody will have some blood moving out of the body.
Grieving children’s emotional outbursts are not unique to this study; in another study, Willis (2002) identifies withdrawal and violent behaviour as common signs of mourning. This finding implies that some of the orphans in this study could still be mourning the death of their parent/s – hence the violent behaviour. The findings of a study on barriers to the community support of orphans and vulnerable youth in Rwanda also revealed that community members perceived orphans as troublemakers, describing their behaviour as unruly and disruptive (Thurman, Snider, Boris, Kalisa, Nyirazinyoye & Brown, 2008). Dowdney (2002) agrees with this finding, revealing that one in five bereaved children is likely to manifest emotional and behavioural symptoms in the form of anxiety, depression, anger, outbursts and regression.
Role of teachers
The teachers interviewed perceived their roles in different ways. One of the teachers felt that the role of providing care should be the responsibility of the government. She said:
I would prefer that somebody give them food and pay school funds for them. I think the Social Welfare Department should see to such kids.
Another teacher indicated that caring for the orphaned learners is not the responsibility of teachers per se, but the choice of the individual teacher. She was of the opinion that the school system does not endorse care for orphaned learners as part of teachers’ responsibilities and further argued that, as a result of individual differences, some teachers were more compassionate towards the orphans than others. The teacher explained:
I think that the other teachers don’t want to be involved because they just feel that it is not their problem. This is not really part of what we should be doing. It is what you feel. When you are at home and you are eating and there is food that is left and you know what is happening out there, it troubles my heart. That is why you go out to help. This is not a feeling everybody has, so you cannot condemn those who do not help.
In contrast, another teacher perceived the role of providing care as the responsibility of all teachers. She appeared to ascribe the lack of teachers’ response to the needs of the learners to a lack of dedication. She felt that other teachers who were prepared to let her take responsibility were exploiting her and she challenged them to be more responsive in providing care.
Learners come to me. It became my job. I do not feel pain, I do not ask for contribution from the other teachers. Other teachers when it comes to the problem of orphaned learners they push the orphans to me. “Go to Teacher Khumalo she will help you”. I asked, “why can’t you help, why do you always send the learners to me?”
Owing to the differing perceptions of the role of providing care, the teachers’ commitment to this task varies. Some teachers provide food, clothes and emotional support in terms of guidance and counselling. One of the teachers told how she responded to the needs of a sexually abused learner by facilitating assistance from different role players such as a medical practitioner, a social worker, a counsellor and a policewoman. She said:
The cousin raped the girl. So I called the girl and asked her whether she has been taken to the doctor. The guardian took the girl to the doctor and only asked for painkillers. I phoned the doctor and the doctor told me to take the learner to the hospital. The doctor examined the girl and she was safe. We remained convinced that the girl must be counselled, go through therapy because when she is quiet the things come back to haunt her. So I approached the hospital, they said that they need a docket number. So I took the girl to the police station to get the docket number. Thereafter is when the girl got attention from Social Welfare.

Other teachers responded to the needs of the orphaned learners by referring the learners to a third party for help. Two teachers reported:
I send them to the teachers who help orphans. The social workers usually say that we must send a list of the learners that we have here to them. We did send the list but they did not respond.
As a class teacher I have to report this to those who help the orphans like Ms Chabalala. She does it by giving them money to buy bread and soup during break.
This quote reveals that not all teachers are involved in helping orphaned learners – those who are committed seem to be internally motivated to do so. For example, one teacher was motivated to help the orphans by her background experiences and her religious beliefs. She said:
I am from a poor background. When I used to go to school the teachers would buy for me the things that I did not have like school uniform and books. I am also a Christian and I like to help people when I can. This is why I ask learners about their problems.
Another teacher also had a positive attitude towards helping orphaned learners, saying:
Every year I would buy uniform for one learner. I think I got it from my mother. When she was still alive she use to help learners.
It seems that when the two teachers reflected on their background, they were able to relate and identify their experiences and thus empathise with those of the orphaned learners. The literature reports that compassion is the key underlying factor to an individual act of kindness and care towards others (Foster & Williamson, 2000).
Role conflict
The teachers’ experiences indicate conflict in terms of the interpersonal relationships between the teachers and conflict in terms of the teachers’ duties and responsibilities. The differences in the perceptions of the teachers’ role and their responsibility for providing orphaned learners with care in particular appear to be causing tension and conflict within teachers. One of the teachers, for example, explained:
As teachers, we have to be social workers, parents and everything. I had to come quickly just before lunch and prepare the soup and bread for the learners on the day they have soup and bread. I had to leave class before time and leave them with work. I knew that it was not right but now the lady who works as a general worker helps me.
Another teacher said:
You know I am teaching at the same time I am dealing with the orphans at the same time I am a policewoman. I am a social worker and a counsellor.
As evidenced by this study, the emerging multiple roles of teaching and caregiving are in agreement with the findings of Schierhout et al., (2004) they reported that teachers perceive their roles, as providing food, counselling and advice, money and school fees and encouraging learners to attend school.
As indicated in the quotes, from the two teachers’ experiences it would seem that these multiple roles are demanding and that it is probably unrealistic to expect them to be taken on unless, as Evans (2002) suggests, teachers’ roles are modified and redefined to include caring for learners’ social and emotional needs. The new role definition would then imply a supportive structure that would enable teachers to carry out their responsibilities more effectively and less stressfully.

Teachers’ perceptions of the involvement of the school principal in supporting the teachers’ caregiving role

Another emerging theme from the study is the leadership role of the school management in responding to the needs of orphaned learners. From the teachers’ responses it seems that school management, specifically the principals at the two schools investigated, were not directly involved in providing for the needs of the orphaned learners. At times they supported the efforts that some of the teachers made in providing for the learners needs, but the efforts had to be from the teachers’ own initiative. In one case, for example, one teacher commented that the principal had encouraged and supported her efforts to assist the orphans. She stated:

If you go to the principal and tell her that you want to help an orphan, the principal does not block your efforts she encourages you to go ahead. Like when I was telling you that I had to come before break to prepare the lunch for the learners. I was never hassled about it. They understood that I had to do it. When the general worker came in, I asked the principal to include in her job description that the worker should help with this and she did it.

However, another teacher experienced a conflict of interest with the school management in terms of the use of donations received to support the learners. The teacher wanted to use the donated money to provide food and school uniforms for the orphans, while the school principal’s suggestion was to improve the school infrastructure of the school. The teacher explained:

When I told my principal that I got donations from the university for the orphans, she said that I must use the donations for buying computers and paving the school. But this is not the job I want to do.

It appears that there is a need for supportive and caring leadership that encourages teachers to become involved and respond positively to the needs of orphans. The experiences of the two teachers suggest uncertainty about the role of school management in terms of providing assistance for orphaned learners and the lack of a support structure.
Time constrains and the lack of teacher capacity to provide for the orphans’ needs in the absence of material and human resources seem to make it more challenging for teachers to provide care for traumatised, grieving children at school. All the teachers interviewed acknowledged this and recommended that alternative care in the form of an orphanage should be considered to provide holistically for the orphaned learners.
Discussion
The results of this study indicate that teachers identified the needs of the orphaned learners as being material, social and emotional. The emotional needs were more difficult to identify and more challenging to fulfil. Teachers are considered to be frontline workers in recognising the danger signs in learners and responding immediately and effectively to them (Cleave et al., 1997). In addition, learners experiencing orphanhood may be at greater risk of emotional problems than other learners. Therefore, teachers who are not sensitised to or are unaware of the personal, social, emotional and behavioural problems which their learners as suggested in this study may experience, are not well placed to identify the learners’ non-academic problems (Best, 2007). Such teachers are more likely to be unprepared and /or unable to provide pastoral care.

“Pastoral care” is a term that can be interpreted in a variety of ways depending on the ethos of the school (Cleave et al., 1997). In some schools this is the responsibility of the entire staff, while in others it is the responsibility of a group of pastoral specialists. The findings of this study concur with Cleave and others (1997) argument that in the context of orphaned learners, although it may seem almost certainly impractical for teachers to meet some of the orphan’s needs in the absence of alternative sources of support such as social services, it may be necessary for teachers to acquire knowledge, of and skills in, the pastoral role. The teachers’ accounts reveal the need for counselling in cases of behavioural problems that may be triggered by the orphans’ emotional state or in cases of abuse such as the rape reported by one of the teachers. Although some of the learners may be in need of professional help, as alluded to by the teachers, others may benefit from the support given by teachers competent in providing pastoral care.

The current situation in some schools, as described by the teachers, necessitates them taking on multiple roles if they are to meet the material, social and emotional needs of the learners. This implies that there is a need to redefine the roles of teachers in terms of a shift from dispensing knowledge to counselling and pastoral care in order for the learners to gain maximum benefit from their educational experience. It would seem that there is a call for teachers to adapt to these new roles. The issue that needs to be addressed is the interpretation of the concept of pastoral care. In this study, teachers’ interpretation of the role of care lacked clear and shared understanding. The literature reveals that pastoral care means different things which may include teachers’ role in guidance, and counselling, spiritual guidance or a bureaucratic structure of an educational institution (Best, 1977; Chittenden, 1999; Watkins, 1999). Evans (2002) advocates for teacher development to incorporate role development that focuses on redefining and modifying the role of teachers to include caring for social and emotional needs. Although the need for skills development did not emerge directly from the teachers’ interviews in this study, in a similar study on educational opportunities for orphaned learners, some teachers expressed the need to be trained in counselling (Oleke et al., 2007). These researchers further suggest the need for teachers to acquire specialised skills if they are to provide effective emotional and social support for learners. Moreover, not all schools have trained guidance and counselling teachers and not all learners are likely to require professional help. There may be cases where teachers who are competent in pastoral care, and who have the enthusiasm, could assist the learner under stress without referring him or her to a specialist.

The findings of this study reveal that teachers’ responses to orphaned learners’ needs seem to be influenced by the perceptions of their roles and personal characteristics. Not all the teachers regarded pastoral care as being part of their responsibilities. Teachers who empathise with the orphaned learners tend to assume the care-giving role and respond by providing material and sometimes emotional support. Their motivation is based on their background experience and religious beliefs; but there were those in contrast, refer the learners to other teachers for support. Although some teachers strive to provide the orphans with food, clothes and at times emotional support, their narratives suggest a heavy workload.

In this study, it appears that the burden of supporting these learners also seems to be linked to the absence of supportive leadership. The teachers’ accounts of support or lack thereof from school leadership and management reveal a need for leadership involvement in the initiatives and a systematic structured approach towards providing for the learners’ needs. It implies from the context of this study that school leadership needs to be more sensitive to the needs of the orphaned learners, and also to be part of the whole support initiative in order for the teachers’ efforts to be more successful and less strenuous, as described by one of the teachers. It may mean that school leaders’ engagement with the activities geared to supporting the orphans could enhance the teachers’ capacity to provide pastoral care and to involve other stakeholders. One of the dilemmas mentioned by the teachers interviewed was the use of her time, which created conflict in terms of what should be given priority that is, teaching the learners or preparing their lunch.

This study focused on the experiences of five teachers. Due to the limited sample, the findings of this study cannot be generalised beyond the context of the field of study. However, the description of the context of this study may enable readers to determine the transferability of the findings to their own setting (Seale, 2000). Another limitation is the use of interviews as the only data collection method. The data collected from the interviews could not be triangulated by other methods such as document analysis and observation. The absence of other sources of data such as a response or support from the school principal or social workers made it impossible to substantiate some of the findings from the interviews. Contextual factors such as poverty, which was not explored in the study could have also influenced the way teachers respond or did not respond in providing for the needs of the learners. Despite the limitations, the emerging themes from the context of this study could contribute to understanding how teachers cope with the responsibility of providing care to orphaned learners in some schools. Further research needs to be done with a larger sample and multiple data sources to shed more light on this topic

Conclusion
The results of this study provide some insights into the experiences of teachers in two schools with orphaned learners in South Africa and the changing role of the teachers, leadership and management implications for the schools. It was evident from this study that some teachers are involved in some kind of pastoral care-giving activities in response to the needs of orphaned learners. Some teachers responded by providing for material needs and giving emotional support, while others referred the orphaned learners to other teachers for assistance. This is clearly a move away from the traditional role of imparting knowledge to the learners to an additional new role of providing social and emotional support for the learners, as well as counselling and pastoral care (Zappulla, 1997, De Witt & Lessing, 2005; Best, 2007; Robson & Kanyanta, 2007). The teachers who opted to provide care for the orphaned learners seem to be struggling to meet the learners’ needs in the absence of material and human resource support. This finding calls for an urgent need to redefine the role of teachers with the emphasis on caregiving aspect. It also suggests that pre-service programmes and in-service teacher development training programmes should include preparing teachers to provide pastoral care in order to increase their potential for supporting grieving children. Such programmes are likely to empower and develop the teachers’ care-giving competences and skills in providing care for orphaned learners (Evans, 2002). This study found that some teachers provided for the material needs of the orphaned learners from their own resources, and other sources. If more teachers could be involved as caregivers and work as a team to solicit material resources it would ease some of the burden of providing for the orphaned learners as described in this study.


In light of the teachers’ perception of school principals’ involvement in supporting orphaned learners in this study, it would seem that leadership in schools that aims at encouraging and supporting teachers to support their learners is crucial if teachers are to fulfil the material, emotional and social needs of the learners. At present, the teachers seem uncertain of their responsibilities in terms of care giving. This study shows that teachers expect the school principal to support them in providing for the needs of the learners. In order for the school principals to meet teachers’ expectations there is a need for training on strategies and new ways of management that embrace motivation, the provision of resources and other forms of support for the teachers’ efforts to provide pastoral care (Cleaver et al., 1997).

The teachers also acknowledged that, given the situation in their schools, the state should consider employing full-time and part-time social workers and counsellors to support these learners which would relieve the teachers of some of their multiple layers of responsibilities. However, more research needs to be done on the role of leadership in providing pastoral care and possible partnership relationships that could be established between social workers and/or counsellors with the teachers in playing the different but interdependent roles in supporting orphaned learners, and probably other learners in vulnerable situations.

From the findings of this study, one may argue that teachers are also caregivers and can never fully escape from the responsibility of helping orphans in their class. The questions that we need to ask are: what is the concern of teachers regarding caring for orphans and other vulnerable children, what motivates the teacher to provide care, what do the teachers need to do their work better?
References
Abebe, T. & Aase, A. (2007). Children, AIDS and politics of orphans care in Ethiopia: The extended family revisited. Social Science & Medicine, 64, 2058–2069.
Beard, B.J. (2005). Orphan care in Malawi: Current practices. Journal of Nursing, 22(2), 105–115.

Berger, E.H. (2000). Parents as partners in education (5th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Pearson Education.

Best, R. (2007). The whole child matters: The challenge of Every Child Matters for pastoral care. Education 3-13, 35(3), 249–259.

Chabilall, J.A. (2004). A social-educational study of the impact of HIV/AIDS on the adolescent in child-headed household. MA Dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria.

Chitiyo, M, Changara, D.M. & Chitiyo, G. (2008). Providing psychological support to special needs children: A case of orphans and vulnerable children in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Education Development, 28, 384–392.

Chittenden, A. (1999). Teachers as carers: A case study of a secondary school’s pastoral process. Pastoral Care in Education, 17(2), 14-22.

Cleave, H., Carey, P., Norris, P., Sloper, P., While, D. & Charlton, A. (1997). Pastoral care in initial teacher education: A survey of secondary teacher education institutions. Pastoral Care in Education, 15(2), 16–21.

Cluver, L. & Gardner, F. (2007). Risk and protective factors for psychological well-being of children orphaned by AIDS in Cape Town: A qualitative study of children and caregivers’ perspectives. AIDS Care, 19(3), 318–325.

De Witt, M.W. & Lessing, A.C. (2005). Educators’ views on the needs and support of HIV/AIDS orphans in their psychological development. Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 17(1), 13–22.

Department of Education. (2007). The National Policy Framework for Education and Development in South Africa: More teachers: better teachers. Pretoria: Government Printers.
Department of Education. (2000). Norms and Standards for Educators. Government Gazette, 243(21565), 22 September.
Dowdney, L. (2000). Annotation: childhood bereavement following parental death. Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(17), 819–830.
Epstein, J. (2001). School, family and community partnership: preparing and improving schools. Oxford USA: Westview.
Evans, L. (2002). What is teacher development? Oxford Review of Education, 28(1), 123–137.
Foster, G. & Williamson, J. (2000). A review of literature of the impact of HIV/AIDS on children in sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS, 14(3), 275–284.
Freeman, M. & Nkomo, N. (2006). Guardianship of orphans and vulnerable children: A survey of current and prospective South African caregivers. AIDS Care, 18(4), 302–310.
Giese, S., Meintjes, H., Croke, R. & Chamberlain, R. (2003). The role of schools in addressing the needs of children made vulnerable in the context of HIV/AIDS. University of Cape Town: Children’s Institute.

Heyman, J., Earle, A., Rajaraman, D., Miller, C. & Bogen, K. (2007). Extended family caring for children orphaned by AIDS: Balancing essential work and caregiving in high prevalence nations. AIDS Care, 19(3), 337–345.

Jarolimek, J., Foster, C.D. & Kellough, R.D. (2001). Teaching and learning in the elementary school (7th ed). Upper Saddle, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Kidman. R., Petrow, S.E. & Heymann, S.J. (2007). Africa’s orphan crisis: Two community-based models of care. AIDS Care 9(3), 326.
Loots, T. & Mnguni, M. (2006). Pastoral support competencies of educators subsequent to memory box making: Part of asset-based research project on school-based support. Unpublished paper, University of Pretoria: South Africa.
Makame, V., Ani, C. & Grantham-McGregory, S. (2002). Psychological well-being of orphans in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Acta Paediatrica, 91(5), 459–465.
McBride, R. (2002). Playing down presence: The importance of in-depth research for education for development. In M. Schweisfurth, L. Davis, L & C. Harber (Eds), Learning democracy and citizenship: International experiences. United Kingdom: Symposium Books.
Miller, R. (1990). What are schools for? Holistic education in American culture. Brandon, Vermont: Holistic Education Press.
Nyambedha, E.O., Wandibba, S. & Aagaard-Hansen, J. (2003). Changing patterns of orphaned care due to the HIV epidemic in Western Kenya. Social Science & Medicine, 57, 301–311.
Oleke, C., Blystad, A., Fylkesnes, K. & Tumwine, J.K. (2007). Constraints to the educational needs of orphans: A community-based study from northern Uganda. AIDS Care, 19 (3), 361–368.
Richter, L. (2003). The impact of HIV/AIDS on the development of children. Paper presented at the Institute of Security Studies Seminar – HIV/AIDS vulnerability and children: Dynamics and long-term implications for South Africa. Pretoria, 4 April 2003.
Robson, S. & Kanyanta, S.B. (2007). Moving towards inclusive education policies and practices? Basic education for AIDS orphans and other vulnerable children in Zambia. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(4), 417–430.
Robson, S. & Sylvester, K.B. 2007. Orphans and vulnerable children in Zambia: The impact of HIV/AIDS epidemic on the basic education for children at risk. Educational Research, 49(3), 259–272.
Schierhout, G., Kinghorn, A., Govender, R., Mungani, J. & Morely, P. (2004). Quantifying effects of illness and death on education at school level: Implications for HIV/AIDS responses. Final report submitted for the Joint Centre for Political and Economic Studies. Health and Development Africa.
SCOPE-OVC/Zambia. (2003). Findings of orphans and vulnerable children psychological survey. USAID/Zambia: Family Health International.
Seale, C. (2000). The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
South Africa HIV & AIDS statistics summary. Available online at: http://www.avert.org/safricastats.htm [Retrieved October 29, 2007].
State of the environment in South Africa. Mpumalanga poverty and vulnerability. Available online at: http://www.mpu.agric.za/SOER/Mpumalanga [Retrieved November 2, 2007].
Taylor, M & Kvalsvig, J.D. (2008). Scaling up support for children in HIV-affected families by involving early childhood development workers: Community views from Kwazulu-Natal South Africa. Development South Africa. 25(1), 61–73.
Thurman, T.R., Snider, L.A., Boris, N.W., Nyirazinyoye, L. & Brown, L. (2008). Barriers to the community support to orphans and vulnerable youth in Rwanda. Social Science & Medicine, 66, 1557–1567.
UNAIDS Inter-agency Task Team on Education and HIV/AIDS. (2004). The role of education in the protection, care and support of orphans and vulnerable children living in a world of HIV and AIDS. Available online at: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php [Retrieved October 25, 2007].
Urassa, M., Boerma, T., Ng’weshemi, J.Z.L., Isingo, R., Schapink, D. & Kumogola, L. (1997). Orphanhood, child fostering and the AIDS epidemic in rural Tanzania. Health Transition Review Supplement, 7(2), 141–153.
USAID (2000). Efforts to address the needs of children affected by HIV/AIDS. Report to Congress: An overview of USAIDS development programmes and approaches. The Synergy Project. Available online at: http://wwwsynergyaids.com [Retrieved August 12, 2006].
USAID (2001). Responding to the educational needs of children and adolescents affected by AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa. Report on Town Hall Meeting October 23, 2001. Available online at: http://www.synergyaids.com [Retrieved May 5, 2006].
Van Wyk, N. & Lemmer, E. (2007). Redefining home-school community partnership in South Africa in the context of HIV/AIDS pandemic. South African Journal of Education, 27(2), 301–316.
Watkins, C. (1999). The case of restructuring the UK secondary school. Pastoral Care in Education, 17(4), 3-10.
Willis, C.A. (2002). The grieving process of children: Strategies for understanding, educating and reconciling children’s perception of death. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(4), 221–226.
Zappulla, C. (1997). Suffering in silence: Educators with Aids and the moral school community. New York: Peter Lang.