Presupuesto

According to Khewu (2012:86), “doing community work is one of disciplinary measures used to reprimand children for an offence….”. Joubert (2006:129) outlines the activities that learners can undertake to perform community work: “cleaning classrooms and toilets; cleaning a park; collecting items for charity such as clothes, food, or furniture; cleaning roadside verges; helping the elderly in nursing homes; helping the local fire or police service; helping out at a local library or tutoring children with learning disabilities”. Additionally, Joubert (2006:129) advocates that

127

community work is particularly beneficial to learners who lack responsibility and consideration for others.

Benatar (2009:9) states that numerous educators are “worried that assigning extra work or requiring community service ought not to be used as punishments because work and community service are seen by teachers as being good in themselves”. This scholar further maintains:

“If a child does not want to perform these activities, requiring her to do so would be to inflict a hardship on her. One would thus be reinforcing the child's resistance to these practices and not only would the child continue to dislike working or helping in the community, but she would come to associate these activities with punishment.”

An additional criticism is that Joubert (2006:129) does not state whether, while doing community work, there will be on-going counselling or mentoring for the child who lacks accountability or is selfish. If the on-going counselling or mentoring is missing, the child will not be able to comprehend the profound purpose of the disciplinary measure. Aziz (2010:2) contends that “if a learner is forced to do community work, the resulting negative feeling is usually reflected in her facial expression, attitude, character or body language and this may disappoint the organization which looks forward to the student’s help”. However, a matter that the above-mentioned authors have not addressed is this: While using community work as a disciplinary measure, who is to be held liable should something go wrong while the learner is carrying out her assignments? For example, when an injury is sustained by the learners or by another person while she is performing a task, who is liable? According to Khewu (2012:87), “parents know that, according to the South African Schools Act, if a learner gets injured inside the school premises the parent will carry the responsibility”. This scholar also wants to know who is to be entrusted with the responsibility of supervising the child whilst she is doing community work. Will a teacher be on site to supervise the learner? If that is not the case and the child gets into some sort of trouble or mischief, who is going to be accountable?

2.20.3.5 Performing menial tasks (physical work)

According to the guideline document on ATCP (2001:25), “learners are supposed to perform menial tasks, which are tasks that are basic and not degrading or lowly. However, there is evidence that “some teachers are giving learners tasks that constitute child labour because they are not

128

activities to be performed by children”. Christie (2001:7) claims that “some educators together with principals punish learners for misdemeanours by instructing them to clean the toilets during teaching and learning time. This practice not only exposes children to health dangers, “but it also violates children’s right to learn”. A recent incident occurred in KwaZulu-Natal in which the DBE ordered an investigation after parents had protested about their children being made to clean toilets as a form of punishment. According to Khewu (2012:89), one of the parents suggested better and more encouraging ways to discipline children as he believed that “there are other ways of teaching them rather than humiliating them.” However, the school’s management team failed to pursue any of his suggestions. Another parent also revealed that” learners had been ordered to spend Friday afternoons sweeping or polishing floors or cleaning windows” (Leverton 2010:3).

Soneson and Smith (2005:20) insist that non-corporal forms of punishment such as making children do heavy physical labour also constitutes corporal punishment. Even though it is said that the ATCP is aimed at redressing the injustices of the past, it is also evident that the nature of the disciplinary measures and practices is punitive in the sense that “learners are still exposed to maltreatment, neglect, abuse or degradation” regardless of the fact that such measures are illegal according to Chapter 2 of the Constitution of South Africa and the Bill of Rights (Khewu, 2012: 89). If children are obligated to do or provide services that are not age-appropriate or that put their safety, education, physical or mental health, and their spiritual, moral or social development at risk, such services are equivalent to the violation of the children’s rights.

Chauke (2009) also voices the concern that educators do not have a good comprehension of what physical work may reasonably be expected when learners are disciplined. Chauke (2009:63) cites that teachers themselves argued that there should be limitations; for example, one stated that inappropriate “manual work is against the law and learners are not labourers”, yet another educator stated: “We detain learners; we give them extra work and subject them to cleaning of toilets”. It is imperative to note that giving learners small menial tasks appears to be making provision for minor offences only and does not give direction for the eradication of some offences that are predominant in certain areas of the country. For example, Khewu (2012:89) states the following:

“There is no advice given on what is supposed to be done in the interim, which is, in the process awaiting the DoE ruling for the serious offences referred to them, because issues

129

of expulsions can only be approved by the Head of Department. Another example related to the absence of strategies for area specific challenges is that the Eastern Cape Province has a problem related to learners coming from initiation schools. This has an adverse effect on school discipline due to all forms of indiscipline like long periods of absence from school and their demand for respect from other learners and teachers. These learners believe that as they are initiated by men, they cannot be ordered by ‘junior’ members of their communities; that is, women who in most cases [are] the majority of the teachers and those men who have not been to initiation schools. The ATCP is quiet about ways to handle area specific cultural issues so it becomes critical to note that when formulating the guidelines that are to be used in a country like South Africa, issues of diversity and the dynamics of each area need to be considered.”

2.21 Factors that Contribute towards Disciplinary Problems in South African Schools