South African parents’ view of their role in the education of their young children in South Africa as democratic citizens

Abstract

This study addressed the knowledge gap regarding South African parents’ view of their role in the education of young children as democratic citizens. The study was conducted with parents of children younger than 8 years in 2 multicultural primary schools in Gauteng, South Africa. The explanatory sequential mixed methods research design was used to collect data from parents in order to answer the research question. The quantitative data were gathered first by means of a questionnaire, and afterwards the qualitative data were gathered by means of semi-structured interviews. The research results showed that when educating their young children to democratic citizenship, participating parents consider various values of a democratic citizen as important including responsibility, respect, participation, norms and values, peacebuilding, love, loyalty, deliberations, kindness, commitment, non-racism, non-sexism, equality, reconciliation, self-control, forgiveness, compassion, tolerance, open-mindedness, a sense of belonging, rule of law and social justice. Participating parents also regard their example as democratic citizens, respect, participation and the creation of a safe, proud and free democratic society as important. They did, however, consider the media and other bad role models as challenges when educating their young children towards democratic citizenship. The most important finding of the study is the influence of negative societal and political factors on the attitudes and opinions of the participating parents. New insights that emerged from the study includes that these parents want to do their best to educate their children as democratic citizens in South Africa, in the best interest of their children as future democratic citizens, but are hindered by certain societal and political factors.

Keywords

citizenship education democratic citizens parents in South Africa values of a democratic citizen

Introduction

The main objective of this research was to gain greater insight into the phenomenon of parents educating their children in the Foundation Phase of their formal education, to become democratic citizens. With this as a foundational understanding, the intention was to subsequently provide parents with guidelines which can empower them to educate their children about democratic citizenship in a multicultural society such as South Africa (Klopper, 2019).

Results showed that participating parents viewed their role as educators of their young children as democratic citizens as important, but that they have societal and political challenges in the educational process. Paterson (2011) considered ‘the quality of parenting’ and the opportunities created by the parents in the ‘home learning environment’ as the ‘most important’ influence on children’s social and intellectual development. According to Article 18 (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2003), parents were the ‘primary educators of the child’.

The theoretical basis of the study was founded in the bioecological theory of Bronfenbrenner (1992), namely that the micro-level of influencing children is at home. Based on the theories of Dewey (1899), Bourdieu (1990) and Waghid (2008), I argue that it is important to educate young children as responsible and participative democratic citizens. Parents should instil democratic values in their children, as well as empower them with knowledge about democracy. Values are ‘principles’ according to which people behave, it indicates what is important in life and ideals and standards to judge what is good, right, desireable or worthy of respect (Botha et al., 2016).

The theoretical framework of this study was partly based on the characteristics of democracy according to Dewey (1916) as described in Benson et al. (2007: 77). In this study, it was appropriate to also consider Dewey’s school of thought about the relationship between democracy and education.

Waghid (2014: 82) considered consensus, talking, listening, reading, critical engagement, disagreement and responsibility towards the society as vital virtues for a democratic citizen. He referred to the fact that education in South Africa should not repeat the ‘racist, repressive and authoritarian apartheid past, and (should instead) promote equality, non-racism and a culture of human rights’ (Waghid, 2014: 71). According to him, education should ensure the right to equality, life, work, care, education, human dignity, freedom and security of the person and his property (Waghid, 2014: 74).

According to Waghid (2008),

… respect entails that one recognises that others have something worthwhile to contribute to the dialogue and that they are not excluded from the dialogue based on their difference or one’s dismissive bias towards them . . . mutual respect is a form of agreeing to disagree, which requires a favourable attitude towards and constructive interaction with the person with whom he disagrees. (p. 73)

He continued that respect involves forgiveness, reconciliation, democratic justice, compassion and the acceptance among citizens that they should agree to disagree. To Waghid (2014), ‘Mutual respect is a form of agreeing to disagree, which requires a favourable attitude towards and constructive interaction with the person with whom he disagrees’ (p. 57). This does not mean that one should unconditionally accept everything that people say; they should just respect each other’s views and proposals.

It should be noted that I based this study on the most relevant theory, namely the bioecological theory of Bronfenbrenner that is based on the active participation of the young child (in the case of this study) in the developmental processes. Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development considered the environment in which a child grows up as vital for development (Bronfenbrenner, 1992). Development is an ongoing process which entails changes in the bioecological characteristics of an individual or group. According to this theory, change occurs throughout life and generations.

In South Africa, this implies that all children can develop their full potential, but parents should provide opportunities for their children to develop their talents so that they can again contribute to the environment wherein their children grow up. In this way, the whole society will undergo change and benefit from development. The micro-system refers to the influence of the parents or caretakers, extended family members, peers and teachers on a child’s development. It also includes the social circumstances in the neighbourhood where they grow up. External events such as war, famine, disasters and political unrest have a negative impact on the development of the child. In South Africa, the macro-system has a particularly significant impact on the development of the society. The negativity about crime and corruption in the country is a challenge that parents themselves struggle to cope with, and it is something they must try and overcome if they are to effectively educate their young children to be positive, active citizens of South Africa. Through the process of development, children will develop into adults who are educated to improve the circumstances of the society in general. This includes development in the medical field, education, law, social services, politics, business and other aspects of life.

The bioecological theory of human development of Bronfenbrenner (1992) considers development as an ongoing change in the bioecological characteristics of a person, both as an individual, and as part of the greater whole of society, with its many social groupings. This phenomenon is also a continuous process that takes place not only throughout an individual’s lifetime, but also over generations and historical times.

The different levels of the ecological environment, which will influence the development of a human being, form the structure of his theory. As stated earlier, the person is influenced by the micro-system, which is the immediate, face-to-face setting that includes the different characteristics of a person, as well as the specific features of the immediate setting. All relationships in the micro-system are bi directional, which entails that

adults affect children’s behaviour, but children biologically and socially influenced characteristics – their physical attributes, personalities and capacities also affect the behaviour of adults, for example a friendly attentive child is likely to evoke positive and patient reactions from parents, whereas a distractible youngster is more likely to be responded to with restriction and punishment. (Berk, 2000: 27)

If the relationship between parents is harmonious, parents will most likely be supportive of each other, and they will also treat their children with respect and affection. If, however, there is conflict between parents, they will tend to treat their children hostile and have inconsistent discipline. This will have a negative impact on the child’s development.

The meso-system is a system of micro-systems such as the home, school, neighbourhood and peer group. This suggests that the person is both the product and the producer of his or her development (Berk, 2000; Bronfenbrenner, 1992). There should be connections between micro-systems for example home, school and the child-care centre. Academic progress does not depend only on activities in the classroom but is also enhanced by the extent to which academic learning is carried over into the home, as well as the level of parental involvement in school life.

The background for the study also stemmed from the Freedom Charter of the Democratic dispensation of South Africa. According to the charter, ‘to teach the youth love for their people and culture, to honour human brotherhood and liberty and peace’ shall be the aim of education (Department of Education (DoE) Republic of South Africa, 1994).

Methodology

The methodology, the explanatory sequential mixed methods research design, was applied to answer the research question namely, ‘What are the views of participating South African parents on their role in the education of their children in the Early Childhood phase as democratic citizens?’

The sample sizes for the qualitative and quantitative methods of data selection were different, ‘given the nature of quantitative research to generalize to a population whereas the qualitative sample is to provide an in-depth understanding of a small group of individuals’ (Creswell, 2008: 76). Sampling for the explanatory sequential design was done as described by Creswell (2015: 79). If, as in the case of this study, the qualitative data must explain the quantitative results, the qualitative sample must be drawn from the quantitative sample and is therefore purposeful sampling.

The research was conducted during 2017. First, quantitative data were collected by means of questionnaires filled in by 233 voluntary parents. The data gathered by means of the questionnaires were captured, and then analysed. The results and findings were interpreted afterwards.

Second, a group of 16 parents who have answered the quantitative questionnaires participated in the qualitative data collection by means of personal semi-constructed interviews. The interviews were audio-typed and transcribed, and then coded to identify themes that emerged from the data. Processes to enhance validity were rigorous collection of both quantitative and qualitative data, the combination of the two forms of data and their results, the organization of these procedures into specific research designs that provide logic, and finally to frame these procedures within theory and philosophy (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2017).

Strategies to analyse and interpret the data of the study were applied (Nel and Jordaan, 2016; Onwuegbuzie and Teddlie, 2003: 393). These strategies were data diminishing by statistical procedures in the case of the quantitative data, and summaries in the case of qualitative data. Data were presented in tables and data correlation and consolidation were done. It included a combination of both datatypes to create new dependables, data comparison and data integration which combined data to a coherent whole.

Validity and trustworthiness of the study were considered very important aspects of the research report (Grosser, 2016: 302–303). Objectivity was maintained throughout the course of the study. Quality assurance in the qualitative phase of the data collection was ensured by establishing dependability, credibility, confirmation of ability and trustworthiness with the participants (Botha et al., 2016).

Data analysis and findings

After the quantitative data collection instruments (questionnaires) were collected from the schools, each questionnaire was numbered for analysis purposes, and to ensure anonymity. Data were summarized and numerically coded (Rule and John, 2011) and then electronically analysed. The results of the quantitative data were presented in tables.

Steps for preparation for qualitative data analysis as advised by Rule and John (2011) were followed. Field notes were written during the interviews and the taped interviews were transcribed. The data were carefully ‘prepared, checked and cleaned’ (Rule and John, 2011) and then analysed. Transcripts were printed, comments were written and themes or ‘foci’ were identified by a colour-coding process. An ‘open coding’ method was used, as the codes emerged from the data during the coding process, and by applying a deductive analysis, the significant text regarding the focus of the study was marked. Then the process of inductive analysis which allowed the data to ‘speak’ was applied. Codes were named during the analysis process. A third technique that was applied while analysing the data, was to work with the data in an integrated, holistic way. Rule and John (2011) described the aim of this global analysis as ‘to obtain an overview of the thematic range of the text’.

Transcriptions of the audio-typed interviews with the parents were used to identify themes emerging from the data. A thematic summary of the data was drawn up by writing down corresponding answers of the parents to simplify interpretation (Fontana and Frey, 2008).

A content analysis of inductive coding was performed, where the codes emerged from the data from the bottom upwards. In phase 1 of the qualitative data analysis process, the data were coded. In the audit trail, the results were presented according to four main themes (axial codes), which were identified in the results. These were the values of respect and participation in a democratic dispensation, challenges parents must overcome when educating their young children as democratic citizens and finally, a safe, proud and free democratic society in South Africa. When patterns were recognized, the qualitative findings, in combination with the quantitative findings, enabled me to answer the research question.

Ethical considerations

Confidentiality, privacy and the anonymity of the participants were also assured at all times. Furthermore, ethical clearance was obtained from the UP-Ethics Committee (permit number: EC16/04/02), and consent from the Free State Department of Basic Education (DoBE). Consent to send the questionnaire to the parents was also obtained from the principals of the schools, as well as the chairmen of the governing bodies. The knowledge and information obtained was only used for this study, and for no other purpose.

The researcher did not influence the data, which was generated during the research, because the researcher was not involved with these two schools, either as a parent or a staff member. Furthermore, this study was monitored throughout the study process by various stakeholders. Timelines and all other steps were discussed with the supervisor and co-supervisor. All content was evaluated and controlled before and after feedback from the supervisor and co-supervisor. The completed questionnaires, along with the field notes, the audio recordings of the interviews and the transcriptions of the audio recordings were handed to and controlled by the supervisor and co-supervisor. Language and technical aspects, as well as the Turnitin processes were observed and accepted by the supervisor and co-supervisor.

To ensure autonomy of the study, participants were fully informed of their choice to participate, and that they had the option to withdraw from the study at any stage. Steps were taken to ensure participants’ privacy, confidentiality and anonymity. Permission was gained from gatekeepers and informed consent from participants. Deception was not used to secure participation. Non-maleficence was a priority, as no harm or damage was done to the participants, their organizations or communities. To implement beneficence, the research aimed to contribute to public good. Feedback was promised to those who have requested it, included the Free State DoBE.

Quantitative results

Qualitative data analysis

The Pearson’s chi-square test of independence was utilized to compare groups who chose an option to those who did not. The chi-square test offers a non-parametric and distribution free comparison of groups and expected frequencies in cells for dichotomous data (Field, 2018). In this study where most of the aspects had nominal categories of either having selected an option, or not having selected an option, the chi-square test was deemed most appropriate. Determining if there was a statistically significant difference between being a member of the selection group (chose the option) or the non-selection group produced nominal data which had to be compared with non-parametric statistics. The chi-square was chosen due the nature of the data as well as the advantages of chi-square which include robust analysis that negates requirements of normality and generally has few other requirements other than cell sizes ( > 5) (Field, 2018). The statistical output should be interpreted as follows: if a result is significant, then there were significantly more respondents in one group versus the other group. The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference between group memberships, and where significance is detected there may be statistical as well as practical significance to choosing an option versus opting for no endorsement of the option.

Sample

In total, 233 respondents completed the questionnaire and the majority of the respondents (80%) were female. Respondents spoke English (25%) or Afrikaans (37%) or Sesotho (27%) at home, with only 12% speaking other African languages. Two-third (61%) of the respondents were between 31 and 40 years old. Only 10 per cent were younger than 30 years old and 29 per cent of respondents were older than 40 years. Most of the participating parents reported a tertiary qualification (71%) and the majority had only 1 child in the foundation phase (75%), with 23 per cent of respondents reporting 2 children in foundation phase. There were only 2.6 per cent of respondents who had 3 or more children in grade 0–3.

Data analysis

The scales were not normally distributed, Shapiro–Wilk (p = .000), and therefore the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient (Field, 2018) was used to estimate the strength of relationships among scales and their significance. Cohen’s (1988) criteria were used to interpret the relationships, where r = .10–2.99 is a small relationship, r = .30–4.99 is classified as a medium relationship, r = .50–6.99 is a large relationship and r = .700 is a very large, strong relationship. The ordered-categorical individual aspects were analysed using the chi-square test and results are shown per aspects in tables. The Mann–Whitney U and Wilcoxon tests were used to test for significant differences between groups within the sample.

Results

In Table 1, the characteristic that participating parents endorsed as empowering their foundation phase child as a democratic citizen are shown with the associated chi-square values and significance. Chi-square shows the significant difference between the number of respondents who chose the option (coded as 1) when compared with those who did not choose the option (coded as 0). This analysis was conducted specifically to identify characteristics of empowering the child which were significantly more likely to be chosen by parents/guardians as important to empowerment. Characteristics which were not chosen also reveal relevant information about sources of empowerment which parents are less likely to value.

Table 1.

Count of parents choosing characteristics as important to encourage in child.

Characteristics encouraged	Not endorsed		Endorsed		Chi-square	Asymp. Sig.
Characteristics encouraged	Count	N (%)	Count	N (%)	Chi-square	Asymp. Sig.
Tolerance	67	29	166	71	42.064	0.000
Forgiveness	53	23	180	77	69.223	0.000
Non-sexism	97	42	136	58	6.528	0.011
Self-control	53	23	180	77	69.223	0.000
Love	42	18	191	82	95.283	0.000
Compassion	72	31	161	69	33.996	0.000
Accountability	45	19	188	81	87.764	0.000
Open mindedness	67	29	166	71	42.064	0.000
Commitment	68	29	165	71	40.382	0.000
Respect	29	12	204	88	131.438	0.000
Non-racism	65	28	168	72	45.532	0.000
Loyalty	61	26	172	74	52.88	0.000
Responsibility	26	11	207	89	140.605	0.000

df = 1.

Table 1 displays the count of participating parents who chose the following characteristics as being important to encourage in their child, showing also the raw percentage and associated significance.

Most characteristics were strongly endorsed by participating parents as characteristics that they would encourage in their children, with between 58 per cent and 89 per cent of respondents choosing the options as important characteristics with a few exceptions. The characteristic responsibility was chosen most often and respect was endorsed significantly as a character to be encouraged in their children. Non-sexism was chosen only by 58 per cent of respondents, and therefore, 42 per cent did not see this as specifically important.

Table 2 displays the count of participating parents who chose certain aspects of democracy that they consider as important.

Table 2.

Count of parents choosing aspects of democracy as important.

Important in a democratic society	Not endorsed		Endorsed		Chi-square	Asymp. sig.
Important in a democratic society	Count	N (%)	Count	N (%)	Chi-square	Asymp. sig.
Deliberations	94	40	139	60	8.69	0.003
Norms and values	50	21	183	79	75.92	0.000
Peacebuilding	75	32	158	68	29.57	0.000
Equality	68	29	165	71	40.38	0.000
Reconciliation	98	42	135	58	5.88	0.015
Participation	107	46	126	54	1.55	0.213
Sense of belonging	104	45	129	55	2.68	0.101
Affective response to your country	117	50	116	50	0.00	0.948
Open mindedness	89	38	144	62	12.98	0.000
Social justice	92	39	141	61	10.31	0.001
Rule of law	99	42	134	58	5.26	0.022
Pride	115	49	118	51	0.04	0.844
Safety	51	22	182	78	73.65	0.000
Freedom	66	28	167	72	43.78	0.000
Cultural mixing	79	34	154	66	24.14	0.000
Knowledge of systems and principles	107	46	126	54	1.55	0.213

df = 1.

While most qualities were highly endorsed, the qualities of participation, sense of belonging, affective response to your country, pride and knowledge of systems and principles were chosen by just more than half of the respondents, indicating that the other half of the respondents did not choose the options (p > 0.05). For example, the option pride was not chosen by 49 per cent of respondents as being a crucial value in a democratic society.

Table 3 displays the count of participating parents who endorsed the rights of democratic citizens.

Table 3.

Count of parents who endorsed rights of democratic citizens.

Rights of citizens in democracy	Not endorsed		Endorsed		Chi-square	Asymp. sig.
Rights of citizens in democracy	Count	N (%)	Count	N (%)	Chi-square	Asymp. sig.
Work	53	23	180	77	69.22	0.000
Own property	76	33	157	67	28.16	0.000
Learn skills to participate	72	31	161	69	34.00	0.000
Acquire knowledge about the voting process	84	36	149	64	18.13	0.000
Learn values	65	28	168	72	45.53	0.000
Acquire knowledge democracy, rights and legal entitlement	80	34	153	66	22.87	0.000
Acquire an effective response to their country	95	41	138	59	7.94	0.005
Feel safe	36	15	197	85	111.25	0.000
Feel free	60	26	173	74	54.80	0.000
Feel proud	80	34	153	66	22.87	0.000

df = 1.

Participating parents strongly endorsed all aspects as rights of citizens in a democracy. The aspects chosen most often by participants was feeling safe as the most important right of citizens in a democracy (χ² (1) = 111.25, p = 0.000).

In Table 4, the challenges as recorded by parents are shown.

Table 4.

Challenges experienced by parents in empowering child.

Challenges empowering child	Not endorsed		Endorsed		Chi-square	Asymp. sig.
Challenges empowering child	Count	Row N (%)	Count	Row N (%)	Chi-square	Asymp. sig.
External influences	125	54	108	46	173.194	0.000
Parents were not empowered	153	66	80	34	297.384	0.000
Democracy does not function well	142	61	91	39	337.200	0.000
Weak role models	134	58	99	42	339.822	0.000

According to participating parents, the greatest challenge they experience in empowering their children as democratic citizens is external influences (χ² (1) = 173,194, p = 0,000).

The findings of the quantitative data analysis reflected the understanding of participating parents regarding their role in the democratic education process. It reflected that participating parents do not consider political leaders as contributors towards educating their young children as democratic citizens. Participating parents experienced the biggest challenge in empowering their children as democratic citizens of South Africa, as external influences.

Based on the democratic skills that children should be equipped with as defined in this study, compassion was considered the least important (69% of participating parents chose this option). Supporting the global citizenship that is currently experienced worldwide, it was significant to this study that 50 per cent of South African parents participating in this study also did not consider an affective response to your country as an important aspect of democracy. The recognition of human dignity was considered important by 73 per cent of the participating parents. In the light of the current sexism in South Africa, it is significant that non-sexism as a characteristic of a democratic citizen was only endorsed by 58 per cent of the respondents. Participating parents mainly focussed on ‘feeling safe’ when referring to the rights of democratic citizenship. They want to feel safe at home and not fear for bodily harm. These results may be important to the education process of future democratic citizens in South Africa.

Qualitative results

The four themes which emerged from the interviews with the parents were the following:

The importance of respect in educating young children as democratic citizens

Joubert (2007), Banks (2004) presented the interrelatedness of concepts regarding a democratic identity. Botha et al. (2016) referred to the 10 fundamental values in the Constitution, namely democracy, social justice, equality, non-sexism, non-racism, Ubuntu, an open society, accountability, responsibility, rule of law, respect and reconciliation. Participating parents considered all of these values as important, but responsibility and respect were chosen to be the most important values in a democratic society. Some participating parents of this study mentioned that by participating in my study and discussing respect in-depth during the interviews, they became more aware of their responsibility to educate their children to respect themselves, other people, their possessions, their culture, their language and religion, as well as the environment.

Participating parents identified self-respect as democratic value, and argued that one cannot have respect for other people if you do not have self-respect. Self-esteem appeared to be vital as a trait of democratic citizens who participate in democratic actions for example voting and community projects. Citizens with a low self-esteem are not likely to participate in positive democratic activities which enhance the society.

Apart from society, children should respect the environment. Resources like water should be used sparingly and paper and glass should be re-cycled. Animals should be protected. Participating parents felt strongly about a clean environment, and consider recycling and developing new projects to contribute to the conservation of water and other resources in South Africa as necessary.

The importance of participation as democratic value to educate their children in the foundation phase

Articles 12 and 40 of UNESCO (2003) stated that children have the right to be educated to participate at home, at school and in the democratic dispensation.

Carr (2008) stated that ‘thick democracy’ entails participation based on positive attitudes, beliefs and values. The importance of participation as democratic value to educate children in the foundation phase refers to the values of democratic citizenship. Johnson and Dawes (2016) argued that prerequisites for competence in democratic citizenship were considered knowledge, skills, attitudes, values and involvement in civic matters.

Participation in family life and society manifests on many levels. At first, it is vital that all values of a democratic citizen have to be practised. When socializing with fellow citizens, one should always portray respect, love, forgiveness, loyalty, kindness, self-control and compassion.

By living the characteristics of a democratic citizen for example love, forgiveness, loyalty, kindness, compassion, self-control, peacebuilding, tolerance, forgiveness, reconciliation, non-sexism, non-racism and respect a citizen also participate in the democratic society in a positive manner. Skills to deliberate and negotiate and the realization of rights and responsibilities are necessary in a democratic dispensation. Participation in promoting a sustainable environment through recycling and new inventions was also indicated as beneficial to the democratic society.

Rights and responsibilities form the foundation of participation in the democracy of South Africa, and for that matter, for all democratic societies, because one cannot claim to have rights if you do not carry out the responsibilities that you have.

Challenges preventing the education of young children to become democratic citizens

Parents who participated in this study indicated first that they found the media to influence the education process of their young children as democratic citizens, negatively. Taking note of the news resulted in negativism about crime and corruption in South Africa, and this influenced the education process negatively. Participating parents expressed a feeling of powerlessness and said that they feel unsafe with the status quo regarding security and political conflict in the country.

Participating parents wanted good role models to whom they can refer to when establishing democratic values in young children. It was reported that they experienced family and friends to be negative role models as well, because some of them would speak openly about racism, politics, murders and other crime in South Africa. P0143 argued, ‘On social media there are often negative remarks about other races. People are displaying hatred and intolerance. There is a lot of racism on Facebook’. Public figures, for example, police officers and government officials, are also seen as bad role models to the children.

Parents of young children in South Africa can be supported to overcome challenges keeping them from being able to properly educate their children as democratic citizens in South Africa. Social problems for example crime, drugs, corruption and negative role models in the country create a feeling of powerlessness, as was also seen in the study of Joubert (2007, 2012) with 9-year-old children.

Literature supports the findings of this study. According to Africa Check (2018), the South African Police Service admitted that in 2013 that 1448 members of the police force were convicted on 3204 charges of serious crimes such as murder, attempt to murder, rape, assault, corruption, theft, robbery, house-breaking, drug trafficking, domestic violence and aiding escapes. Furthermore, Africa Check (2018) referred to corruption and crime that prevented South Africa from being safe, proud and free.

Pace and Bixby (2008) also stated that citizens are confronted with controversial issues which upset citizens and might lead to negativity. Parents participating in this study agreed that children should be protected against anything that could harm them or influence them negatively. They were particularly concerned about exposure by the media to negative presentations of women and children, political actions, violence and crime.

Joubert (2007: 49) and Banks (2004: 8) stated that children who are educated as democratic citizens will be able to participate in the transformation of South Africa into a ‘prosperous and peaceful nation’ if the ‘experience the feeling of belonging’. Joubert (2007) also stated that ‘high levels of violence, a lack of tolerance and limited mutual respect and understanding of different groups’ (p. 50) were challenges in South Africa.

Children also have the right to receive parental direction regarding aspects mentioned in the media for example on television and the Internet, according to Article 16 (UNESCO, 2003). They have the right to be protected within the family and home against negative media and unlawful interference.

Creation of a safe, proud and free democratic society in South Africa

Participating parents were concerned about creating safe environments in South Africa for their families. They were worried that they would be attacked at home and robbed from their belongings, and that they or their families would be seriously injured or harmed. Parents who participated desired to go for a walk in the park, and they wanted their children to play outside without the fear of being attacked or kidnapped. On the question whether parents feel safe in South Africa, P0176 replied, ‘No, I do not feel very safe. I will feel safe again when the criminal offences in South Africa are properly addressed and punished’.

Participating parents displayed the longing to establish pride in the democratic society of South Africa. They were proud of the country’s sport achievements, and they considered South Africa as a beautiful country, but they were not proud on the leadership in South Africa. They also indicated that they are proud of their own achievements.

Finally, the findings of the results of both the quantitative and qualitative research were interpreted. An integrated conceptual and theoretical ‘LANTERN’ framework was developed which, supported and enhanced by the literature review, indicates the combined qualitative and quantitative analysis of data gathered in this study.

Discussion

Parents participating in the study mostly had the desire to educate their children as democratic citizens, for the reason that they wanted their children to be happy, well-balanced, participating democratic citizens of South Africa when they grow up. Parents loved South Africa; the majority of them grew up in South Africa, and want their children to contribute towards the democratic dispensation in South Africa. They want their children to experience the best of South Africa with its rich natural resources of minerals and wild life. Parents whom I interviewed considered the role model of the parents in educating the young children as democratic citizens as important.

Parents in South Africa can negatively influence their children’s democratic dispensation which our young children will inherit if they demonstrate negative behaviour. They confuse children and establish a feeling of hopelessness and apathy if they are negative towards the society.

Miklikowska and Hurme (2011), who conducted research on democratic functioning families in Finland and democratic values of adolescents, argued that parental openness to communicate had a positive effect on adolescents to learn deliberance in a democratic society. Their study found that ‘democratic parenting enhances the democratic commitment in adolescents’. This study involved younger children, but I consider these aspects of parenting that emerged from Miklikowska’s study, as applicable to this study. According to Miklikowska and Hurme (2011), parents should talk to their children about what happened with them during the day, and find out how they are doing. Parents should not take all the decisions and should be willing to see things through their children’s perspectives too. If children experience empathy and less prejudice at home, they will have empathy with others. Flanagan found connection with Miklikowska and Hurme (2011), and considered parents as role models for children from whom they should learn respect for the rights of others, and to distinguish right from wrong. Children should experience a democratic environment at home and learn that joint decisions compromise differences in point of view. They should practise democratic skills under the guidance of their parents. Excessive psychologically controlling methods used by parents might cause feelings of guilt, anxiety and aggression in their children, and give way to negative outcomes, counter to the democratic ideals necessary for good democratic citizenship.

The majority of participative parents were positive about the education of their young children as democratic citizens if South Africa. They demonstrated a feeling of pride and patriotism, as well as a nostalgic notion to change South Africa for the better. These parents wanted South Africa to be peaceful, safe and thriving. My perception was that, although most parents were aware of being role models of democratic citizens who act out the characteristics of good democratic citizenship as an example to their children, some parents admitted that they did sometimes act out negative characteristics like poor self-control, negative remarks of other race groups in the country. They did, however, give an indication that they were going to change that behaviour for the sake of their children.

Participative parents view their role in educating their young children as democratic citizens as important. They do, in correlation with the theories of Bronfenbrenner (1992), Vygotsky (1978) and Bourdieu (1990), consider the home environment as the place where their children are mainly educated and influenced as democratic citizens. They are mostly aware of what they are doing wrong in their role modelling of democratic citizenship. P0203 argued, ‘I think the most important role models are the parents, because the children watch us . . . what we do and the way we treat other people’.

Conclusion

Guidelines emerging from this study by means of the enlightening ‘LANTERN’ conceptual and theoretical framework could be used to support parents to educate their children towards democratic citizenship (Klopper, 2019). It could be presented in publications or by means of speeches or workshops to reach the public to empower those parents who need such empowerment. The findings and the combined conceptual and theoretical ‘LANTERN’ framework can serve as a guideline to empower parents with the necessary skills and knowledge to educate their children as democratic citizens. First, it includes the values of democratic citizenship as well as the theories from which it originated, namely the theories of Dewey (1899), Waghid (2008) and Bourdieu (1990). It also refers to the Bioecological theory of Bronfenbrenner. Finally, it contains references to the Constitution of South Africa (1996) and the Manifesto on Values for Education for Democracy (Department of Education (DoE) Republic of South Africa, 1994). Application of this integrated conceptual and theoretical framework in South Africa might enlighten the democratic dispensation and bring about a better South Africa for all citizens.

Future studies could also use this framework as a starting point. The same study could be conducted, but with purposeful sampling to select the participants in such a way that the home languages of the participants are presentative of the presentation of the home languages in South Africa. By doing this, skewed data would be minimized, and findings could be regarded as representative of parents in South Africa.

If we fail our children, we fail our future. (The Huffington Post, 2011)

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded with a merit bursary from the University of Pretoria. The author declares that she has no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced her in writing this article.

My gratitude goes to My heavenly Father; the University of Pretoria for financial support and my supportive supervisors, friends and family

Author’s note

The views expressed in this article are my own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

Author contributions

The research described in this article was conducted by Dr C. Klopper. This article was written by Dr C. Klopper.

Funding

The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was financially supported by the University of Pretoria by means of a merit bursary. Further support was received from Prof. Ina Joubert, the author’s supervisor, and Dr M. Finestone, the author’s co-supervisor, who guided the research process.

ORCID iD

Cecilia Klopper

References

Africa Check (2018) South Africa’s criminal cops: is the rot far worse than we have been told? Available at: https://www.africacheck.org

Banks

(ed.) (2004) Diversity and Citizenship Education: Global Perspectives. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Benson

Harkavy

Puckett

(2007) Dewey’s Dream: Universities and Democracies in an Age of Educational Reform: Civil Society, Public Schools and Democratic Citizenship. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Berk

(2000) Child Development. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Botha

Joubert

Hugo

(2016) Children’s perceptions of democratic values: implications for democratic citizen education. South African Journal of Childhood Education 6(1): a343.

Bourdieu

(1990) The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Bronfenbrenner

(1992) Ecological systems theory. In: Vasta

(ed.) Six Theories of Child Development: Revised Formulations and Current Issues. UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 187–249.

Carr

(2008) Educators and education for democracy: moving beyond ‘thin’ democracy. Inter-American Journal of Education for Democracy 2: 147–165.

Creswell

(2008) Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

10.

Creswell

(2015) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

11.

Creswell

Plano Clark

(2017) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

12.

Department of Education (DoE) Republic of South Africa (1994) The freedom charter: the doors of learning and culture shall be opened. Available at: https://www.sahistory.org.za

13.

Dewey

(1899) The School and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

14.

Dewey

(1916) Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: Macmillan.

15.

Field

(2018) Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. 5th ed. London: SAGE.

16.

Fontana

Frey

(2008) The interview: from neutral stance to political involvement. In: Denzin

(ed.) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. New York: SAGE, pp. 115–159.

17.

Grosser

(2016) Kwantitatiewe insamelingsmetodes. In: Joubert

Hartell

Lombard

(eds) Navorsing: ‘n Gids vir die beginnernavorser. Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik, pp. 302–303.

18.

Johnson

Dawes

(2016) Do parents’ life experiences affect the political and civic participation of their children? The case of draft-induced military service. Political Behaviour 38: 793–816.

19.

Joubert

(2007) The life experiences and understandings of children as citizens in the democratic South Africa. PhD Thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.

20.

Joubert

(2012) Children as photographers: life experiences and the right to be listened to. South African Journal of Education 32(4): 449–464.

21.

Klopper

(2019) The role of parents in educating their young children as democratic citizens. PhD Thesis, Pretoria, South Africa: University of Pretoria.

22.

Miklikowska

Hurme

(2011) Democracy begins at home: democratic parenting and adolescents’ support for democratic values. European Journal of Developmental Psychology 8(5): 541–557.

23.

Nel

Jordaan

(2016) Die gemengde navorsingsmetode. In: Joubert

Hartell

Lombard

(eds) Navorsing: ‘n Gids vir die beginnernavorser. Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik, pp. 377–394.

24.

Onwuegbuzie

Teddlie

(2003) A framework for analysing data in mixed methods research. In: Tashhakkori

Teddlie

(eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, pp. 351–383.

25.

Pace

Bixby

(2008) Introduction: studying citizenship in troubled times. In: Bixby

Pace

(eds) Educating Democratic Citizens in Troubled Times: Qualitative Studies of Current Efforts. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 4–21.

26.

Paterson

(2011) Parenting Matters: Early Years and Social Mobility. London: Centreforum.

27.

Republic of South Africa (1996) The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, Act No. 108 of 1996, Government Gazette, 378(17678), Cape Town: Government Printer.

28.

Rule

John

(2011) Your Guide to Case Study Research. Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik.

29.

The Huffington Post (2011) Juvenile delinquency: if we fail our children, we fail our future. Available at: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/juvenile-delinquency-if-w_3_b_954632?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLmluLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABRZ_XWjq3l8swvcciFqdvCWi2IvfgES-awBrrKmVbfPveimWbV31s5KSU3W-54z9YlQwmZbtdL58NvHtXv-8N62kkdWAYJ5KKOc3ey

30.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2003) Learning to live together: have we failed? In: A Summary of the Ideas and Contributions Arising from the Forty-Sixth Session of UNESCO’s International Conference on Education, 5–8 September 2011. Geneva: International Bureau of Education.

31.

Vygotsky

(1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

32.

Waghid

(2008) Democratic Citizenship, Education and Friendship Revisited: In Defence of Democratic Justice, Studies in Philosophy and Education. New York: Springer.

33.

Waghid

(2014) African Philosophy of Education Reconsidered: On Being Human. New York: Routledge.