Institucionalidad alineada a la solución del problema local

A lot must be done when it comes to inclusion in South African schools because support services (Such as SBSTs) in schools have failed to address the major issues faced by learners (Hay, 2003). Policy developers and implementers in South Africa have arrived at a conclusion that there are several shortcomings with the implementation of inclusive education (Naicker, 2006). A minority of learners in schools are still discriminated against based on their sexual orientation (Nel & Judge, 2008; Msibi, 2014). Kumashiro (2000) argues that schools should provide supportive spaces where the “other” is cared for and supported by authorities. However, currently authorities (or schools) are not yet practising inclusion principles. In schools, for instance, contextual factors that hinder the implementation of inclusive education are not yet recognised (Ainscow, 2000) and sexual diversity among learners (including learners with same-sex orientations) is still not acknowledged (Msibi, 2012). Brown and Diale (2017) spotlighted the fact that schools still have gaps in recognising and appreciating sexual diversity, and as a result learners are oppressed and discriminated against in schools (Nel & Judge, 2008). The main problem with schools is that they are dominated by compulsory heteronormativity (Nel & Judge, 2008; Msibi, 2012; Brown & Diale, 20117). At some schools learners with same-sex sexual orientations are seen as demonic or possessed with evil spirits (Graziano, 2004) and other schools view the behaviour of learners with same-sex sexual orientations as immoral (Brown & Diale, 2017). The following section discusses the most critical shortcomings of inclusive education:

39

a. Lack of clarity in the White Paper 6 policy document

In 2014, Donohue and Bornman did a study on “The challenges of realising inclusive education in South Africa” and the outcomes of the study reveal that White Paper 6 (DOE, 2001) is imprecise about the mission and the vision of inclusive education in South Africa. They argue that teachers do not understand what is required of them, hence they do not implement what is outlined in White Paper 6 (Donohue & Bornman, 2014). In addition, Conrad and Brown (as cited in Lampen, 2014), conducted a study in 2011 where they stated that school principals (who were participants) demonstrate confusion around ‘what is meant’ by ‘inclusive education’. Lack of a clear and explicit policy implies that educators cannot draw on authoritative discourse to guide their classroom actions (DePalma & Francis, 2014). Another problem with White Paper 6 is that it does not give direction on how to select or classify learners with severe special needs. As a result, even learners who experience mild learning difficulties are still kept in separate “special” schools and some of them are still hidden at home by parents because they do not get accommodation in so called “special” schools (Donohue & Bornman, 2014). The problem here is that the isolation of learners based on their learning needs is a violation of their human rights (Mitchell, 2005). Engelbrecht et al. (2001) argue that all educators are trained to meet with diversity in schools, and therefore children with mild learning barriers should not be kept in so called “special” schools.

b. Lack of epistemology and teacher training

What happens in practice at schools does not display the principles of inclusive education (Donohue & Bornman, 2014). Naicker (2006) says that the gap between policy and reality can be traced to the fact that policy and the curriculum do not display a pedagogic revolution but are stuck at a political level and ignore the epistemological issues in the training of teachers. Naicker (2006, p. 1) says “epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge”. Naicker (2006) argues that after freedom came to South Africa in 1994, the Department of Education was invaded by bureaucrats who were not trained in the field of education but were expected to lead the Department. However, as authorities they have to train teachers in the new inclusive policies that were introduced. It is a challenge to train or orientate others if one does not possess

40

a sound understanding of epistemological issues (Naicker, 2006). In most cases training that is provided by people who lack knowledge about inclusive education, tends to be routine and controlled as opposed to reflective, critical and able to create new meaning (Naicker, 2006). As a result, these trainings do not have a positive effect on teachers. In 2012 Msibi conducted a study focussing on the experiences of homophobia among queer youth in South African township schools. Some of his findings highlight the point that school teachers are confused when it comes to sexual diversity and they tend to victimise learners who do not comply with the norms of society (Msibi, 2012). In some instances, teachers punish learners based on their sexuality, with the aim of changing their behaviour so that they can conform to ‘normal’ behaviour (Nel & Judge, 2008; Msibi, 2012). But inclusive education is not about making children as normal as possible; it is about transformation of the society and its educational institutional arrangements. (Mahlo, 2013). Msibi (2012) believes that not all teachers victimise learners (especially learners with same-sex sexual identities) purposefully, but rather that they lack information about inclusion (Donohue & Bornman, 2014). Even though this is not done intentionally it is considered as a barrier to inclusive education (Donohue & Bornman, 2012).

c. Negative attitudes towards inclusive education

Bornman and Rose (2010) argue that some township educators have negative thoughts and attitudes towards the new initiative of inclusive education. They do not display an empathetic understanding of learning barriers that learners come across in their daily realities in schools, (Mdikana, Ntshangase & Mayekiso, 2007) and some indicate that the initiative of inclusion will not work in black schools due to overcrowding (Bornman & Rose, 2010). Bornman and Donohue (2013) add that school personnel such as teachers have negative notions about inclusive education and learners needs because they still view learning barriers as originating within individual learners themselves.

c. Loopholes in the school curriculum

Lampen (2014) observes that the school curriculum can hinder the implementation of inclusive education. According to him, the curriculum can be the greatest barrier to

41

learning (Lampen, 2014). Aspects of the curriculum that may create barriers to learning include the content, the medium of instruction (the language used), how the classroom is organized, teaching methods, pace of teaching, time allocated to complete the curriculum, learning materials used and assessment methods (DOE, 2001). Within inclusive education, it is considered important for a curriculum to be flexible in order to accommodate diversity within the classroom (DOE, 2011; Lampen, 2014). Educators should ensure that they create space in their curriculum for learners to deal with the crises they encounter, for instance, rejection because their sexuality is different (Kumashiro, 2000).