Key concepts of the capability approach

3.3.2.1 Functionings and capabilities

According to Sen (1987:36):

A functioning is an achievement, whereas a capability is the ability to achieve. Functionings are, in a sense, more directly related to living conditions, since they are different aspects of living conditions. Capabilities, in contrast, are notions of freedom, in the positive sense: what real opportunities you have regarding the life you may lead.

Alternatively put, Sen (1993) noted that the “capability of a person reflects the alternative combinations of functionings the person can achieve, and from which he or she can choose one collection” (p.271). For example, being able to learn how to swim or how to read are capabilities, while the ability to swim or the joy of reading a novel are examples of functionings (Sen, 1999).

Robeyns (2005a) defined capabilities as people‟s potential functionings. Functionings are “beings and doings” (ibid.:94). To relate this to this study, capabilities therefore refer to what Life Sciences teachers in the PLCs are able to do (activities), as well as the kinds of teachers they can be (being). Sen (1999) expressed that capabilities are what allow people, for example Life Sciences teachers to perform certain functionings to lead the kind of lives they value and have reason to value. He added that the sum of an individual capability is his/her capability set. Lanzi (2007) categorised capabilities into three groups: S-caps which includes concrete skills and knowledge; E-caps which includes social and political rights and institutions, cultural practices and norms; and M-caps which are ethical principles and judgments.

Walker and Unterhalter (2007) noted that capabilities and functionings are linked but different.To differentiate between capabilities and functionings they gave an example of two young women who both achieved a degree in Biology at the same university. One young woman comes from a middle- class background and did not need a tertiary qualification to work in her father‟s business as a junior manager. Nonetheless she wanted an experience of tertiary education and coped well with the academic demands because her background has prepared her well. On the other hand, the second young woman from a working-class background struggled to cope with academic demands because her secondary education did not prepare her well for higher education. Despite her lack of confidence she was desperate to excel so she worked hard and obtained her degree. This example according to Walker and Unterhalter (2007) demonstrates that both women had a similar functioning (to obtain a Biology degree), but their capabilities were different. To relate it to this study, this example demonstrates that two Life Sciences teachers in the PLC may have the same functioning related to the teaching and learning of biodiversity but may have different capabilities to achieve that functioning.

To re-emphasise, key to the capability approach is what teachers are able to do, able to be, and choosing the quality of life they have reason to value (Walker, 2005). The notion of „reason to value‟ is important as it points to reflective, informed choices (ibid.). Sen stressed the significance of „reasoned value‟, pointing out that what we, for example, need to scrutinise is the Life Sciences teachers‟ motivations for valuing what they value in terms of biodiversity teaching (Robeyns, 2005a). Therefore at the boundary of functionings and capabilities is the matter of choice where Life Sciences teachers, for example, exercise their agency, having the requisite set of capabilities, ability to reason about choices and exercise agency to choose from a range of available options (Walker, 2005). Lack of agency constrains one‟s ability to choose preferred functionings (ibid.).

3.3.2.2 Agency

According to Crocker (2008), the concept of agency marks what a person does or can do to realise any of her goals and not only ones that advance or protect her well-being. Agency is defined as the ability to act according to what one values or in Sen‟s words – “what a person is free to do and achieve in pursuit of whatever goals or values he or she regards as important” (Sen, 1985:206). Agency has to be studied within the social context in which it is exercised such as the PLC (Peris, Belda & Cuesta, 2013). What this implies is that Life Sciences teachers in the PLCs can, for example, exercise their agency in relation to the teaching of biodiversity. Sen also uses the concept of an agent (Sen, 1999). He noted that “I am using the term of agent as someone who acts and brings about change, and whose achievements are to be judged in terms of her own values and objectives, whether or not we assess them in terms of some external criteria as well” (ibid.:19). Life Sciences teachers in PLCs can therefore be agents that bring about change related to their beings and doings in the teaching and learning of biodiversity. Fundisa for Change partners can also be agents who can bring about change in the Fundisa for Change programme which may enhance Life Sciences teachers‟ functionings related to biodiversity. Sen (1985) also talks of „agency freedom‟, which is freedom to achieve whatever the person, as a responsible agent, decides he or she should achieve. He recognises that the freedom of agency that we individually have is inescapably qualified and constrained by the social, political and economic opportunities available to us.

Deliberation and reflexive dialogues are core elements for developing human agency (Crocker, 2008; Crocker & Robeyns, 2010). There must be a certain reflection and conscious deliberation of the reasons and values upholding agency (Crocker, 2008). What is needed is the freedom and power to act, but also freedom and power to question and reassess the prevailing norms and values in a social context such as Sciences teachers PLCs related to biodiversity (ibid). According to Walker and Unterhalter (2007) people are understood to be active participants in development, rather than passive spectators. Agency here is taken to “ mean that each person is dignified and responsible human being who shapes his or her own life in the light of goals that matter, rather than simply being shaped or instructed how to think” (ibid.:5). These goals are reached through reasoned reflection (ibid). People are agents of their own learning, the agents of learning (or failure to learn) of others, and the recipients of other‟s agency (ibid.). Sen (1999) argues that people exercise their agency individually and in co-operation with others. Critical thinking and participation skills are critical for developing their professional agency (Crocker, 2008). As mentioned in Chapter Two, successful implementation of biodiversity education requires participatory methods and should enhance students‟ critical thinking skills. Significant to this study, was to explore if and how Life Sciences teachers exercise their agency in the PLCs to enhance their biodiversity knowledge. It was

This was particularly important because the Life Sciences teachers in this study are part of the Fundisa for Change programme which aims to support transformative environmental learning (Lotz-Sisitka & Songqwaru, 2013). According to Walker (2005), for transformative environmental learning and social change, teachers‟ agency and autonomy are both desired functionings and valuable capabilities. Human agency develops over time: “it is a process of both being and becoming” (Walker & Unterhalter, 2007:6).

3.3.2.3 Conversion factors

The concept of conversion factors (Robeyns, 2005a) is important within the capability approach. Conversion factors are factors that can allow teachers in PLCs to convert resources to new functionings (ibid.). Sen‟s standard example of explaining the concept of conversion factors is the bicycle which is only useful if accompanied by the respective infrastructure, e.g. a bikeway (Sen, 1999). He argued that one can interpret certain acquired skills as commodities, which are useful only if accompanied by respective labour market structures which help turn these skills into outcomes (ibid.). The concept of conversion factors was central to this study, to explore if and how Fundisa for Change acts as a conversion factor that expands and /or constrains Life Sciences teachers‟ functionings related to biodiversity in the PLCs. The choice of using the concept of conversion factors in this study is motivated by Robeyns (2005a). She distinguished between three sources of conversion factors that can constrain or enable people‟s capabilities. These are:

a) Personal conversion factors: These are conversion factors determined by one‟s mental and physical aspect (Robeyns, 2005a). They are internal to the individual, such as metabolism, physical condition, reading skills, or intelligence. To give an example of what she meant by a personal conversion factor, Robeyns (2005a) noted that if a person has a physical disability and has never learned to ride a bicycle, a bicycle will be of limited help to enable that person‟s functioning of mobility. In terms of this study, personal conversion factors in the Science PLCs could be the individual teachers‟ qualifications and personal time (Tao, 2012) that will allow them to engage in PLC activities that will help expand or constrain their valued beings and doings related to biodiversity. To draw on the previous chapter, other personal conversion factors in the PLCs that could enable Life Sciences teachers to achieve their valued beings and doings related to biodiversity also include the individual teacher‟s level of confidence (Howitt, 2007) and the motivation and enthusiasm to learn about biodiversity (Luft, 2007).

b) Social conversion factors: These are conversion factors determined by the society in which one lives, such as social norms (for example, rules of behaviour, materialism), social institutions (such as public policies, political rights), social norms, discriminating practices,

societal hierarchies, or power relations related to class, race, or gender (Robeyns, 2005a). To give an example of social conversion factors, Robeyns (2005a) noted that if in a country there is a law that a woman is not allowed to ride a bicycle unless accompanied by a family member who is a man, then it becomes difficult to use the good to enable the woman‟s functioning. An example of a social conversion factor in the PLC that will enable or constrain the Life Sciences teachers to expand their valued beings and doing related to biodiversity could be the CAPS curriculum (South Africa. DBE, 2011a) expectations regarding the teaching of biodiversity.

c) Environmental factors: These are conversion factors determined by or emerging from the physical environment in which a person lives (Robeyns, 2005a). These can be aspects of one‟s geographical location or climate, pollution, the proneness to natural disasters, the presence or absence of seas and oceans, the state of buildings, roads and bridges, and the means of transportation and communication. A good example of an environmental conversion factor in the PLC that could enable or constrain the Life Sciences teachers to expand their valued beings and doings related to biodiversity is the context in which the PLC activities happen. For example, Smith (2013) and C.A.P.E (2010) promoted pedagogies for biodiversity that allowed for local biodiversity investigation, thus the context in which the PLC happens will determine if there is any presence of biodiversity that teachers can explore to learn about biodiversity, for example the presence of a wetland.

According to Robeyns (2005a), the personal, social and environmental conversion factors are interrelated.Therefore the capability of individual Life Sciences teachers in the PLCs is likely to be dependent on these interrelated conversion factors (Robeyns, 2005a). In this study I consider the PLCs themselves to be potential conversion factors that can enable and/or constrain Life Sciences teachers‟ capabilities for biodiversity teaching. The PLCs in this study are situated in the broader professional development programme, Fundisa for Change (Fundisa for Change, 2013). In this study I therefore consider the Fundisa for Change programme to be a potential conversion factor that can either enable and/or constrain the Life Sciences teachers‟ capabilities relating to biodiversity teaching. The PLC context and teachers relationships in the PLC may have the potential to expand or constrain individual Life Sciences teachers‟ capabilities (Robeyns, 2005a). It is thus not enough to know what functionings Life Sciences teachers can or cannot achieve; we also need to know the circumstances in which the PLCs are situated (Robeyns, 2003; 2005a).

The capability approach is sensitive to individual differences as well as facilitating or impeding factors that impact on conversion of resources into valuable functionings (Robeyns, 2005a; Crocker,

two Life Sciences teachers with identical capability sets are likely to end up with different achieved functionings in the PLCs (Robeyns, 2005a). She further noted that there are sometimes complex intertwined factors that affect and influence, for example, Life Sciences teachers‟ choices to participate in PLC activities. This may be related to family, religion, tribe, cultural ties and community background (Robeyns, 2005a). This debate prompts the question: what factors influence the Life Sciences teachers to achieve their desired functionings in the PLCs?

Walker and Unterhalter (2007) recognised that individual people have different abilities to convert resources into valued functionings. To expand on this, Sen gave an example of an individual commodity of food and a functioning of being well–nourished; the relationship will vary depending on individual‟s body size, metabolic rate, age, activity levels or presence of parasitic diseases and so on (Sen, 1985). With regard to this study, what this example demonstrates is that a distinction needs to be made between the presence of the PLC and the Life Sciences teachers‟ functionings. This thus implies that the resources used in the PLCs are likely to generate different capability sets for individual teachers. The study sought to explore what resources the Life Sciences teachers in this study required to achieve their individual functionings in the PLCs related to biodiversity. This study investigates how teacher education programmes such as Fundisa for Change can potentially act as conversion factors that may enable or constrain teachers achieve their functionings. Lewis and Hurd (2011) warned that if professional development programmes are designed to act as conversion factors that expand teachers‟ capabilities on the teaching of biodiversity, they may not be effective if they are designed in a „one-size fits all‟ manner. Figure 3.1 below sums up some of the key concepts of capability approach as discussed above.

Figure 3.1: The building blocks of capability approach (Goerne, 2010:7)

Commodities are resources that an individual can dispose of, such as money and other material goods (Goerne, 2010). The capability approach criticises the assessment of individual outcomes based on commodities, argues for measurement of individual functionings instead of commodities. The concepts in Figure 3.1 are the building blocks of capability approach (Goerne, 2010). These concepts were used in this study to help understand if and how Life Sciences teachers in PLCs achieve their functionings related to biodiversity teaching. Analysing these concepts in the study

helped explore how Fundisa for Change potentially acts as a conversion factor for Science teachers in PLCs to achieve their functionings related to biodiversity.