Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Radical Social Justice Agenda for the 21st Century
The distributional and relational dimensions of social justice as identified by Gerwitz resonate with other elements of social justice informed by leftist discourse of the 21st century. Concepts such as socio-economic inclusion, and human development, radical democracy and transformative intellectuals emerge in the writings, on social justice, of radical scholars. The emphasis on social justice, inclusion and social capital accords with that of humane capitalism which, according to Brine (2001:139), is reliant on social inclusion and subsistence welfare support and is less aggressive. Consequently for him social capitalism would promote conditions conducive to social justice.
Similarly, Walker (2003) argues that social justice pertains to human development, the advancement of the individual as well as collective solidarity – the one with the other (Walker, 2003: 168-169). Applebaum (2001) adds another dimension to the debate on social justice by indicating that as a form of, and essential to, moral education, social justice needs to raise awareness of dominance. He suggests that for social justice to be genuine there must be a critical analysis of dominant beliefs, values and standards so that the supposedly ―good intentions are exposed for what they promote and genuine socially just alternatives are found‖ (Applebaum, 2001:55). This position is similar to the notion of the anti-capitalist terrain of social justice advanced by Gindin (2002). He proposes that a social justice situation comprises certain elements such as the radical democratisation of knowledge, where technobureacracy moves to technodemocracy and academics develop into academocrats (Gindin, 2002:8), which implies civil workers or workers who are democratic in outlook and practice and also implies that academics hold transformatory and democratic dispositions. In many ways this position echoes Giroux‘s notion of teachers as transformative intellectuals (1987:36). This position advanced by Giroux is also reminiscent of that held by Young on justice as freedom from oppressive situations, discussed above, since the main objective of transformative intellectuals is to liberate the oppressed masses by developing solutions to the injustices of the past. Social justice and the transformative intellectuals that support it bring to light very appealing classroom dynamics, for example, that further illustrate the elements of radical social justice. The elements of these classroom dynamics include collaborative problem solving and critical reflective practice. These must be displayed by all, particularly teachers as intellectuals, while challenging the underlying assumptions of policy provision and practice (Lloyd, 2000: 149).
South Africa and Radical Social Justice
In South Africa, concerns with social justice, in line with the radical tradition, have always been high on the agenda of the anti-apartheid movement. The dawn of political independence and the dismantling of apartheid in the 1990s led to a re-emphasis on the social justice agenda in the government‘s attempts at nation building, reconciliation and addressing the injustices of the past.
Social justice became an integral part of the education and training agenda for post apartheid South Africa. The foundation of the social justice discourse can be traced to the anti-apartheid movements, culminating in the formation of the National Education Policy Investigation (NEPI) in the 1990s, a policy initiative informed by a progressive philosophy of education and reform. The apartheid government also proposed a policy framework: the Education Renewal Strategy (ERS), which also claimed to address the injustices of the past. There were major differences between the ERS and NEPI, both conceptually and politically. In the first instance, the NEPI framework could be seen as an attempt to democratise education policy formulation, whereas the ERS did not fundamentally address the question of social injustice and was essentially autocratic and informed by neo-liberalism‘s economic and technocratic rationality. Secondly, the NEPI researchers consisted of a wide range of people, spanning political leaders and academic practitioners, while the ERS derived its personnel from the state bureaucrats (Chetty et al., 1993). It could be said that the ERS policy options were in alignment with the conservative social justice positions as discussed in part one, while the NEPI policy options were more in alignment with the social democratic tradition. The NEPI emerged as one of the dominant positions that proposed progressive policy options for South Africa. The guiding principles of NEPI were non-sexism, nonracialism, redress, democracy and a unitary education system (NEPI, 1992: 6-7).
According to the NEPI proposals, the above principles require that any higher education institutions must at least ensure open access, wider consultation and participation with all stakeholders, equal opportunity employment policies and equal opportunities in admissions (NEPI, 1992:90).
On closer scrutiny, it could be said that during the agenda setting stage of policy development in South Africa, the policy options that embodied concerns with social justice, as advanced in this thesis, were those of the NEPI. All five guiding principles of the NEPI not only hold appeal for the mass democratic movement but also for progressive scholars internationally, in the quest for democracy and socially just futures. However, it should be noted that the proposals of the NEPI did not exist in a conflictfree political setting. They were strongly contested, further illustrating that the battle for progressive radical social justice is fraught with competition as well as struggles for recognition and a place in the centre. Following the NEPI and ERS Proposals, the late 1990s saw the formulation of policy documents such as the White Paper on Education and Training of 1995, the Green Paper on Higher Education Transformation of 1996, the White Paper on Higher Education (3) and the Higher Education Act of 1997. All these policy documents signalled the country‘s commitment to transforming and reconstructing education in general, and higher education in particular, in line with the demands of the Reconstruction and Development Programme. Since the year 2000 a plethora of policy documents focusing on transforming and reconstructing higher education have been published. These included the Size and Shape Document – Towards a New Higher Education Landscape – Meeting the Equity, Quality and Social Imperatives of South Africa in the 21st Century (June 2000), the National Plan For Higher Education (February 2001) and the New Academic Plan for Programmes and Qualifications in Higher Education (January 2002). The policy documents of the 1990s, especially the foundational 1995 White Paper on Education and Training, emerged as documents that carried over the proposals of the NEPI and the ERS. The 1995 White Paper locates education and training within the Reconstruction and Development macroeconomic policy. It is an attempt by the government to envision and realise the policy of open access to all in an integrated unitary system. The policy states: ―the paramount task is to build a just and equitable system which provides good quality education and training to learners young and old throughout the country‖ (Department of Education: White Paper, 1997:9). The specific values that drove the policy are those embodying the reconstruction and development of education and training. The policy is committed to education as a human right, open access, lifelong learning, and an integrated approach to education and training, equity, democratic governance, justice, respect for diversity and commitment to critical thought. Most of these values portray a commitment to redress and justice (Department of Education: White Paper, 1997: 9-12). In these foundational documents, concerns with social justice were explicit. Although the basic principles that guided these policy documents were progressive, overall macro-economic factors continued to be at odds with the progressive philosophy. This inconsistency consequently calls for a new approach to the advancement of the social justice agenda.
The subsequent policy documents and policy-making bodies, namely the National Commission of Higher Education (NCHE), the Council on Higher Education (CHE), the National Plan on Higher Education (NPHE) and the New Academic Policy (NAP), brought additional elements of the social justice agenda to the policy scene. Most of them made reference to this agenda, implicitly or explicitly, and to varying degrees. The common aim of these policy documents is to transform higher education to meet the challenges of globalisation. The recurring points raised in these documents that are in alignment with the social justice agenda are: equity and redress, democratisation and development (White Paper, 1997: 11-13). The ―Size and Shape‖ document echoes the White Paper in the following: meeting equity, redressing challenges and promoting critical intellectual debate, good citizenship, open access to all and the reinvigoration of the African continent Council on Higher Education- CHE,, 2002:24-28). The National Plan priorities were to increase the participation and representation of previously disadvantaged groups (Department of Education: New Academic Policy, 2002: 26-27). Although concerns with social justice remain in the policy documents on higher education, the tone of the statements appears to be aligned with conceptions of social justice associated with neo-liberalism and its emphasis on developing higher education for the needs of the competitive global knowledge economy. Concerns with global competitiveness and the knowledge economy have been translated in terms of the corporatisation and commodification of higher education – a trend that is eroding social justice concerns in higher education. Proponents of the radical social justice agenda, such as the progressive intellectual forces in the country (Muller, 1998; Vally, 2002; & Chisholm, 1998), lament the manner in which social justice is downplayed in policy due to the macro-economic regime under which the new government has placed itself. The developments in question are the replacement of the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) by the Growth, Economic and Redistribution Strategy (GEAR). At the macro-level, progressive social scientists call for the re-insertion of the transformatory agenda of the RDP in addressing the impact of globalisation. Commenting on the change in the direction of post-apartheid education in South Africa (from RDP to GEAR), Kallaway et al.
CHAPTER 1 – BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
1.1 Introduction and Statement of the Problem
1.2 Research Questions
1.3 Rationale for this Study
1.4 Conceptual Framework
1.5 Methodology – The Methods of Inquiry Informed by Critical Theory
1.6 Qualitative Critical Research – Social Science for Emancipatory Change
1.7 Data Collection and Analysis
1.8 Themes from Data Analysis
1.9 Strategies to Ensure Rigour – Validation Strategies
1.10 Limitations
1.11 Conclusion
CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW AND SYNTHESIS ON SOCIAL JUSTICE
2.1 Introduction: Some Positions on Social Justice
2.2 The Conservative Tradition of Social justice
2.3 The Liberal Tradition of Social Justice
2.4 The Radical Tradition of Social Justice
2.5 South Africa and Radical Social Justice
2.6 Criticisms of Radical Social Justice
2.7 Conclusion
CHAPTER 3 – SOUTH AFRICAN HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRANSFORMATION PILLARS – FOCUS ON SOCIAL JUSTICE
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The South African Higher Education System After 1994
3.3 Social Justice as an Element of a Transformed Higher Education System – Contributions and Contradictions
3.4 South African Higher Education Performance in Terms of Three Pillars of Transformation
3.5 South African Higher Education: Persistent Policy Challenges
3.6 Conclusion
CHAPTER 4 – UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA AND TRANSFORMATION
4.1 Introduction
4.2 University of Pretoria before 1994 – The Conservative Tradition and Ideological Outlook
4.3 The University of Pretoria during the Democratic Dispensation
4.4 University of Pretoria as an ―Innovation Generation‖ Institution
4.5 The Organisational Culture of the University of Pretoria
4.6 Competing Discourses at the University of Pretoria
4.7 Conclusion
CHAPTER 5 − ACCESS AS SOCIAL JUSTICE: THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA FOUNDATION YEAR PROGRAMME −UPFY
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Access to Higher Education as a Social Justice Agenda
5.3 The Elements of Social Justice Education Related to Access to Education
5.4 University of Pretoria Foundation Year Programme − UPFY
5.5 Policy Implementation
5.6 Role of Project Managers
5.7 Conceptualisation of Social Justice
5.8 Intended Outcomes of the UPFY
5.9 Research
5.10 Challenges
5.11 Addressing Challenges
5.12 The Uniqueness of the UPFY – Other Emergent Factors
5.13 Critical Appraisal of the UPFY
5.14 Conclusion
CHAPTER 6 − IGWS AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Gender Equality in the Global Debate
6.3 The Women in Development Agenda – WID
6.4 The Women and Development – WAD Agenda
6.5 Gender and Development – GAD
6.6 Gender Mainstreaming
6.7 Gender Mainstreaming Strategy in South Africa
6.8 Evaluating South African Performance in Gender Equality
6.9 Women‘s Studies Programmes in the Global Debate
6.10 Background to the Institute of Gender and Women Studies
6.11 Implementation of Gender Equality at the University of Pretoria
6.12 The Role of Facilitators at IGWS
6.13 Conceptualisation of Social Justice
6.14 Conceptualisation of Gender
6.15 IGWS External Programmes and Linkages
6.16 Challenges Facing IGWS
6.17 Dealing with Challenges
6.18 Other Emergent Factors
6.19 The Potency of the Oppositional Voice
6.20 Conclusion
CHAPTER 7 − THE CASE OF CSA AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Overview of HIV/AIDS
7.3 The South African State‘s HIV/AIDS Agenda
7.4 The South African Higher Education HIV/AIDS Agenda
7.5 HIV/AIDS Reviews by the CSA
7.6 Conceptualisation of Social Justice
7.7 The CSA‘s Conceptualisation of HIV/AIDS
7.8 Leadership in HIV/AIDS
7.9 The Role of Project Managers
7.10 Outcomes of the Programmes
7.11 Challenges of the CSA
7.12 Dealing with the Challenges
7.13 Critical Policy Engagement
7.14 Conclusion
CHAPTER 8 − SOCIAL JUSTICE MANDATE UNDER SIEGE
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Conceptualisation of Transformation
8.3 Conceptualisation of Social Justice
8.4 The Dilemmas and Possibilities of Transformation
8.5 The University of Pretoria and Neo-Conservative and Neo-Liberal Ideology
8.6 Policy, Implications and Lessons
REFERENCES
