Mentoring for best educational practice : a generic framework for whole school transformation within dysfunctional senior secondary schools, South Africa

MENTORING FOR BEST EDUCATIONAL

PRACTICE: A GENERIC FRAMEWORK FOR

WHOLE SCHOOL TRANSFORMATION WITHIN

DYSFUNCTIONAL SENIOR SECONDARY

SCHOOLS, SOUTH AFRICA

by

GISHMA MOHAMED

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of

DOCTOR PHILOSOPHIAE

in the Faculty of Arts

at the

NELSON MANDELA METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY

January 2013

SUPERVISOR: PROF F J BEZUIDENHOUT CO-SUPERVISOR: Ms E. LOMBARD

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... iii

TABLE OF CHAPTER CONTENTS ... iv

LIST OF TABLES ... ix

LIST OF DIAGRAMMES ... x

SUMMARY AND KEY WORDS ... xi

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ... xii

ADDENDUM A: EXTRACTS FROM BOOK OF CODES & CHAPTER REFERENCES ...xiii

ii

DECLARATION

I, Gishma Mohamed, hereby declare that the thesis, Mentoring for best educational practice: a generic framework for whole school transformation within dysfunctional senior secondary schools, South Africa, is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it does not contain material previously submitted for assessment to any other institute of higher learning for any other degree or diploma. I declare that all the sources that I have quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references.

Signature: _______________________ Gishma Mohamed

iii

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

I owe a debt of gratitude to the following, therefore my sincere thanks to:

 God, my source of strength, joy and peace during this time

 Prof Frans Bezuidenhout for his enduring patience, professional and constructive mentorship throughout the course of this research and throughout my academic career

 Dr Eddie Daniels for the time he spent assisting me in my earlier years of this research

 Ms Elsa Lombard, for her commitment and encouragement during the last phase of this research

 Prof Raga for the editing of my script

 My family, for their patience and encouragement, particularly, my sisters, Soraya and Mureeda, for their continuous love and support throughout my studies, my brother-in-law, Gary Tobias, for being available at my beck and call and to my son, Rushin.

 To all sponsors, particularly, the National Research Foundation, South African Association of Women Graduates, and to all other funders and sponsors who made a contribution of some kind to this research.

iv

TABLE OF CHAPTER CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION 1

1.1 Introduction 2

1.2 Background to the study 3

1.3 Brief historical overview of education in South Africa 4

1.4 Rationale for the study 8

1.5 Research question 10 1.6 Research objectives 11 1.7 Research methodology 11 1.7.1 Meta-theory 11 1.7.2 Methodological approach 13 1.8 Significance of research 16 1.9 Additional concepts 17

1.10 Brief chapter overviews 18

CHAPTER 2: THE SCHOOLING SYSTEM: A MICRO-LEVEL ANALYSIS 20

2.1 Introduction 21

2.2 The functionalist perspective 22

2.3 Parsons’ social system 22

2.4 Structure of the South African Education system 28

2.4.1 Macro and meso-level social systems 29

2.4.2 Micro-level systems 30

2.4.2.1 School Governing Body (SGB) 31

2.4.2.2 School Management Teams (SMTs) 32

2.4.2.3 Educators 33

2.4.2.4 Learners 34

2.5 Maintaining the schooling system 34

2.6 Social functions as outlined by Merton 35

2.6.1 Manifest functions 35

2.6.2 Latent functions 36

2.6.3 Dysfunctions 36

v

2.7.1 Adaptation 40

2.7.2 Goal Attainment 41

2.7.3 Integration 41

2.7.4 Latency: pattern maintenance and tension management 42

2.8 Social action systems with reference to schooling systems 43

2.8.1 Social system 43

2.8.2 Cultural system 44

2.8.3 Personality system 45

2.8.4 Behavioural system 45

2.9 Pattern variables and their importance 46

2.10 Positioning of analysis within the research 48

2.11 Summary 51

CHAPTER 3: MENTORING: ITS NATURE, IMPORTANCE AND

PREMISES

52

3.1 Introduction 53

3.2. Mentoring - definitional concerns 53

3.2.1 Defining Mentoring 55

3.3 Theoretical underpinning of mentoring in an educational setting 56 3.3.1. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development 56

3.3.2 Learning theories 57

3.3.3 Reflections on the theoretical perspectives: The act of mentoring 60

3.4 Formal mentoring vs. Informal mentoring 61

3.4.1 A comparison between formal and informal mentoring 61

3.5 Types of mentoring 64

3.5.1 Team and/or peer mentoring 64

3.5.2 Multiple mentoring 65

3.5.3 Reverse mentoring 65

3.5.4 Electronic mentoring 66

3.5.5 Professional mentoring 66

3.6 Justification for mentoring: Benefits of mentoring for all 66

3.6.1 Benefits for mentors and mentees 67

vi 3.6.1.2 Improvement of professional practice through professional

development

68

3.6.1.3 Establishing positive collegial relationships 68

3.6.1.4 Depth of understanding 68

3.6.1.5 Receiving and offering psycho-social support 69 3.6.2 Benefits for the school as organisation 69

3.7 Justifying the mode of mentoring 70

3.8 Barriers 71

3.9 Establishing an aligned mentoring system 72

3.10 Implications for mentoring practice 73

3.11 Integration of insights into a generic mentoring framework 74

3.12 Chapter summary 76

CHAPTER 4: CONCEPTUALISATION OF BEST EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE

78

4.1 Introduction 80

4.2 Exploring the concept ‘best practice’ 80

4.2.1 Standards for ‘best educational practice 83

4.2.2.1 A clear and common focus 83

4.2.2.2 High standards and expectations 83

4.2.2.3 Strong leadership 83

4.2.2.4 Supportive, personalised, and relevant learning 84

4.2.2.5 Parent/community involvement 84

4.2.2.6 Monitoring, accountability and assessment 84

4.2.2.7 Curriculum and instruction 84

4.2.2.8 Professional development 85

4.2.2.9 Time and structure 85

4.3 Quality education 85

4.3.1 Whole school development (WSD) / Whole school culture (WSC) 87

4.4 Benchmarking 89

4.5 Functional vs. dysfunctional schools in a South African context 92

4.6 Functional schools 94

vii

4.6.1.1 Partnerships with the community 95

4.6.1.2 Staff appraisal and development 96

4.6.1.3 Staff organisation into groups, teams and learning networks 96

4.6.1.4 Decision-making processes 97

4.6.1.5 Financial controls, budgets and fundraising 98

4.6.1.6 The timetable and school handbook 98

4.6.1.7 Managing diversity 99

4.6.1.8 Behaviour and codes of conduct 99

4.6.1.9 Staff induction and orientation 100

4.6.2 Infrastructural functionality (Resources) 101

4.6.2.1 School resources and infrastructure 101

4.6.2.2 School environment 102

4.6.3 Instructional functionality (Teaching and Learning) 103

4.6.3.1 Schemes of work 103

4.7 Dysfunctional schools 104

4.7.1 Factors contributing towards a dysfunctional school status 104 4.7.1.1 Previously classified educational departments and dysfunctional

schools

105

4.7.1.2 Poor socio-economic backgrounds, poor performances 105 4.7.1.3 District/departmental visits and dysfunctional schools 106

4.7.1.4 Governance and dysfunctional schools 106

4.7.1.5 School management and dysfunctional schools 107 4.8 Factors influencing applications of best educational practice

principles

109

4.9 Positioning of best educational practice 109

4.9.1 Enabling structures and functions 112

4.9.2 Enabling processes 113

viii CHAPTER 5: THE STRUCTURE AND PROCESS OF A GENERIC

MENTORING FRAMEWORK

116

5.1 Introduction 117

5.2 Theoretical underpinning: positioning of analysis 118

5.3 Introducing the generic mentoring framework 122

5.3.1 Components and elements 122

5.3.2 The phases 123

5.3.2.1 Phase 1: Orientation and set-up of a task team 124

5.3.2.2 Phase 2: The design phase 128

5.3.2.3 Phase 3: Implementation phase 133

5.3.2.4 Phase 4: Evaluation phase 136

5.3.3 Feedback 139

5.3.4 Complimentary compulsory training 140

5.4 Conclusion 141

CHAPTER 6: SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 143

6.1 Introduction 144

6.2 The study 144

6.3 Problems and limitations 145

6.4 Assessment of research objectives 147

6.5 Recommendations 150

6.6 Conclusions 152

List of References 154

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Examples of how pattern variables are operationalised within a schooling system

46

Table 3.1: A comparison between formal and informal mentoring 63

Table 3.2: Psycho-social benefits of being a mentor and having a mentor

69

Table 3.3: Benefits for the school as an organisation 70

Table 3.4: Successful elements of mentoring 71

Table 3.5: Barriers to mentoring 72

Table 4.1: Criteria used to define schools as functional 94

Table 4.2: Barriers / Dysfunctionality within schools 108

x

LIST OF DIAGRAMMES

Diagramme 2.1: Depiction of functional prerequisites 26

Diagramme 2.2: Structures of the South African schooling system 29

Diagramme 2.3: Micro level structures of the South African schooling system

31

Diagramme 2.4: Structural interaction and systemic equilibrium 35

Diagramme 2.5: Actor collectives of whole school system aligned with AGIL-scheme

38

Diagramme 2.6: The schooling system with micro level subsystems as aligned with the AGIL-scheme

39

Diagramme 2.7: Function of subsystem within whole school systemic environment

39

Diagramme 2.8: The RCL and its function of Adaptation within the whole school system

40

Diagramme 2.9 The Educators and its function of Goal attainment within the whole school system

41

Diagramme 2.10: The SMT and its function of Integration within the whole school system

41

Diagramme 2.11: The SGB and its function of Pattern maintenance and tension management (Latency) within the whole school system

42

Diagramme 2:12 Functions of action systems in terms of the AGIL-scheme

43

Diagramme 2.13: Schooling system positioned within Parsonian

framework

49

Diagramme 2:14 Envisaged elements of the generic mentoring

framework

51

Diagramme 4.1: The AGIL-scheme and primary subsystem functions with reference to best educational practice

112

Diagramme 5.1: Phases and elements of the generic mentoring framework

122

Diagramme 5.2: The mentoring framework process 123

Diagramme 5.3: Phase 1: Orientation of generic mentoring framework 124

Diagramme 5.4: Phase 2: Design of fit-for-purpose mentoring system 129

Diagramme 5.5: Phase 3: Implementation of fit-for-purpose mentoring system

133

Diagramme 5.6: Phase 4: Evaluation of fit-for-purpose mentoring system

xi

SUMMARY

During transformation (1994 onwards), different interventions were instituted within Education as an attempt to redress learner achievement and throughput. By so doing, the South African government believed that by investing in education a return would be attained which would be beneficial to stabilising its economy — nationally and internationally. However, expected outcomes of these interventions have not been achieved and various researchers and opinion leaders still view the quality of education in South Africa as disparaging and deficient as well as characterised by an increasing prevalence of dysfunctional schooling systems. Therefore, this research aimed to design a generic mentoring framework through which transformation within dysfunctional schooling systems can be facilitated; this is to enable whole school development to achieve best educational practice. In order to achieve this, a micro-level analysis of schooling systems, using the functionalist perspective, specifically enabled through the contributions of Parsons and Merton was undertaken. In addition, insight gained from a broad range of literature and other secondary resources on mentoring, best practice and quality education was used to develop a number of premises. These premises were used to suggest how the generic mentoring framework can be adapted to enable a fit-for-purpose mentoring system which allows facilitation of a process of sustained transformation which gravitates towards a whole school culture that envisions quality education for all. It is recommended that further research be undertaken to ascertain the strength of the generic mentoring framework and operationalising it as a fit-for-purpose mentoring system within a school in the form of a pilot study. Aligned with this, to undertake assessment research, amongst other things, to systematically and with greater depth explore the notions of intended and unintended consequences that manifest during operationalisation of a fit-for-purpose mentoring system and how these can and should be measured.

Key words

Action systems, AGIL-scheme, best educational practice, dysfunctional schools, functionalist perspective, mentoring, pattern variables, quality education for all, whole school development, social system, transformation, whole school culture.

xii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A Adaptation

AMCHP Association of Maternal and Child Health Programmes C2005 Curriculum 2005

CAPS Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement DBE Department of Basic Education

ELRC Education Labour Relations Council EMS Education Management Services

G Goal-attainment

GCIS Government Communication & Information Systems I Integration

JET Joint Education Trust L Latency

NCS National Curriculum Statement

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development RCL Representative Council of Learners

RNCS Revised National Curriculum Statement SADTU South African Democratic Teachers Union

SERC Science Education Resource Center SGB School Governing Body

SMT School Management Team UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

WSC Whole School Culture WSD Whole school development

xiii

ADDENDUM A

Extracts from Book of Codes and Chapter References

1

181

2

188

3

189

4

₁₉₆

5

₁₉₆

6

197

7

198

8

199

9

₂₀₇

10

₂₁₂

10.1

212

10.2

220

10.3

225

10.4

₂₃₄

10.5

framework

245

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Background to the study 2

1.3 Brief historical overview of education in South Africa 4

1.4 Rationale for the study 8

1.5 Research question 10 1.6 Research objectives 11 1.7 Research methodology 12 1.7.1 Meta-theory 12 1.7.2 Methodological approach 13 1.8 Significance of research 16 1.9 Additional concepts 18

2

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION AND ORIENTATION

1.1 Introduction

Education is viewed as an important cornerstone to address South Africa‘s growth and development (Department of Education (DoE), 2001)1. As a social institution, education‘s importance is also evident when considering that the largest percentage of South Africa‘s annual budget is set aside to ensure growth and development (Hofmeyr, 2000). However, the notion of incapability of the government to attain its educational objectives (Du Toit, Erasmus & Strydom, 2010) has become synonymous with the decline of the South African economy over the past few decades (Du Toit, Erasmus & Strydom, 2010). According to Cronje (2010), the lack of skilled labour can be attributed to problems associated with the quality of education resulting in learners who are not adequately prepared for the next level of education. By investing in education, the government aspires to a return on investment which is beneficial to stabilizing the South African economy, nationally and internationally (Amino, 2009; Watkins, 2010).

During transformation (1994 onwards), different interventions such as coaching (Veenman, Denessen, Gerrits & Kenter, 2001; Brooks, 2006), training of educators in problem-areas (for example, mathematics and science teaching) (Overton, 1999; Kanjee & Prinsloo, 2005) and improving safety in high-risk schools was instituted an attempt to redress learner achievement and throughput (Erasmus, 1996; Zulu, Urbani, van der Merwe & van der Walt, 2004; Mashele, 2009), while to ensure quality education for all. However, there is insufficient evidence to assess whether the expected outcomes of these interventions have been achieved. Taylor (2000), Rembe (2005), De Villiers (2010), Sokupa (2010) and Taylor (2011) still view the quality of education in South Africa as disparaging and deficient as well as characterised by dysfunctional schooling systems.

1 _{In 2011, with the inauguration of Blade Nzimande as Minister of Higher Education and the inception of CAPS,}

the Department of Education’s (DoE) name changed to the Department of Basic Education (DBE). Therefore, references pertaining to the DoE will remain as is until 2010, and from there on it will be noted as the DBE.

3 1.2 Background to the study

One of the priorities of the South African government is to provide education for all as envisioned by the DoE through redress (Berger, 2003; Rembe, 2005). However, there is concern that this priority is not being achieved with resultant adverse consequences for quality education for all (Rembe, 2005; Cronje, 2010; Nzimande, 2010; Taylor, 2011; SAIRR, 2012).

The text book debacle in mid-2012, where a number of schools in the Limpopo Province had not received their consignment of textbooks from the DBE in time for the learners to prepare for their assessments based on the new curriculum, is one such concern affecting the quality of education. The text book crisis held negative consequences for both the learners at the affected schools and education.

An analysis of the national matriculation results for 2008 – 2012 (62.6%, 60.6%, 67.8%, 70.2% and 73.9%) respectively, reveal an increased pass rate for each consecutive year. However, the results do not reflect the learner dropout rate. If, for example, the results of 2011 included the dropout rate, then only 38 % of the learners who commenced their schooling career in 2000, had passed. In 1997, the high drop-out rate was mentioned as a concern by Crouch and Mabogoane and reiterated by Hodgson in 2012 and the South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR) (2012).

In 2010, the South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU), (cited by Sokupa, 2010) voiced their concern about the practice to adjust marks upwardly. Taylor (2011) expressed concern over school principals involved in ―gaming‖ or tweaking of the matric results when the school‘s reputation is at stake. In addition, they were also concerned about the low pass requirements as well as the small number of learners who were able to further their education at tertiary institutions (Sokupa, 2010). While these concerns may not necessarily be of an on-going nature, the quality of the pass and the subject content, adjustment of marks and a low pass requirement points towards accountability issues. Concerning the low number of learners entering tertiary institutions, there is the implication of limited future job prospects and consequences for quality of life (Sokupa, 2010). While it may be reasoned that this does not directly relate to quality of education, it does question whether the DBE is able to succeed in attaining its vision of quality education for all.

4

Pennington (2011), Director of a non-profit organisation, Together Schools of the Joint Education Trust (JET) which assists corporates support South African schools, also expressed concern about the current throughput rate. From an approximate 1 000 000 (one million) learners who enrolled for their school career, about only 17% managed to enter some form of tertiary education (Pennington, 2011). Whether this by nature is indicative of a quality-related problem such as subject content or teacher capacity problem, it ties up with the same concern expressed by SADTU (2010 cited by Sokupa, 2010). In addition to this, Pennington holds the position that regulatory and infrastructural dysfunctionality can be cited as reason for prevalence of approximately 24 000 of the 30 000 schools in 2011 being identified as dysfunctional places for learning. He is of the opinion that learners within dysfunctional schools have little or no hope of exiting school with a level of development that will had prepared them for either the job market or tertiary education.

Adams (2007) stated that matriculation pass rates and Annual National Assessment (ANA) scores should not be used as the sole basis to determine school development (Adams, 2007). He postulates that education in South Africa is a complex matter of improving learner test scores at various stages in their schooling experience. Berger (2003), Rembe (2005) and Soudien (2007) attribute the lack of performance in schools to the legacy of apartheid. The current education system reflects apartheid‘s inherited values, emotions and circumstances. Therefore, to understand why transformation of the education system is challenging, it should be understood against the background of the history of education in South Africa over the past 50 years (DoE, 2001). This, amongst other things, provides insight into the various reasons that indicate the breakdown in education, and the struggle to transform it.

1.3 Brief historical overview: Education in South Africa

Prior to 1994, education was a driving force behind apartheid and a segregated South African society (Msila, 2007). Apartheid education was a means of social control and used to exploit political objectives (Carrim, 2001). White citizens received a higher quality of education compared to non-whites citizens. Black, Coloured and Indian citizens of the country received mediocre education. According to Rembe (2005), this prevented the majority from becoming educated since, amongst other things, it was believed they were more suited for manual labour. The adoption of an apartheid

5

education system left black schools dysfunctional. They were forced to function with limited resources which, inter alia, resulted in demoralised educators and learners who lacked accountability to teaching and learning (Todd & Mason, 2005).

Quality education was prioritized by post-apartheid government (ANC). The White Paper on Education and Training (1995) made reference to declining school performance among the schools serving the masses (Motala, 2001).

During the first five years of democracy (post-1994), the newly established National DoE tackled the mammoth task of transforming education by setting itself two major priorities. The first priority was a bureaucratic, administrative and informational one that had to do with creating a single education department from the previous 19 departments of education within the frame of nine new provinces (Hofmeyr, 2000; Gilmor, 2001: 6). The 19 departments of education had served as a means to segregate the different race groups into different schooling systems which had resulted in the unequal provision of education in South Africa.

The restructuring of the 19 departments of education was, therefore, an essential priority because it involved the integration of the various departments of education and re-staffing (Gilmor, 2001; Rembe, 2005). The schools were required by the new DBE to reflect a democratically elected staff constituting all race groups. In addition, re-staffing was intended to reflect unity and equal participation in decision-making at all levels. A unified body would imply that an understanding of and appreciation for the values and culture of other race groups would be achieved. This in turn would enable all stakeholders to work collectively towards educational objectives based on a shared vision. However, this was not the case, as restructuring and re-staffing of the education system, combined with the allocation of authority and responsibilities impacted unfavourably on policy implementation and service delivery (Rembe, 2005).

The second priority was to formulate policies and to establish legislation that would create a framework for a single public-school system for South Africa. By so doing, it was envisioned that equality would be enhanced (Gilmor, 2001). The legislation and policies formulated during the post-apartheid period included, amongst others, the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996 (DoE, 1996), the Norms and Standards for

6

School Funding 84 of 1996, and a new curriculum, namely: Curriculum 2005 (C2005) (Rembe, 2005). However, this transformation process and the policies that were put in place did not solve the intricate problems of the education system (Ntuta & Schurink, 2010). Implementation proved to be problematic. Consequently, a number of intervention programmes were introduced at provincial and national level in an attempt to address this challenge.

With the advent of time certain policy issues and challenges had a negative impact on achieving transformation which necessitated interventions. Some of the most pressing factors were the shortcomings and unequal participation of different population groups; education policies that retained the inequalities of class distinction, such as different school categories and unequal distribution of resources; lack of communication within the meso and micro departments due to linguistic problems which caused confusion and controversy; and confusion between theory and the application of these policies within their respective environmental contexts (McGrath, 1998). This resulted in a call for the revival and rejuvenation of the education system and the fundamental alteration of teaching and learning in formal education (Overton, 1999).

Rembe (2005: 10) writes that (p)roblems of allocation of powers and the functioning of structures at the national and provincial levels (have) resulted in misinterpretation of policies by the provincial Departments of Education. This resulted in some Departments setting their own priorities since they chose to implement policies selectively. In addition, the National DoE was also confronted with problems in its inherited organisational structures. These problems originated because the employees who worked for the apartheid government had experience in administrative practices and procedures but lacked the orientation, will and commitment to adapt to the new approach and continued to function along the old practices which undermined the implementation of some of the new changes that were being introduced (Rembe, 2005: 11). The variance in skills and attitude between employees who remained and those who entered the system contributed to the false impression of adjustment to the new educational system. While senior management and new staff members, some of whom were political activists and the majority political party members, had knowledge and discernment of the kind of management style that was needed to ensure best

7

practice and were committed to transformation, they lacked competence and experience (Rembe, 2005).

In 2001, it was noticed that various actors in the education system displayed a lack of capacity to cope with trends in practice and management (Motala, 2001). It had become clear that educators also lacked relevant skills to impart knowledge and execute the kind of erudition for the desired goal of lifelong learning (le Roux & Möller, 2002). In addition, Fleisch and Christie‘s (2004) research undertaken during 1994 and 1995 among Gauteng schools revealed that these schools were becoming dysfunctional. More specifically, they identified four problems that contributed to these schools‘ dysfunctional status, namely:

 Poor physical and social facilities which had an on-going negative impact on teaching and learning.

 Serious organisational problems, including weak and unaccountable leadership and administrative dysfunctioning.

 Poor communication and inadequate disciplinary and grievance procedures.  Poor relationships with surrounding communities, as well as poor communication

between schools and the DBE.

Amino (2009) and Nzimande (2010) stated that an assessment of the DoE‘s vision to attain uniformity of values and traditions had still not been achieved by 2009.

While Fleisch (2006) highlighted the lack of competence in teaching within a multicultural inclusive pedagogic setting as a criterion attributing to a school‘s dysfunctional status, Taylor (2011), in his report on ‗Priorities for Addressing South Africa‘s Education and Training Crisis‘ emphasised a general deterioration of the education system with regard to access, quality and equity. In addition to this, Taylor (2008) mentioned that resolving curriculum issues only will not improve the quality of education; he recommended preparing educators to teach within dysfunctional contexts, enhancing accountability, increasing resources, and by gaining community participation (Equal Education, 2009).

Six years after the first democratic elections, Hargreaves (2000: 151) draws attention to the fact that (o)verworked, and underpaid teachers have had to master and comply

8 with centrally imposed learning standards, detailed curriculum targets and pervasive testing regimes – and they have seen their work and their worth become broken down and categorized into checklists of performance standards or competencies. Five years later Rembe (2005), while reminding that the envisioned educational goals had not been achieved, cites the lack of commitment and motivation amongst some of the civil servants together with corruption and mismanagement as contributing factors. Now 18 years after the first democratic elections, although some wins have been attained, it has become nevertheless impossible to ignore the poor matriculation results, the growing number of dysfunctional schools, and the periodic forms of disruptions by educators and learners that mar the education environment.

1.4 Rationale for the study

Huge investments have been ploughed into education with the hope for a return on investment (Amino, 2009; Watkins, 2010). However, the current education system continues to widen the chasms between 6 000 functional and 24 000 dysfunctional schools (Taylor, 2011). As quality education is not provided to all South African learners, this hampers their educational achievements (Rembe, 2005; Cronje, 2010; Taylor, 2011; SAIRR, 2012). The education system also continues to push disadvantaged learners through a seemingly inflexible education system that lacks resources (van Heerden, 1997 as cited in Rosa, 2004). The negative impact of apartheid has left many schools in a dysfunctional state struggling to improve learner performances (Pennington, 2011).

The dysfunctional state of the education system has resulted in various transformation initiatives over the years aimed to reform education at the ground level in an attempt to achieve envisioned post-apartheid educational objectives (Jansen, 1998; Hofmeyr, 2000; le Roux & Möller, 2002; Rembe, 2005; Motshekga, 2012).

While the government has encouraged professional development at all levels to enable critical and reflective lifelong learners (DBE, 2012), professional development has remained underutilized. Furthermore, interventions as mentioned in preceding paragraphs, have not achieved expected outcomes. This has resulted in, amongst other things, a need for research on intervention initiatives involving mentoring to enhance best educational practice or quality education for all within the whole school

9

context, especially in those that have been defined as dysfunctional. Orland (1999), Evertson and Smithey (2000) as well as Norman and Ganser (2004) have emphasised that considering mentoring as an intervention will enable much required professional development in order to enhance teaching and learning and to prevent talented educators leaving the profession. In similar vein, both Gebeda (2000) and Norman and Feiman-Nemser (2005) accentuated the need for mentoring to improve the quality of education. However, they add that while it will profit mentees and learners, it is also important that it should serve to enable whole school transformation.

Aligned with the above mentioned and introducing the notion of change within the educational environment, Robinson as far back as 2001, indicated a need for a mentoring system to address gaps in the education system which render a school dysfunctional. While a mentoring system provides an opportunity to address dysfunctionality, it also augments job satisfaction, career achievement and organisational commitment (Scandura & Williams, 2002 cited in Pinho, Coetzee & Schreuder 2005: 20). Baugh, Lankau and Scandura (1996) cited in Pinho et al. (2005) state that mentoring is positively linked to workplace retention while it also reduces work stress.

Although mentoring is mentioned by both researchers and DBE as a means to eliminate problems of dysfunctional nature and varying intensity, mentoring is not a once-off intervention. Rather, it requires a design for a strategy that will continuously lead to optimizing quality education for all. In a certain sense it is a never-ending process that should be clearly structured, and process-driven.

It might be reasoned that while the purpose of a mentoring strategy is clear (namely to facilitate best educational practice within a whole school context) there is no clarity of its nature, and how best to operationalise a mentoring framework. This is a concern when keeping in mind those educators who have been affected by internal and external forces, in a sense contributed to a school‘s underperforming and dysfunctional status, have to buy into such an intervention. This research envisions how to enable transformation within dysfunctional schools through the design and implementation of a generic mentoring framework.

10 1.5 Research question

Against the background of the aforementioned rationale for the research, the following question will guide the research:

What is the nature of a generic mentoring framework that serves to establish a process of transformation through which to achieve best educational practice within the whole school context, and by so doing, prevent dysfunctional schooling systems?

Central to the research question are three concepts that warrant an operational definition. These are: best educational practice (see chapter 4); dysfunctional schools (see chapters 3 and 4), and mentoring framework (see chapter 5). While each concept will be briefly defined below, each will be discussed in detail within the relevant chapters of this thesis.

 Best Educational Practice

Best educational practice refers to interrelated structures and systemic, iterative and incremental processes that are enabled through which knowledge and technology, competence, skills and attitudes, are internalised to achieve quality performance outcomes within various educational contexts.

 Dysfunctional Schools

Dysfunctional schools or dysfunctional schooling systems are defined by the presence of intrinsic (or internal) (under-prepared educators) and extrinsic (or external) (non-delivery of text books) conditions that have an adverse impact on the quality of best educational practice, and therefore have consequences for whole school environments; specifically in attaining quality learner achievement and outcomes.

 Generic mentoring framework

A generic mentoring framework is an adaptable product which can be adapted for the design of a fit-for-purpose mentoring system. The framework consists of structural and processual components focused on optimising a Whole School Culture (WSC) through which to envision and operationalise best educational practice or quality education for all through purposeful mentoring initiatives.

11 1.6 Research objectives

The purpose of this study is to develop a generic mentoring framework which can

be adapted as a fit-for-purpose mentoring system enabling a process of transformation to optimise best educational practice or quality educational for all within a whole school context.

In order to address the research question, the researcher aims to:

i. undertake a micro functionalist analysis of the South African schooling system by using contributions and insights gained from the work of Parsons and Merton. ii. undertake a functionalist analysis of the South African micro-level schooling

system (see Diagramme 2.2) using insights derived from the Parsonian theory of action, and the work of Merton on social functions (Chapter 2).

iii. define the concept of dysfunctional schools from a functionalist perspective (Chapters 1, 4 and 5).

iv. conduct a critical analysis of relevant literature on the nature, function, context, design and operation of mentoring (Chapters 3 and 5).

v. provide a critical exposition of the nature, context and operationalisation of best (educational) practice (Chapters 4).

vi. develop a generic mentoring framework adaptable for whole schooling system contexts through which to optimise best educational practice (Chapter 5).

1.7 Research methodology 1.7.1 Meta-theory

The researcher chose to apply the functionalist perspective (see chapter 2) as it would enable an understanding of the operation of schooling systems within the whole school context, and to develop a generic mentoring framework. This framework would in turn serve as a vehicle when designing a (fit-for-purpose) mentoring system for a specific school by adapting it for a purpose.

In addition, the researcher aims to use Parsons‘ exposition of the four-functional requisite AGIL-scheme (Parsons, 1951) to explore and explain how schooling systems

12

adapt to their external environment (A: the function of adaptation), define and achieve goals (G: the function of goal-attainment), integrate its various components (I: the function of integration), and establish and maintain behavioural patterns as well as manage tensions (L: the function of latency or pattern maintenance and tension management) to prevent systemic dysfunction.

Furthermore, the nature and dynamics of the four action systems (Parsons, 1951, 1971) as aligned with the AGIL-scheme is employed to describe how these systems within a schooling system consisting of various interdependent and interrelated components can prevent dysfunctionalism occurring, or explain how schooling systems maintain their functional equilibrium or move towards such a state of operation.

The action systems and their connectedness to the functional requisites are: the cultural system (serving the function of pattern maintenance and tension management); the behavioural system (serving the function of Adaptation); the personality system (performing the function of goal attainment), and the social system (serving an integrative function) (Parsons, 1951; Wallace & Wolf, 1980).

The Parsonian pattern variable scheme is also applied. This scheme provides insight of how a facilitator can use their decisional and behavioural aspects that are embedded within the five sets of polarised variables to create a relational pathway when introducing and establishing a mentoring framework within a school. Its premises arealso to indicate how mentors and mentees can be guided to develop and manage a mentoring relationship through which to achieve best educational practice.

Moreover, in order to enable insight in the functions of the various macro, meso and micro-level educational structures, an analysis of their social functions are undertaken. Using Merton‘s contribution to depict the social functions of the various educational structures will enable understanding of their primary focus and how even a dysfunctional schooling system pre-empts the context for development of best educational practice.

13

1.7.2 Methodological approach

Originally, the researcher‘s aim was to use participation action research as methodology. This would have entailed establishing a research team in a senior secondary school comprised of elected members to represent a school‘s Governing Body (SGB); Management Team (SMT); educators (both experienced and novice, the latter including interns); parents; learner-members of the Representative Council of Learners (RCL); non-educator support staff, and mutually decided community representatives. Through this team the researcher would have facilitated a research process to gather data by, inter alia, using discussion, feedback and assessment sessions and focus group interviews. However, teacher boycotts, strikes and learner disruptions2; in addition to far reaching and on-going changes within basic education over the past decade [such as the introduction of Outcomes-Based Education as teaching philosophy, amendments to curricula and policies [e.g. C2005, the Revised National Curriculum Statement (RNCS), the National Curriculum Statement (NCS), and later the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) including the eventual so-called ‗death of OBE‘ (Equal Education, 2009)] created an almost animosity amongst the teachers to change. Each of the above mentioned changes were instituted by the DBE in a top-down fashion and required educators to re-orientate and come to grips with a new set of expectations and challenges. For them, spending time and energy on the preparation of the learners for the final year examination was of greater importance than participating in research which they believed took them away from their core educational function, namely, the achievement of learners in the final year examination. The scenario described above created methodological and ethical conditions which forced the researcher to consider an alternative methodological approach.

The researcher, as an alternative choice to field work, decided to rather rely on data she would obtain from the contributions of leading educationists and social science

2

Cohen, M. 2010. South African Teachers' Strike Shuts Schools, Compounds Educational Crisis. Bloomberg.com

News [31 August 2010]. Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-31/south-african-teachers-strike-shuts-schools-compounds-educational-crisis.html (retrieved on 17 December 2012);

Teachersolidarity.com. 2008. South African Teachers Strike against high prices. [8 August 2008]. Available at: http://www.teachersolidarity.com/blog/south-african-teachers-strike-against-high-prices (retrieved on 17 December 2012); News24. 2007. School’s out as teachers strike. [30 May 2007]. Available at: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Politics/Schools-out-as-teachers-strike-20070530 (retrieved on 17 December 2012).

14

researchers, as well as from government and other reports and responses located in the news, internet and social media. By so doing, the researcher could undertake an extensive study of relevant primary (books, journal articles, research reports, Acts, policies) and secondary (news, internet and social media downloads) sources to ‗create‘ a data base in the form of a code book for the research3

. From the literature and other documentary sources as noted in the code book, the researcher was able to identify themes and elements of a generic mentoring framework suggested to be used as intervention for dysfunctional secondary schools. Themes such as dysfunctional schools; dysfunctional schooling systems, best practice / best educational practice; mentoring, and mentoring framework were identified. Besides being the data base for the research, the book of codes served the researcher as mechanism to validate her suggestions (chapter 5) and recommendations (chapter 6), and to assess whether or not the research objectives (chapters 1 and 6) were achieved. By utilising the code book4, the researcher was able to use its contents to design and present a number of tables and diagrammes to depict the thoughts and ideas and guide the research to achieve the set objectives.

Using the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) library service, the researcher was able to undertake an extensive study of relevant literature and documentation within and across databases (Aluka, EBSCOhost, Emerald, JSTOR, LexisNexis Academic, NEXUS, ResearchPro, SAe Publications (Sabinet Online), SAGE, Taylor and Francis Online, and Wiley Online Library), while also using OpenDOAR (Directory of Open Access Repositories), books, and a number of theses and dissertations. In utilising the internet, particularly google.com to access scholarly articles, reputable websites, and news and social media, the researcher was able to expand the sources of documentation.

In applying the four criteria, namely: authenticity, credibility, and representativeness as proposed by Scott (1990), as well as meaning or significance, the researcher could ensure relevance of documentary choice.

3

The code book is available on request.

4 _{Besides providing a general list of references, all primary and secondary references have been tabulated per}

chapter. These chapter references can be viewed as addendums to the thesis, and should be considered as the medium from which data for the research was extracted.

15  Authenticity

Two elements associated with authenticity are soundness and authorship. While soundness refers to the extent of detail, it also highlights completeness of a source; the latter not only in terms of confirming authorship but also in providing information relating to authority or expertise of an author.

Primary and secondary sources were used for the purpose of this research. Primary sources included books, articles and research reports, in order to lay the foundation for the theoretical approach, the researcher used sources mainly authored by Parsons (1951, 1967, 1971 & 1977) and Merton (1949, 1957 & 1968). Secondary sources based on primary sources enabled the researcher to refer to contributions by Ritzer and Goodman (2004) and Wallace and Wolf (1980). Various news, internet and social media as well as relevant government and reputable educational websites were also used. Sites such as those developed and maintained by the DBE served as primary sources of reference. Besides assessing for authorship and soundness, the researcher applied the criteria of credibility.

 Credibility

Credibility generally relates to the amount of distortion in a source; therefore, the requirement to assess sources for their accuracy. In the search for credible sources from which to gain insight and on which to base her own deductions, statements and recommendations, the researcher used triangulation of literature and documentation. The latter enables researchers to identify a variety of sources of literature and documents that report on specific information and to allow for validation. The researcher was able to assess the impact that pre- and post-apartheid era factors and forces have on education, and for the reliability of statistical and other data on matriculation pass rates as well as to identify and assess criteria that is used to label schools as dysfunctional places of teaching and learning.

 Meaning and representativeness

16

researcher in the first instance limits her search to those of a primary nature and relates to her research objectives; thereafter adding relevant secondary sources after ascertaining their authenticity and credibility. For example, using books and articles that were written by Parsons (1951) and Merton (1949) and those that relate to the contents of the work of Parsons and Merton. In using these to understand and apply a functionalist approach with the aim to develop a generic mentoring framework enhanced meaningfulness (typical) of these sources of information. In addition, these sources of information are representative of the thoughts and ideas of respected sociologists whose works are still used to this day. In applying this criterion, the researcher in her thesis is also able to contribute to a sociological understanding of the phenomenon of dysfunctional schooling systems while being able to recommend a strategy of transformation.

1.8 Significance of the research

The study is of practical significance against the background of South Africa‘s education crisis as described in the preceding sections and in particular the escalating number of underperforming and dysfunctional secondary schools.

It is also generally accepted among educators, researchers, government officials and other interest parties that a social science perspective is required to assist in addressing the education crisis in South African.

Sociology as social science is able to offer perspectives through its ‗sociological imagination‘ - a concept coined by Mills (1959) which refers to the competencies and character sociologists have; also because of a variety of theoretical approaches that can be used to enable insightful understanding of phenomena. Therefore, specific to the research, sociologists can offer perspectives why schooling systems become dysfunctional and what measures of redress can be suggested and/or to prevent further escalation thereof.

In the light of the above, the research offers a generic mentoring framework that emphasises whole school transformation with the aim of optimising best educational practice as one such strategy which has not yet been fully exploited within the educational environment.

17

In using the functionalist perspective, and mainly the contribution of Parsons, this research adds to a body of existing knowledge while also provides a strategy to uncover the multi-facet problem characteristic of a dysfunctional school environment that requires transformation - an approach that contrasts with the current crises-intervention strategies of the DBE (Hofmeyr, 2000; Gilmor, 2001; Motala, 2001; Rembe, 2005; Fleisch, 2006; Msila, 2007; Cronje, 2010; Sokupa, 2010; Taylor, 2011).

In summary, this research will:

 propose a framework to serve as a vehicle through which various fit-for-purpose mentoring strategies can be operationalised to encourage best educational practice;

 provide opportunity to contribute scholarly articles, and to present papers at seminars, colloquiums and conferences;

 provide prospects for the researcher to collaborate with government, private and non-private organisations to introduce the concept of an enabling mentoring framework to solicit their participation in the process of whole school transformation to redress the state of dysfunctional schooling systems; and  specifically enable interactivity and collaboration with the DBE at provincial and

local spheres to identify schools in which to trial-run the mentoring framework. This will not only enable the design and operationalisation of fit-for-purpose mentoring strategies but also to undertake assessment research.

1.9 Additional concepts

 Whole school development (WSD)

From a functionalist perspective, WSD is a transformative approach which is established within an educational environment enabled by leadership, actor-interchange, structural and processual resources that enhances motivation for gratification to sustain collective purposeful personal, instructional, infrastructural, and regulatory functionality within an environment which optimises best educational practice in response to quality education for all, and enhanced learner outcomes.

18

 Whole School Culture (WSC)

WSD purposes WSC and vice versa; together they enrich the functionality of schooling systems, or prevents dysfunctionality. In essence, WSC implies actors and actor collectives within a physical and psycho-social environment and whose relation to their situation, including each other, is defined and mediated in terms of a system of culturally structured and shared symbols (Parsons, 1951: 5 - 6) which envisions quality education for all.

1.10 Brief chapter overviews

This thesis consists of six chapters. Briefly, the purpose of each chapter entails the following:

Chapter 1: Orientation and introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a background to the educational forces and challenges that cause dysfunctionality in many South African senior secondary schools. An exposition of the methodology approach is also provided.

Chapter 2: The schooling system: A micro-level analysis

This chapter provides the basis of a micro-level analysis using the functionalist approach, and specifically the contribution of Parsons and Merton with regard to understanding dysfunctional schooling systems. Furthermore, the contents serve to position mentoring (chapter 3), best educational practice (chapter 4) and the envisioned mentoring framework (chapter 5) within the functionalist theoretical paradigm.

Chapter 3: Mentoring: its nature, importance and premises

Chapter three provides an overview of mentoring per se as well as mentoring within an educational setting.

Chapter 4: Conceptualisation of best educational practice

This chapter explores the nature of best educational practice and the related concept of quality education. A description of best educational practice is given while attention is also paid to the importance of benchmarking as a means to strive towards achieving best educational practice within the context of whole school environment and

19

specifically dysfunctional schooling systems.

Chapter 5: The structure and process of a generic mentoring framework

In this chapter, the design and operational strategy of a generic mentoring framework is discussed. Both the structural and processual aspects of the mentoring framework are presented.

Chapter 6: Assessment, recommendations and summary

Chapter six includes a review of the limitations and problems encountered during the research; an assessment of the research objectives, and introduces a set of recommendations.

20

CHAPTER 2: THE SCHOOLING SYSTEM: A MICRO-LEVEL ANALYSIS 21

2.1 Introduction 21

2.2 The functionalist perspective 22

2.3 Parsons’ social system 22

2.4 Structure of the South African Education system 28

2.4.1 Macro and meso-level social systems 29

2.4.2 Micro-level systems 30

2.4.2.1 School Governing Body (SGB) 31

2.4.2.2 School Management Teams (SMTs) 32

2.4.2.3 Educators 33

2.4.2.4 Learners 34

2.5 Maintaining the schooling system 34

2.6 Social functions as outlined by Merton 35

2.6.1 Manifest functions 35

2.6.2 Latent functions 36

2.6.3 Dysfunctions 36

2.7 Parsons’ AGIL-scheme with reference to the schooling system 37

2.7.1 Adaptation 40

2.7.2 Goal Attainment 41

2.7.3 Integration 41

2.7.4 Latency: pattern maintenance and tension management 42

2.8 Social action systems with reference to schooling systems 43

2.8.1 Social system 43

2.8.2 Cultural system 44

2.8.3 Personality system 45

2.8.4 Behavioural system 45

2.9 Pattern variables and their importance 46

2.10 Positioning of analysis within the research 48

21

CHAPTER 2

THE SCHOOLING SYSTEM: A MICRO LEVEL ANALYSIS

2.1 Introduction

Sociology, a social science, generally referred to as the science of society, provides perspectives on social behaviour, social interaction and social influence. This suggests, amongst other things, that sociologists would also focus on the study of Education5, either at the macro or micro level of analysis, or on both levels simultaneously.

A macro-level analysis provides perspective on how Education as a social institution influences other social institutions such as Economy, Religion and Politics, or how these social institutions interact with and influence Education. A micro-level analysis would enable an understanding of how the nature of an educational system, specifically its structures and processes at schooling level influences learner outcomes.

However, in order to understand the forces that have consequences for learner outcomes in a society, attention should also be given to the influences that specific forces have at the macro level (chapter 1). In addition, consideration should be given to understanding of the educational environment from a micro-level perspective as this will give insight of how education is operationalised, and how envisioned learner outcomes are achieved or hampered.

Against the background of chapter one, which includes a macro-level focus of Education in South Africa, the current chapter introduces the reader to a micro-level analysis of the South African schooling system. The functionalist perspective is used; specifically enabled through the contributions of Parsons (1951, 1967, 1971 & 1977) and Merton (1949 &1968).

22 2.2 The functionalist perspective

In the tradition of sociology as a social science, various theoretical perspectives are available to enable insight in social phenomenon such as education. Amongst these perspectives are symbolic interactionism, the conflict perspective and functionalism.

Interactionists focus on the subjective aspects of human interaction within a schooling system, and more specifically on patterned interactions among role players who adjust their behaviour to the actions of others through interpretation of symbols to derive meaning (Blumer, 1969). Those who use the conflict perspective, view inter alia, disintegration and disruption within schools, for example, the unequal distribution of resources and the marginalisation of individuals and groups (Giddens, 1991).

Functionalists, on the other hand, view society as a system with interconnected parts or sub-systems, and stability of these interacting parts is maintained by consensus and normative frameworks as well as the presence of certain functional requisites and action systems to create stability within the whole. Therefore, dysfunction within a system implies a state of disequilibrium which requires transformation. When one part of the whole is in disequilibrium it will affect the other as the various parts are interdependent and interrelated (Ritzer & Goodman, 2004).

With regard to education, functionalism provides insight in the complex nature of Education as a social institution and how it attempts to maintain itself. In essence, a functionalist approach implies that action and interaction enables social structure (Hussain, 2010) to maintain stability. By applying the functionalist perspective, an understanding of the South African educational and schooling environment as a social system will become apparent.

2.3 Parsons’ Social System

A social system consists in a plurality of individual actors interacting with each other in a situation which has at least a physical or environmental aspect, actors who are motivated in terms of a tendency to the ‘optimization of gratification’ and whose relation to their situations, including each other, is defined and mediated in terms of a system of culturally structured and shared symbols (Parsons, 1951: 5 - 6). This translates to social action systems which have reference in interaction within a

23

situation, and therefore as relational systems, they have the capacity to generate structure and process (Parsons, 1951).

Action is a process in which the action-situation system has motivational significance (Parsons, 1951: 4) for an actor and/or a collectivity; the latter consisting of a number of actors. Actions are needs driven to achieve gratification or to avoid deprivation. While individuals may pursue their needs (wants and desires) out of self-interest, there is also the tendency to cooperate to enable each other‘s gratification, or to prevent deprivation (Parsons, 1951). Ends to action denote internalised shared values and norms, or have become institutionalised within a collective. Means are used to attain ends. These means are socially and morally regulated allowing actors to differentiate between what is appropriate or inappropriate and beneficial. Within the end-means relationship, normative constraints create conditions for the gratification, survival and maintenance of the system. It is for this reason that systems have guidelines for behaviour to enable achievement of goals (Parsons, 1951).

Within the confines of an action system, interaction can be described as the process of defining meaning derived from signs and symbols which serve as a means of communication between actors within a specific situation. With the latter perception, the nature of social action is not a system of stimuli-response sequences per se; rather, it is a system of expectations relative to objects of the situation, and may be structured relative to the actors‘ need-dispositions and the probabilities of gratification or deprivations contingent on the various alternatives of action which they may undertake (Parsons, 1951: 5). However, if the focus of interaction is with social objects, the ego-actor‘s expectations manifests as the reaction to anticipated action of the alter-actor which affects the ego-actor‘s choices (Parsons, 1951: 5). Here pattern variables offer opportunity to understand how gratification can be determined (which will be discussed later in this chapter). Thus, interaction is a relational system created by the dynamics between units of action which in their most basic form are actors and objects in their situation. While signs and symbols may have significant meaning for actors, it is only when meaning is shared that symbolic systems start to develop at the cultural level and cultural systems are eventually created.

24 objects of orientation (1951: 4) that are classified according to their social, physical and cultural character. While social objects may be an individual actor (ego), other actors (alter) or a collective of actors and physical objects are viewed as the means and conditions of actions which do not interact with or respond to ego (Parsons, 1951: 4). Cultural objects are symbolic in nature and refer to tradition, ideas or beliefs which are expressed as symbols, or as value patterns which are situational but not viewed as part of the composition of the internalised elements of the personality of an actor (Parsons, 1951: 4).

Believing in interpenetration and mutual influence or interdependence and interrelatedness, Parsons (1951) views social systems as open. By nature these systems engage in processes of interchange with other external units or systems, and in the process create boundaries which are the reason that systems have the need to maintain themselves. Boundaries have the function to enable differentiation between the internal and external social environments of systems.

All social systems are arranged according to their interdependence and relatedness. Therefore, in order for systems to maintain themselves, these parts must be in a state of equilibrium to enable the same in the system as a whole (Parsons, 1951), as a change in equilibrium in one part of the system affects the other.

For Parsons, the origin of the action system is embedded in the status-role bundle (Grabb, 1990). The former enables social positioning of actors while the latter entails pre- and proscriptions guiding actors how to perform their roles or what behaviour is expected of them. As these status-bundles develop, they contribute to the characteristic of a specific social system. Status-role bundles help to create structures, and, therefore, actors or actor-collectives should perform their functions and roles to ensure that these structures are maintained. It is not only the interconnectedness between status-role bundles that creates structures. Its interdependent character, as the presence of status-role bundles implies that certain normative frameworks develop to ensure survival of the system (Wallace & Wolf, 2006). In addition to social controls, a process of socialisation (learning) and internalisation enables social systems through its actors to maintain its equilibrium, as values become institutionalised over time.