Discussion of written documents

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 84 of 1996)

As already discussed in Chapter 2 (p.35), learners have a constitutional right to receive education in a safe school environment, according to Section 24 of the Constitution.

Therefore educators have a legal duty in terms of the common law principle, in loco parentis, to ensure the safety of learners in their care.

Teachers who are not on playground duty, or who leave their classes unattended, seem to be, according to the learners’ responses, contributing to the creation of an unsafe environment for learners. Bullies that are waiting for a chance to attack or threaten innocent learners, and other learners who want to address unresolved break-time issues, might make use of the break-time when educators choose to leave the classroom. Thus, teachers should accept that they could be legally accountable for not protecting learners’ rights. Section 12(1)(c) of the Constitution in turn provides that all persons have the right to freedom and security of the person, which includes the right to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources.

Notwithstanding the fact that the rights to bodily and psychological integrity, dignity, privacy and equality are enshrined in the South African Bill of Rights and therefore protect learners, bullying is still being ignored by many teachers as just “children’s nonsense”, and many learners must face the psychological consequences on a daily basis.

139

The South African Schools Act (SASA) (Act no 108 of 1996) National legislation fulfils its constitutional duty to ensure a safe school environment by

making a number of provisions in the South African Schools Act, 1996 (Act 84 of 1996).

In Section 8(1) of the South African Schools Act, 1996 (Act 84 of 1996), school governing bodies are obligated to draw up a code of conduct for learners after consultation with learners, parents and educators. In terms of Section 8(2), the code of conduct must be aimed at establishing a disciplined and purposeful school environment dedicated to the improvement and maintenance of the quality of the learning process.

Section 8(4) places a legal obligation on learners to comply with the code of conduct of the school they attend, and in terms of Section 8(5) a code of conduct must make provision for due process to safeguard the interests of the learner and any other party involved in disciplinary proceedings. This implies that the school’s disciplinary committee must take certain procedural steps in accordance with the rules of natural justice (e.g. the audi alteram partem rule or “listen to the other side”) before taking acti on against a learner (Prinsloo, 2005:7). The Act also includes expulsion of learners as a corrective measure where serious misconduct has been committed.

School rules, code of conduct, safety policies from schools With regard to discipline, school governing bodies also have a duty to ensure that their

codes of conduct include policies and procedures that are appropriate for dealing with matters such as drugs, sexual harassment, bullying and other forms of abuse, and that these policies are implemented and revised on an ongoing basis. Therefore the code of conduct is central to discipline in any school. The researcher requested a copy of the school rules and code of conduct from each of the participating schools. Each of the nine schools provided a neatly typed code for their particular school. Even though all the schools had codes of conduct, not all of them were comprehensive to the extent of detailing how they would provide the learners with a safe environment. They all had long term goals, although not all stated short term goals clearly, nor indicated ongoing school improvement activities. In all the schools , the code of conduct, except for the vision and mission statement, seemed to present a list of do’s and don’ts, and the consequences of not following the rules. Most of the school rules seemed to be based on the individual preferences of teachers, for instance those concerning hairstyles,

140

short nails for girls, school uniform, etc. that had nothing directly to do with maintaining order in the school, or maintaining the safety of the learners for the sake of ensuring that learning takes place.

The purpose of the study was, however, not to examine the content of each code of conduct and set of school rules in detail. The researcher was more interested in investigating to what extent the application of school rules, the code of conduct and disciplinary strategies complied with the constitutional right to learn in a safe and secure environment. For instance, the researcher was concerned as to whether the measures dealing with bullying and harassment were explained, or whether the procedures in case of suspension and expulsion were stipulated in the code of conduct.

Learners and parents are entitled to be informed as to how these issues will be addressed, for the sake of the safety of their children. Seven of the nine schools did indicate disciplinary steps followed for suspension or detention in their code of conduct.

Only one of the nine schools (School A) required their learners and parents to sign an agreement between staff, parents, learners and governing body to acknowledge that they had read the school rules, and to undertake to support the authority and discipline of the school. While in some schools only punitive disciplinary measures are used, other schools did have in place more preventive disciplinary measures, providing counselling and explaining the corrective measures that would be taken in cases of misconduct. However, in most schools’ rules, misconduct and punishment were clearly defined, for instance to inform learners what will happen in case of suspension and expulsion, and reference is often made to the SA Schools Act 84 of 1996.

Different forms of punitive discipline include writing out, demerits, detention, fatigue duties, community service, order marks, loss of privileges, special reports, disciplinary interviews and hearings, and for serious misconduct, suspension and expulsion. Only one school admitted that they use corporal punishment (School E), notwithstanding the fact that it is prohibited by law. The same school also did not address disciplinary measures, or explain the disciplinary procedures which will be taken in case of misconduct, in their school rules or code of conduct. Only in some schools (Schools F, G, H) were the code of conduct and school rules reviewed annually; one school had

had the same code of conduct for more than ten years. Schools normally don’t include the safety regulations for the school in their codes of conduct, but would have these as a separate document. School B and School I, however, do include safety regulations in their codes of conduct, concerning what would happen in the event of an accident involving school buses, swimming pool, trees, roofs and pedestrian crossings. This seems to be of great value for parents, caregivers and the school in case of an accident at school involving one of the learners.

The national policy on Health and Safety for Learners in Public Schools (2006:13) clearly advises schools that a school’s code of conduct should specify the procedures that should be followed in case of sexual harassment and fighting; however, bullying is not included. Bullying is regarded as a Grade 2 offence by the Department of Education Code of Conduct (2007:25), and it is recommended by this code that the corrective measures should be a phone call to the parents and a warning letter following detention (2007:26). The National Department of Education sees bullying as just as serious an offence as stabbing someone with a sharp object such as a pencil, as it would also be regarded as a Grade 2 offence, according to the National Department of Education’s Code of Conduct. It is important to acknowledge these matters in the school’s code of conduct, in order to make it clear that behaviour which includes harming fellow learners or teachers will not be tolerated from learners while they are at school.

All schools except one said that they had a safety policy for their schools; however, only one safety policy was received by the researcher, which merely turned out to be the Health and Safety Policy guideline from the Department of Education.