Stakeholder participation

The research affirmed that stakeholder participation can appear to be effective on the surface, but ineffective at its roots. This situation calls for closer attention. In both case study schools SGB members (more especially learner and parent stakeholders) believed that they do in fact participate. However, it emerged from the findings that they only participate to a limited degree. In the literature reviewed in this study, Naidoo (2012) maintains that participation involves a situation whereby all stakeholders work together and make sound decisions with the same interests at heart. Participation is a process whereby people have to work hand in hand with each other, always pulling in the same direction. If we are to talk about (equitable) stakeholder participation, automatically issues of democracy are involved. It is believed that democracy within schools depends on a school’s culture and the type of people within the school – especially the management team. Do they still believe in bureaucracy, or do they operate within democratic parameters? Within the school, democracy depends on people being guided by the notion of participative democracy, and for a school to be democratic it requires the participation of all stakeholders. Optimal participation suggests high communication levels amongst stakeholders.

From the study it emerged that the participation of the parent and learner stakeholder groups has suffered from a lack of knowledge and exposure, as well as the fear of appearing foolish

124

or disrespectful before others. As a result, the major roles are performed by the principal and teacher stakeholders, while the parents are isolated. Parents thus tend to play a passive role because they do not know exactly what their role is, or how to be productive in the positions they hold. Also, they face time constraints and therefore cannot regularly attend meetings. Transport problems and communication issues also curtail their participation. At both case study schools, learners from single-parent (working class) families were raised by their mothers who had difficulties availing themselves to attend meetings. The principal of Momentum Secondary confirmed that parents do not exercise their participative right, but are good at endorsing ideas which other stakeholders come up with.

This is corroborated by Mncube and Harber (2010), who attest that despite learners being given fully participative roles in school governance under the current educational policy, they do not always play their part in school decision making. Parents are also empowered, yet they fail to take full advantage of this. The study suggests that this is due to parents not always being prepared to discipline misbehaving learners. Teachers, on the other hand, seem to contribute a great deal because they grapple with learner-related issues on a daily basis. Even if a code has been formulated for a school, often it is the teachers who guide the direction they wanted that code to take, as this safeguards their interests and addresses challenges which they tend to experience as educators.

A lack of participation (i.e., imbalances in stakeholder participation) tends to manifest as problems in governance. Learners especially were found to be overshadowed by adults. It is thus up to the adult stakeholders of the SGB, and the teachers within the particular school, to take the role of learner stakeholders seriously. They must show learners respect, treat their views with dignity and value their inputs.

The idea of not being sufficiently competent to participate may link back to traditional African culture, where children are supposed to listen and take orders from adults, and questioning adults is forbidden. Much still needs to be done to erase the scars of the past, but in opening those doors, African children will be able to stand their ground and fight for their right to be respected and acknowledged.

Stakeholder participation on the part of learners leads to better governance and is always associated with good results: Heystek (2001, p. 217) mentions that learner participation in an

125

SGB, in addition to their input in decision making, can help improve the school as a whole and ensure that the school is run better. Mncube and Harber (2011) concur that when all stakeholders work jointly for the common good of the school, in a culture that promotes democracy, a successful school is bound to emerge.

Mabovula’s (2009) study investigated learner participation in school governance in five secondary schools in the Eastern Cape. From the study it emerged that even though the democratisation of school governance had been given all stakeholders a powerful voice through the RCLs, these voices seemed to be silenced, rather than recognised or valued (Mabovula, 2009, p. 219). In the present study it emerged that learners are largely ‘voiceless’. Rubin and Silva (2003, cited in Lin, 2008) attest that including learners in school governance requires giving them a platform and the necessary time to participate in decision-making processes. However, the findings of this study show that this ideal remains a challenge: on paper it can appear feasible and doable, but putting it into practice remains a problem.

In conclusion, both schools were aware of the issues of stakeholder participation and the need for democratic participation on the part of all members of the SGB. The schools attempted to implement this, but were largely unable to do so. Scholars in this field of study have revealed that the involvement of certain stakeholders (learners in particular) amounts to nothing more than window dressing. Similarly, this study revealed that learner participation in school governance is problematic in respect of how limited it is. From data sourced through interviews, the learners in both schools revealed that learner stakeholders do not fully exercise their participative rights, and neither do parents. Thus, their participation is still problematic.