Given the dual roles of the HoDs, their dilemma of simultaneously managing a department whilst being a class teacher are evident (Blandford 1997:13). The focus of this paper is to investigate the motivational role and responsibility played specifically by HoDs in learner performance. Its aim is also to understand better this role in tandem with other contributors, as well as all stakeholders in the Department of Basic Education who are responsible for teacher development and curriculum delivery, especially in the General Education and Training band. The findings highlight important aspects to be considered by Foundation Phase HoDs, educators, curriculum implementers in the districts, deputy chief education specialists in the provincial office and the Department of Basic Education, in ensuring the proper execution of roles and responsibilities of HoDs in the Foundation Phase.

Being aware of, monitoring and responding constructively to students’ motivation signals during instruction is an important teaching skill. This is because classroom motivation is a reliable predictor of students’ subsequent engagement, learning and achievement (Pintrich & De Groot 1990:33; Ryan & Deci 2000:3). The instructional problem with monitoring students’ motivation, however, is that it is difficult to do, largely because motivation is a private, subjective and difficult-to-directly-observe experience. Estimating students’ motivation is made even more difficult for teachers (who may also be HoDs) because classrooms are densely populated, multitask environments (Dislen 2013:37). This is not to say that estimating student motivation is beyond teachers’ capacities, as one study showed that teachers of late elementary-grade students were able to judge students’ self-reported ‘learning goals’ (i.e., mastery goals) reasonably well (average r = 0.26 across multiple assessments) (Givvin et al. 2001:213). Overall, little empirical research exists to confirm that teachers can reliably infer their students’ classroom motivation. In the school setting, motivation is the process whereby students initiate and persist in classroom activity (Schunk, Pintrich & Meece 2008:2). However, for Foundation Phase learners, this may be a challenge as they are too young to exert or receive such influence.

The role of a Foundation Phase HoD is a multilayered one: to improve communication and establish a collaborative relationship with teachers, ensuring that teachers should contact parents early in the school year to explain class and homework procedures and to learn about their concerns, views, talents, interest and availability. Whatever the nature of the contact – phone calls, e-mails, small or large group meetings, or newsletters with invitations to call – they need to keep in mind that home-school collaboration is an attitude, not simply an activity.

Motivation occurs when parents and educators share common goals, are seen as equals and both contribute to the process. It is sustained with a ‘want-to’ rather than an ‘ought-to’ or ‘obliged-to’ orientation from all individuals (Christenson, Rounds & Gorney 1992). Heads of department need to follow the initial contact with ongoing interaction, through checklists, newsletters, informal notes, phone calls, private meetings and parent discussion groups. Contact should define roles; communicate expectations; be clear, positive and non-threatening; inform parents about their child’s progress and about what happened and will happen in class (Allington & Cunningham 2002:304); and give parents easy accessibility to teachers and HoDs. Such contacts usually go beyond homework and can significantly influence parent cooperation and academic achievement (Allington & Cunningham 2002:304). Schools that have a relationship with the community are more likely to receive support from the community in difficult periods (Harris & Chapman 2002:6). Parents should feel free to enjoy the opportunity to come into the school to talk to teachers, to use the school facilities and to utilise the school as a resource to help improve their children and themselves. Hargreaves (1995:23–46) describes this as a ‘cultural relationship’ with the parent community and grounded on principles of openness and collaboration to collaborate in the achievement of good learner performance.

The quality of education is impacted by many factors delivered in the Foundation Phase. The inequalities that are experienced in schools will also persist if parents are not equally empowered in enhancing and promoting the education of their child. The study also indicated that social capital is important in educational success and will have a positive effect on school success when school capital is combined with social capital A study by Msila (2004) explained the advantages of the presence of social capital in education and also how the participation of communities in education can promote the quality of education. The effect of social networks on the child usually reflects in the schooling of the child, and it is essential to include the family in the education of the child.

Coleman and Hoffner (2002:71) describe ‘functional deficiency’ as the situation in which there is absence of a strong relationship between parents and children, even when they are physically present. The authors conclude that for the school to have a solid educational success, it must admit the importance of social capital. Recommendations made by Coleman and Hoffner (2002:71) follow:

The South African Schools Act of 1996 specifies that parents should be more involved in the education of their children. Parents are empowered to assess their children, even when they do not have the social capital. Parental skills are enhanced by community-based organisations, Department of Education and stakeholders in the education industry, most especially because many learners are taken care of by single guardians in historically disadvantaged areas.

Shadow education could empower learners. Shadow education entails offering learners more classes after school with the sole aim of empowering them. In a Kenyan study, Buchmann (2000) discovered that disadvantaged children could most likely learn much about social networks if they can benefit from extra-mural classes. The same author claims that shadow education shows learners the need to connect the social structures in their educational experience, which helps in enhancing social capital. If a school wants to build social capital, it has to connect to societal institutions. Coleman (2002:71) cited by Wong (2002:164) states that not all the social relations and structures are important resources for achieving educational success. It is the schooling-focused relationships that are useful for building the child’s social or cognitive development and also the relationship inside community organisations (Wong 2002:165). Success can be established when learners develop social ties between the school and the community. The development of social capital can be established through the shared norms, values and expectations by many societal institutions such as clubs and churches. Communities must be able to participate in the decisions made in the school whilst the school also contributes to the development of the community.

Involving parents at school level is imperative because most of the needs of a reform in education orbit around the joint effort of the parties concerned, which could be by playing an active or passive participation in activities of the school (Bezzina 2006). Teachers and parents should be involved in the improvement of the education of the learners. Educators are aware that parental involvement plays a significant role in improving the performance and achievement of the learner and the social, intellectual and emotional development of the learner. Therefore, the family should make an effort to ensure that they participate in the formal and informal aspect of the education of their child. The building of a school’s capacity for sustained improvement should have as the core, collective learning and collegial relations (Bezzina 2006).

Against this background, Foundation Phase HoDs have to address issues far more onerous than time constraints. Problems related to drug use, crime, poverty, poor nutrition, high rates of transience and other by-products of socio-economic disadvantage are addressed, as well as community belief that the school has a limited role to play in their lives and aspirations (Louis & Miles 1990:219). Thus, the role of HoDs in such schools supersedes that of teacher. The HoD has the responsibility to build bridges within the school and community by embracing the parents into the school community.

The gender of respondents is provided in Table 3. The findings indicate that the ratio of female to male respondents was nine female respondents for every one male respondent. The Department of Basic Education (2012:15) indicates a ratio of 1.5:1, although that figure includes educators at secondary schools. However, more women prefer the task of teaching Foundation Phase learners.

Even if one assumes that there are three female educators for every one male educator (3:1) in the Foundation Phase of primary schools, then this sample is still over-representative of female educators in primary schools, and hence not representative of the gender distribution in the Mpumalanga Province.

The educators were grouped into four age groups, as displayed in Table 4.

The mean age was 48.8 years, with a minimum age of 27 and maximum age of 64. The median value was 49 years of age. If one assumes that most educators start their teaching career at around 23 or 24 years of age, then this sample could be said to consist of experienced educators, as one would expect for HoDs.

The original seven categories were collapsed to four and the frequency distribution is given in Table 5.

Only 29.6% of the samples do not have at least a Bachelor’s degree, whilst 50% have an Honours degree or higher qualification. As the respondents were HoDs, one would expect them to be well qualified.

The number of years served as HoD was grouped into four categories, which are given in Table 6.

The mean number of years as HoD was 9.4 and the median was eight. The mode was 5 years, whilst the minimum value was 1 year and the maximum 28 years. Thus, the sample can be said to consist of educators who were mostly experienced as HoDs.

The term ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’ (SPF) was first coined by sociologist Robert K. Merton (1948). As part of his explanation of the SFP, Merton drew upon the theorem: ‘If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences’ (Thomas 1928:257). The following five-step model explains how the SFP works: (1) the teacher forms expectations; (2) based upon these expectations, the teacher acts in a differential manner; (3) the teacher’s treatment tells each student (loud and clear) what behaviour and what achievement the teacher expects; (4) if this treatment is consistent, it will tend to shape the student’s behaviour and achievement; and (5) with time, the student’s behaviour and achievement will conform more and more closely to that expected of him or her.

Longitudinal studies (Jussim & Eccles 1992:947–961) support the SFP hypothesis that teacher expectations can predict changes in student achievement and behaviour beyond effects accounted for by previous achievement and motivation. Teachers, including HoDs, who effectively use the SPF can, and should, help students to perform to the best of their ability.

The majority (67.2%) of the participants have no qualification or in-service training in terms of management or leadership capacity. As HoDs are expected to take the lead in the management of their departments, one would expect that many more of them should have some form of leadership and management training.

The inference that can be drawn from this is that with such a large number of HoDs without management or leadership training, the leadership and management in primary schools in Mpumalanga, and the resulting learner performance, can be expected to be poor.

When testing for significant differences between the factor mean scores of two independent groups, the Levene’s t-test can be used. Levene’s test is used to see whether the variances are different between the two groups involved. If the variances are similar (p > 0.05), then equal variances are assumed; if they are significantly different (p < 0.05), then equal variances are not assumed. Only those groupings in which statistically significant differences were found between the independent groupings are discussed.

From the data in Table 9, it can be seen that respondents who indicated that they have no qualification in or attended no in-service training regarding school management or leadership had a less positive perception (a statistically significantly lower mean score) about the parent’s motivational role in their school than did respondents who had attended or had a qualification in leadership or management. Respondents who had such a qualification were also more positive about the school’s motivational role than were respondents who did not have such a qualification. However, this difference was not statistically significant and could be the result of chance factors. The effect size was small.

The study’s findings revealed that in the evaluation of the school as motivator for learner performance, by rural South African HoDs in the Foundation Phase, their mean score was 3.03, which displays a moderate inclination to believe that they or the school plays a role in the motivation of the child. Heads of department have already underestimated their role in motivating the learner. They believe that they do not have a role in the motivation of learners to achieve, and thus, their Self-Fulfilling Prophesy has come true. They have proven that they are unaware of their roles as managers who involve teachers and parents to enable learners to achieve to their full potential.

The Self-Fulfilling Prophesy declares that teacher expectations can predict changes in student achievement and behaviour beyond effects accounted for by previous achievement and motivation (Jussim & Eccles 1992:947). In this quantitative research carried out in Mpumalanga, South Africa, 274 HoDs doubted their belief in motivating learners to achieve. They underestimated the role that parents played in motivating learners to achieve. They seem too busy teaching in their classrooms and lack the time and skill of supervising their subordinates and involving parents in the education tripod. The legislative framework (PAM document), it can be argued, does not allow sufficient time for HoDs to efficiently perform their tasks. They are not trained or inducted into their roles and lack knowledge of their responsibilities. If HoDs believe that they can provide the necessary guidance and support for educators and parents to collaboratively motivate learners to achieve, they have thus provided themselves a self-fulfilling prophesy to improve quality of education.