The teachers’ attitude

Since 1994 all citizens of South Africa have been bombarded with change at all levels of society: political change, economical change, curricular changes in education, changes in their churches and many more. No one likes change. A general reflection on the data that was collected shows that some of the teachers who participated in the research project were set in their ideas after years of experience and did not see the reason for change. All the teachers are professional, well-qualified teachers who could enable most of the learners in their classrooms to pass with good results. It is unfortunate that they have no training in inclusive education or remedial teaching. They are willing to study, but not to be better teachers in full-service schools who can provide support to learners with barriers to learning.

Furthermore, some of the teachers were not prepared to make or buy additional resources needed in their classrooms to enhance learning or to address the needs which occur when differentiated teaching has to be done. They expect the Department of Education to provide everything.

6.6.1.1 Teachers’ emotional intelligence

During the focus group interviews the researcher observed that the participants’ emotional intelligence was low as they could not take charge of their emotions and actions. In the opinion of the researcher emotional intelligence is important in the teaching profession because it can be crucial for FSS teachers to be successful professionals. Emotional intelligence (EI) is the ability to recognize and assess one’s own feelings and manage them, and likewise notice them in others and empathize with them. Thus people with good EI care about other people and recognize their needs (Schore, 2012:30-31).

Some of the participants are not aware of their actions and the effect they have on the learners. They let their emotions control them. P3 (focus group 1) shouted for instance: “These learners drive me crazy”. P1 (focus group 1) “I chase them out of the class if they cannot read.” P1 (focus group 1), “He either sits there, as I don’t want to see him, or he

goes home. I could not be bothered. As long as he is out of my sight”.It seems as if some of the participants act on impulse. They cannot self-regulate their emotions and become outraged.

Some of the FSS teachers seemed to have no self-confidence especially with regard to the use of technology in the classroom. They were too scared to even switch on a computer with software which could assist them with learners experiencing barriers. They did not trust their instincts and rather allowed their feelings to control them. During classroom observation it happened that some of participants could not manage their emotions and verbally abused the learners with barriers to learning. They were not prepared to mirror their actions and be aware that they blundered. They were not eager to rectify their mistakes.

The participants were indifferent to learners with barriers to the language of learning and teaching (LoLT). P5 (focus group 1), “That is another story”. The teacher rolled his eyes dramatically.

P5 (focus group 1, where Setswana is the LoLT in the Foundation Phase) said: “This child cannot speak one word of the Setswana language. He does not understand.” Some of the participants did not feel empathy with learners who did not understand the lesson. Participants above could not identify the needs of the particular learner; therefore they could not manage or build a relationship with the learners. One of the teachers’ wanted a normal classroom with all learners understanding the LoLT of the school.

Some of the participants demonstrated their unwillingness to assist learners or teachers from surrounding schools. This is a requirement set out in EWP6 on inclusive education. Their unpleasant gestures displayed that they were socially unskilled. P1 (focus group 1), “We can’t even cope with the ones we have here, then we still need to do other peoples work. No!!” They did not attempt to be part of a team, build relationships and be in a position to develop their social skills by sharing their frustrations and work with other teachers. They focused on their challenges rather than help others develop. P3 (focus group 1) exclaimed, for instance: “My opinion is, I do not want learners from neighbouring schools to come to this FSS”. P1 (focus group 1),”It will worsen our situation as teachers here. It’s difficult!”

Some of the participants said they did not want additional work by assisting learners and teachers from neighbouring schools.

6.6.1.2 Teachers’ attitude to inclusive education

The attitude to inclusive education of the teachers who took part in the research became clear from the interviews. To the researcher it seemed as if some participants have made a decision neither to be interested in inclusive education at all nor to implement the inclusive education policy. To them it was just additional work which they did not want to do. P5 (focus group 2) had the following to say: “Inclusive education with its policies is additional work.”

The following is proof of their negative attitude. The question was asked during the focus group interviews: “Can you identify learners with barriers to reading in your class?” P8 (focus group 2) shouted: “These learners drive me crazy. I chase them out of the class if they cannot read.” P17 (focus group 4) confirmed: “We don’t have a learner support teacher. We cannot help learners that cannot read.” It could be useful to attempt to do interventions for the learners or ask for assistance from colleagues. This statement confirms that participants lack motivation as they do not regard a new situation as a learning experience. Their attitude is that if there is no learner support teacher at their school, they do not want to make an effective difference in the lives of learners (Schore, 2012:30-31).

Some of the participants provided reasons for their negative attitude to inclusive education and learners with barriers to learning. P2 (focus group 1), for instance, said: “I am not comfortable with inclusive education. No, it is just extra work.” P5 (focus group 2) had the following to say: “Inclusive education with its policies is additional work.” P2 (focus group 1) stated: “Every now and then officials come to school and they want us to do new stuff.” P11 (focus group 2) exclaimed: “The department takes a long time before they replace teachers who left the system, as those teachers who went on pension, passed on or are on maternity leave. We the teachers left at school have to sit with additional learners in our classes and then we still have to struggle with the ones that cannot cope in class. I have

45 learners in my class which I have to teach. What happens to the other learners if I have to struggle with one learner, just tell me? This inclusive education is just nonsense.”

This type of feedback provides proof of the teachers’ negative attitude to inclusive education. P2 (focus group 1),”Yes i will have no inclusive policies”, when asked what would the teacher change at the full-service school.

In section 1.3, in which reference is made to a document from the Department of Education, it is stated that teachers feel “that they are not adequately trained, do not have the necessary specialized skills, cannot use the assistive devices to teach learners with barriers to learning, lack the basic knowledge and confidence to teach diverse learners, do not believe in inclusion” (Department of Education, 2012:4-5).

This statement from the Department of Education bears proof of other teachers’ opinions, as well as some of the participants’ rejection of inclusive education. The actual words spoken during the focus group interviews were also confirmed by the body language of some of the participants which the researcher observed. Gouws and Dicker (2006:416) affirm that teachers’ attitudes play a central role in their professional career and can impact positively or negatively on the way in which they act at school and in their classrooms. The researcher could also identify the unfavourable effects of the participants’ attitude.

The researcher concluded that some of the participants in the research study did not care about the principles and policies of inclusive education. The researcher could see that some of the teachers of FSSs who formed part of the research project regarded inclusive education as unwanted work and those they did not want to implement it in their classrooms.