Programa Especial de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (PECiTI) y Programa para el Desarrollo de la Bioseguridad y la Biotecnología (PDBB)

5.4.1 Curriculum goals in grade overview

The majority of the respondents, (35=89.74%), indicated that they needed to devise mathematics curriculum goals other than those in the grade overview. In other words, the results indicated that the curriculum goals in the grade overview were not a perfect fit for the learners with a MID because the respondents needed to devise alternative curriculum goals. The views of the respondents were consistent with the statements cited in section 3.5.2 of this study whereby the Directorate Inclusive Education and DoBE (2011:4) stated that all schools (special, ordinary, rural, metropolitan or any other type of school) were required to offer the same curriculum to all learners while simultaneously ensuring variations in mode of delivery and assessment processes to accommodate all learners. Parajuli (2012:5-10) noted that a curriculum developed at national level

could not address the geographical, social, cultural, linguistic and economic diversities hence it disregards that indigenous communities are one of the target groups of the community. However, the finding that 4 (10.26%) did not need to devise other curriculum goals for the learners with a MID, confirm that there is a probability, although still small, that national curriculum adaptations can promote inclusive education for learners with a MID. Table 5.10 presented the data on curriculum goals in the grade overview.

Table 5.10 Need to devise mathematics curriculum goals for slow learners, other than those that are in FFL/CAPS overview for the grade

School Yes No School Total

n % n % n % A 9 100.00 0 00.00 9 100.00 B 8 72.73 3 27.27 11 100.00 C 9 100.00 0 00.00 9 100.00 D 9 90.00 1 10.00 10 100.00 Village Total 35 89.74 4 10.26 39 100.00

5.4.2 Foundations for Learning

The issue of lack of progress in learning basic academic skills reflected an incomplete fulfilment of the vision of access to quality education (Etscheidt 2012:199). It has been explained in this study that the FFL is a national curriculum adaptation for the RNCS. The RNCS was ineffective because content to be taught was not specified therefore making adaptations for learners experiencing barriers to learning impossible since the content that was to be adapted could not be pin pointed in many instances (DoBE 2009a:45). The content in the RNCS was then adapted in the FFL and later included in the NCS, especially in CAPS, as already highlighted in the introduction of this chapter. The components of the FFL/CAPS that the study focused on were the assessment methods, daily mathematics activities and concrete learning and teaching materials.

5.4.2.1 Assessment methods

Only 14 (35.90%) of the respondents found the assessment methods suggested in FFL/CAPS suitable for learners with a MID. The findings depicted that generally the assessment requirements and procedures of formal assessment were inflexible as with the notations in section 3.3.1.2 of the current study. This study in section 3.3.2 noted that the principle of flexibility contributed to meeting a diverse range of needs especially since the education system in South Africa opted not to have a separate curriculum for learners with ID but commended flexibility in teaching and learning styles with peer support being recognised as a major resource in the classroom (DoE1997:50; DoE 1999:30-34). The DoE (2005:97) emphasizes that inclusive assessment strategies formed part of everyday teaching and learning and were not confined to formal

assessment or continuous assessment. Section 3.6.3 of the current study also recommended approaches that were more functional in linking assessment with intervention and also that recognised that although learners with a MID were different, they were in many respects children like all others (Engelbrecht & Green 2009:204). The data was presented in Table 5.11.

Table 5.11 Assessment methods suitable for slow learners

School Yes No School Total

n % n % n % A 3 33.33 6 66.67 9 100.00 B 4 36.36 7 63.67 11 100.00 C 3 33.33 6 66.67 9 100.00 D 4 40.00 6 60.00 10 100.00 Village Total 14 35.90 25 64.10 39 100.00

5.4.2.2 Mathematics lesson activities

The United Nations (2007:82) stated that to be inclusive in general education should among things adopt teaching methods and curricula that benefited all children. Section 2.13 discussed the TEAM (Together Everyone Achieves More) concept related by Morgan (2009:24) that fitted well in promoting inclusive methods considered good inclusive practice for learners with MID. TEAM was an effective reinforcement approach which, among many things, encouraged children to help one another since as a team they were given a common goal which they all worked towards. The results of the study showed the FFL/CAPS contained inclusive practice as 17 (43.59%) respondents found that that using the daily mathematics lesson activities suggested in the FFL/CAPS promoted learning of mathematics basic skills in learners with a MID. Table 5.12 presented the data.

Table 5.12 Daily mathematics lesson activities promote learning in slow learners

School Yes No School Total

n % n % n % A 5 55.56 4 44.44 9 100.00 B 5 45.45 6 54.55 11 100.00 C 3 33.33 6 66.67 9 100.00 D 4 40.00 6 60.00 10 100.00 Village Total 17 43.59 22 56.41 39 100.00

5.4.2.3 Concrete learning and teaching materials

The majority of the respondents (25=6410%) supported that use of concrete learning and teaching materials promoted the learning of basic academic skills in learners with a MID. The results

agreed with section 2.5 of this study, whereby it was noted that Farrell (2009:700) and Kirk et al. (2006:181) stress that effectiveness of intervention for learners with an ID has to provide and emphasize extended concrete learning which should be intensive and on-going because once it stops there is a tendency for the children to lose some or most of the gains that they have made in education. The results also disagreed with the literature review in section 3.5.4 of the current study which maintained that the teaching of learners experiencing barriers to learning was an issue for teachers due to lack of learning and teaching support materials and guidance on how mainstreaming of the learners was to work practically, thereby contributing to job stress and teacher workload (DoBE 2009a:60; Chisholm et al. 2005:138). Table 5.13 presented the data.

Table 5.13 Concrete learning and teaching materials promote learning in slow learners

School Yes No School total

n % n % n % A 7 77.78 2 22.22 9 100 B 6 54.55 5 45.45 11 100 C 7 77.78 2 22.22 9 100 D 5 50.00 5 50.00 10 100 Village Total 25 64.10 14 35.90 39 100