/ 25 April 2005

A committed school failed by the department

I work in a superbly managed state school in Johannesburg called The Hill High School. I am generally more fulfilled working in an ordinary state school than I ever was in prestigious private schools and am proud to be part of the changes that have taken place in our country in education.

But a recent experience has made it clear to me that the Gauteng department of education (GDE) is content to let schools become unmanageable by its failure to provide us with visible support in a difficult situation we are facing.

Our school has been severely affected by the behaviour of two Grade 10 learners. Both boys are highly intelligent but use their wit to destroy and steal property, disrupt lessons and subvert the orderly running of the school. They have both been found running a gambling enterprise, are reputed to deal in illicit drugs, have behaved in a threatening manner towards both staff and learners and have also acted violently against other learners.

Unfortunately, the ‘gangsta rappa” culture has permeated our society from the United States and these boys are idolised by a significant number of their peers. Perhaps more worrying is the effect they have on the younger learners.

At a recent meeting with GDE district officials to discuss the behaviour of these two learners, the staff of the school were told that it was unlikely in the extreme that the GDE would endorse, enforce or support an application for the removal of these boys from the school.

I do not advocate barbarous corporal punishment and I am willing to give of my time to help develop strategies and

implementable solutions to the problem, in conjunction with other education professionals. But an ordinary high school is not an appropriate place for these boys. Rather, a well-managed residential facility of a Boys’ Town model is a starting point for them to engage in the educative process.

When a few learners disrupt the learning environment to the extent that the educational opportunities of other learners are limited, my colleagues and I turn to the authorities for support in sustaining a safe and free environment. This is not forthcoming.

All learners have the same right to education — so why do the rights of a few thugs take precedence over the rights of the vast majority of learners? If in fact they do not, why is the GDE apparently so impotent?

The provincial head of department needs to act in the best interests of the children who come to school for the reasons schools exist: to learn to grow into socially, emotionally and intellectually healthy citizens.

David L Silman,

Randburg, Gauteng