The two schools are both in townships and they are in section 21 of South African Schools Act (SASA), that is, the schools are self-reliant in terms of controlling their funds and submit audited annual financial reports to the department of education. To be in section 21 also means that the school buys most of its own resources (teaching material and textbooks). Both schools basically control their own finances through a school governing body (SGB) committee.
It is evident that the two schools struggle with teaching resources. However, both schools believe they are doing all they can to deliver the curriculum, irrespective of their not having sufficient resources. In School A, it is clear that the subject choice poses a challenge in terms of both human resources and learning material. The school does not offer social sciences subjects like History and Tourism. Instead they offer technical subjects which require the school to be resourced with technical workshops that are fully equipped with the machines and computers to enable teaching and learning to take place effectively.
The lack of resources in School A impacts negatively on the results (see results table, chapter 4). Since the school is in section 21, the principal claimed not to be able to afford teaching resources in technical subjects as they are expensive. The principal further revealed that not only does the school lack teaching material, but also in human resources, that is, teachers who are offering technical subjects are hard to find. There was a time when the grade 11 did not have a teacher in
104
the technical subject because the school, together with assistance from the district, could not find someone who was qualified and suitable to teach technical subjects “Yes I know, in fact they cannot find a suitable or qualified teacher for technical, even the teacher we have is from Zimbabwe and unfortunately we do not have such teachers in our country”.
Therefore, School B is faced with two major problems which are: (1) the subjects the school is offering and (2) the lack of resources to support the very same technical subjects. It is clear that even though School A has systems in place to manage teaching and learning, the leadership is dense and collaborated. There are, however, challenges when it comes to resources and it affects the school‟s performance.
Unlike School A, School B does not offer technical subjects; they offer the normal stream of subjects, that is, social sciences, commerce, and sciences subjects. In offering the subjects, it is evident that the school could not cater for textbooks and workbooks for each and every learner. What emerged was that School B is in section 21, and they could still not afford to buy a textbook for each and every learner. The principal also mentioned that his school is in quintile 4, that is, it is regarded as the school in a community where the parents can afford to pay school fees for their children and the government only subsidises them with a lower percentage of funds.
Christie (2008) explains the quintile system as: “The policy from the national funding norm where provinces were required to rank their schools according to a poverty index. If, for example, a province had 5 000 schools, it listed them from the poorest to the least poor. It then divided the list into five equal groups, each with 20% of the schools (these are known as quintiles). Funding was divided up according to quintiles with more money being given to the poorest quintile. The poorest quintile was given 35% of the funding, while the least poor (or richest) received only 5% and the rankings are in the scale of 1-5, quintile 1 being very poor and 5 being rich (p.139).” This could mean that the school is struggling financially and the lack of resources affects teaching and learning to take place effectively.
105
The issue of the lack of resources also emerged in the focus group discussion, and this shows that it is a concern even for teaching staff. The second issue that was highlighted by the focus group is the poor backgrounds learners come from. It is evident that most learners from School B cannot afford to pay school fees as they are from poor backgrounds. The school is in section 21 which means that the SGB stipulates the amount which has to be paid yearly by the learners towards school fees in order for the school to purchase more necessary resources for teaching and learning to take place effectively. This is one of the reasons the school does not have efficient resources to teach and it becomes difficult for both teachers and learners if the resources are inadequate. Research has shown that resources is one of the things that enhances teaching and learning to take place effectively as Kruger and van Schalkwyk (1993) reiterate by saying teaching aids enhances teaching and learning and teaching aids must be regarded as a means of aiding or supporting the teaching-learning event.
What is interesting about the attitude of the deputy principal in School B is that he strongly believed that even though the school is lacking teaching material, there are human resources (teachers) and resources should not be a barrier for teaching and learning to take place effectively “If we have teachers, we have everything. There are schools that do not have what we have and they still perform better than us”.
It is evident that the deputy principal of School B is determined to make sure that teaching and learning takes place in his school despite the lack of resources. The interview is what Bush (2003) advocates in his article about teachers taking responsibility in their classrooms when he said: if we have human resource, we can make the school effective. The main argument here is
that teaching material should not be a barrier in making sure that the curriculum is delivered. Besides the lack of resources among both schools, the principals were supportive in making sure
that textbooks and other relevant document for teaching and learning are available. What emerged in School B was that the principal appeals to the SGB when there is a need for new textbooks to be purchased. This showed that there was support from the principal ensuring that the resources are purchased. Therefore, even though there is a shortage of learning material, the principal of School B takes the initiative in ensuring that SGB purchases what the school can afford to purchase. The principal of School B exhibits the qualities of being an instructional
106
leader by taking initiative in sourcing the necessary resources to enhance teaching and learning. These are the qualities, which are supported by McEwan (2003), when he perceives an instructional leader as a principal who performs at high levels by being a resource provider (see chapter 2).
Even though both schools do not have enough teaching material, this however should not be an obstacle in delivering the curriculum because both schools do have teachers to teach and as an indication of sufficient human resources. But researchers like Davidoffs and Lazarus (1997) and Pointek, Dwyer, Seager and Orsburn (1998) argue that just providing resources is unlikely to automatically lead to improvement. One would simply say that with teachers being there, it could bring some form of effective teaching and learning regardless of the shortage of teaching material. The results from both schools show that having to deal with the lack of resources in the school does not necessarily mean that it is the only challenges the schools are faced with. One of the biggest challenges the schools are faced with is the lack of commitment of teachers and positive school culture to enhance teaching and learning. It will be discussed under the next heading.
5.2.4 Culture, attitude of teachers and internal politics can be destructive in managing