Decolonizing the Curriculum and Social Justice - Panel of 11 May2016 (entry by Razia Mayet)

The 4th panel discussion in the series on the Decolonizing the curriculum, Teaching and Learning at UJ was entitled WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL JUSTICE AND THE DECOLONIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE? The panel was as diverse as it was thought provoking. The panel was made up of a trendy, forward thinking lady advocate and Section 27 activist; a post graduate law student from the UJ SRC ; an ex politician who ran for cover  from politics into academia and a sage, deeply reflective professor. Each brought his/her personal conviction and signature style to the discussion.

Tobia Serongoane was the youngest and he got to start. He questioned the following: In what way does the current education system honour indigenous perspectives? What are we decolonizing to and where are we coming from in this debate? What insights has he gained from the Eurocentric education that he has on these matters?

He said that he refused to accept that decolonization was only about race or colour. But at the same time felt indoctrinated as he knows all about Nietzsche but nothing about his own people, their law systems and histories. In his law studies, even though they are in Africa, mainly American cases were used. Where are the African scholars? What are the African ways that will work for African issues?

 “What makes us unique as African when our curriculum reflects and copies western university?” He asked. He finds it puzzling that all scholarship reflects the authority of western authority and knowledge. Universities like UJ and Wits and UCT focus Research on Medicine, law and Science. But what about Agriculture which is Africa’s cornerstone. Tobia left us with the following consideration. Why has his entire education been framed like there are no women who played a role in the construction of knowledge and education?

Advocate Adila Hassim based her presentation on the right to education from a legal perspective. She stated that although the right to basic education was universally accepted in South Africa, access was still a contested arena. Pupils were denied access due to factors like nutrition, accommodation, infrastructure and lack of delivery of resources amongst others. She said that transformation must be driven by public participation and was a process and not a once off and that South Africans should not depend on the law to bring about transformation. South African law was a centuries-old system based on Roman Dutch law and couched in English tradition. However, the constitution was our own and unique in the world, as it protects the rights of all and also calls for substantive Equality and it is there that Social Justice is espoused in the law of South Africa. The nub of her presentation was based on the textbook case that the NGO Section 27 brought against the Limpopo Education Department for the non- delivery of textbooks. This landmark case showed that the constitution can work in the favour of pupils, teachers and parents. In 2012, the curriculum changed in schools to the CAPS system. All Grade 1,2,3 and 8 pupils were involved in the new curriculum, but no textbooks were delivered. 1.7 million Learners were affected in communities that were mostly poor rural areas with very limited infrastructure. Section 27 represented 39 schools and the applications were made on behalf of the learners, teachers and parents of these schools. Adila stressed that the rulings of the case were landmark rulings for South Africa and a victory for education as they clearly represented decolonization and social justice. Both judges agreed that we cannot be fully functional citizens without education. The judge in his opening statement of the ruling quoted the words of Fredrick Douglass an afro-America anti-slavery activist who said,  “once you learn to read you are forever free”.

Professor Sakhela Buhlungu started by saying that no one owns the decolonization debate. Students think it is theirs and don’t want academics to “pronounce and pontificate” about it. He accepts that in 2015 students forced it away from the fringe onto the national agenda by refusing symbolic change and calling for real change away from patriarchy and gender. Academics are quick to move into this new territory to get published, but how many really want social justice to take centre stage.  South Africa has had centuries of slavery and colonization but today we see no traces of either. Yet coloniality permeates every aspect of our lives and is reinforced through power and inequality and privilege. He expressed an uneasiness about what would happen once the student campaigns dissipate.” What then…?” he asked, “Will the project ever go into the deeper recesses of academia?” For example will it affect the way courses are planned, or which textbooks are prescribed and journals are subscribed to or whose knowledge/voice is relevant. The professor is deeply concerned by the fact that any move to decolonize the African university is seen as a move to dumb down the quality or standard of our university sector. He fears that decolonization will become a bandwagon to be jumped on or an intellectual fashion that is used by some to restore their tarnished credibility. I liked his contention that decolonization and social justice are two sides of the same coin. It is about dismantling coloniality and epistemologies of privilege and in so doing creating social justice. He concluded by referring to the ‘motive force’ behind decolonization and asking who has the power to run with it. Will it be the students, the academics or leadership of the institutions? He wryly observed that, “if no one has a vested interest in it, it will disappear”. 

 Mary Metcalf began by listing the barriers to social justice, as she perceives them. These are social exclusion; exclusion by poverty, exclusion by patriarchy, heteronormativity and barriers to language. She went on to raise the issue of what counts as knowledge; what promotes it; what denigrates it and what languages are valued. She quoted extensively from Ngugi on the impact of imperialism and colonialism to create a ‘wasteland’ of one’s own culture and struggle. Ngugi’s  ‘cultural bomb’ makes people want to disassociate themselves with themselves, and to associate themselves with other groups who are seen as good, moral and just. Ngugi referred to this as a ‘spiritual death’. Mary felt very strongly that those who “dichotomise the struggle” must be avoided. She drew on three dichotomies as examples. That firstly, decolonization is about excellence and those who try to relate decolonization to a ‘drop in standards’ should never be listened to. Secondly that the complexities of the debate on decolonization have to be updated. She used globalisation as an example of how the facts can be muddied if the arguments and contexts are not updated. Finally, she advised that the larger political issues have to be personalised and that names, languages, heritage are all key factors. She concluded by reminding us that, “no one owned the debate on decolonization and everyone has a role to play.”

The closing remarks of the panellists left us with much room for reflection. The professor agreed with the point made by the member of the audience that the debate was an old one started by Mafeje, Mamdani, Ngugi , Fanon, Biko and others. But he said that what was different now in South Africa was that the youth presented a challenge to the Mandela style of social contract for the reconciliation project. He also debunked the whole myth of “rankings”. As far as he was concerned, rankings entrenched ideas of privilege and excellence. Part of coloniality in South Africa was the way  South African Universities want to hold on to notions of ranking. 

The advocate responded to the question of language by firstly pointing out that ‘Post-colonial’ is not equal to ‘de-colonial’. Schools still don’t teach about African leaders and Afrikaans is still the most common second language taught in spite of it being a site of struggle and resistance. In the discussion on why our schools still don’t teach African languages she cleverly pointed out that Afrikaans was rolled out to every school and every child in the whole of South Africa in a very short time under the nationalist regime during apartheid. She went on to add that we cannot trust our leaders and institutions to take decolonization forward.

All in all it was an afternoon spent in the presence of great thinkers who shared some profound insights.

Razia Mayet

SOLT engages with Black thought

Reflections on the 2^nd SOTL @ UJ round of conversations with members of Black Thought

SOTL @ UJ organised a second engagement with members of Black Thought on 5 May 2016 in the Post Grad Centre. 

The conversation was attended by about 15 members of Black Thought and 15 academic staff members. These conversations are motivated by a desire of academic staff to understand and engage with subjugated perspectives as part of the investigation of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning into socially just pedagogies.

I find the views of these students refreshing and challenging. Their ‘frank talk’ is not apologetic or politically correct. The perspectives of Black Thought are valuable for an understanding of socially just pedagogies since they arise from the experiences of ‘blackness’ that is associated with hunger, poverty, marginalisation, inferiority, deprivation, academic exclusion, limited social power and constrained living conditions. These perspectives are representative of the many who are excluded from society and failed by the education system. It is against the context of deprivation of necessities to sustain life that the desperation, frustrations, anger and violence should be understood.

An interesting perspective is given on the nature and aims of education. The view was expressed that education should address the conditions of poverty and social risk by developing the ability to self-organise. This is a shift away from an education that transmits knowledge and skills. In this I read the need to form structured associations where views could be articulated and powers mobilised to challenge forms of oppression. These perspectives should be explored further since they point to educationally valuable ideas of self-governance, freedom, autonomy and agency through which a sustainable life could be created.

What became clear in the discussion is the need to develop pedagogical virtues that would enable engagement across differences:

·         Educators should be able to listen to subjugated views. Although black anger is likely to come as a shock, we need to listen carefully to the underlying desires and frustrations that are authentically expressed. This listening is not an agonistic search for deficiencies and inaccuracies, but a search for novelties, common interests and shared concerns.

·         The authenticity of these views is validated when they are engaged with critically. Such engagements take up the concepts, desires, fears and concerns of students and assist in articulations, in the deepening and broadening perspectives, and in critical self-reflections, etc. One such engagement took place around conceptions of land. It was pointed out that access to ‘land’ signifies the ownership of the means of production that is essential to protection and survival.

·         An educational and academic vice is the ‘pedagogical attitude’ which does not really engage with student views, but rather aims to ‘teach’ them what to think and do. This pedagogical attitude suppresses the emergence of ‘self-organisation’ and is experienced as irrelevant since it claims to know how the world should be renewed.

I detected an impatience among these students about the lack of change and the futility of many conversations. The opinion was expressed that the issues students struggle with have been well-known, but very little has been done to address them. In order to further engage meaningfully with these students a commitment is needed to bring about real changes.

While these kinds of conversations with various marginalised groups on and off campus are essential to ‘reinventing education’, they have to be part of an activism for change.

Dirk Postma

9 May 2016

3rd SERIES PANEL DISCUSSION: WHAT DOES DECOLONIZING THE CURRICULUM MEAN FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING



The panel

Brenda Leibowitz, Chair for Teaching and Learning in the Faculty of Education, kicked off the 3rd panel discussion on Implications for Teaching and Learning at the Soweto Campus Conference Hall. The session spoke to: What do we learn from experience, from best practice and how do we go forward with this knowledge? Just a quick flashback, for those that don’t know about the series discussion. The University of Johannesburg’s Ad Hoc Senate Task Team, chaired by Cheryl Hendriks, was tasked to host a series of panel discussions on Decolonization of Knowledge which hopes to create a platform in which UJ staff and students can analyse and debate pertinent issues in relation to this theme.  These discussions plans to inform the way in which the university embarks on the exercise of transforming teaching, learning and research. These panel discussions draw on global, continental and local knowledge and experience and include a number of invited guests to share to the knowledge.  So, the first in the panel discussion series drew on teaching and learning. The second was on knowledge specifically and the purpose of today’s panel discussion is to talk about,

1) What does decolonizing mean for teaching and learning

2) How do we take teaching and learning forward

3) How do we do things differently? Well here we are ....

The attendance was not great but sufficed for discussion. The convenor of the decolonization task team, Cheryl Hendriks, commented in her closing spot that the event lacked marketing and communication on the Soweto Campus and this contributed to the poor attendance. That was a pity, as these debates open the door for voices to be heard.

Prof Brenda Leibowitz


Brenda’s introductory comments where significant for thought...

She opened the floor by saying that - after a revolution people become complacent.  We start doing things, implement changes and once achieved we stop.  Now, the problem starts when we realize ‘where are we’ to ‘where we should be’. She continued by quoting the famous Professor Njabulo Simakahle Ndebele an academic, a literary and a writer of fiction and Vice Chancellor of UJ. In 1995, 1 year after the ANC came into power, who wrote that those who call others disadvantaged need to consider whether the namers of those that called others disadvantaged are not themselves disadvantaged because they are not aware of how much change they have to undergo to meet what should be in place in University. Twenty one years later there has been greater access in higher education for black student intake at the University. The numbers are not great but there has been satisfactory change, although not in terms of the content of curriculum and the rituals of the University, for example the graduation processes. There have been some changes as well but by and large the way we teach the content is still what Saleem Badat once said is derivative of the metropole. So we are still copying the north. By this time I could hear the passion and fire in Brenda’s voice for this cause. A cause close to her heart.  She was saying that we are still doing what we did so many years ago. Change needs to be far more encompassing.  Although we have wonderful instances of change we cannot say that from a student point of view that the learning experience has been decolonized in total.

The fantastic five on the panel where: 
1)  Philip Baron (Electrical Engineering lecturer, UJ)

2)  Mr Tshepo Goba (Student, Education Faculty, UJ)

3)  Prof Nyasha Mboti (Department of Communications Studies, UJ)

4)  Dr Carina van Rooyen (Dept Anthropology and Development Studies,UJ)

5)  Kibbie Naidoo (Professional Academic Support, UJ)

Philip Baron



Philip Baron spoke on the ‘How’ of teaching and learning. He spoke of goals. For him to reach his goals he needs to know his students’ goals. This means getting to know your student – yeah! But what he learnt in the classroom was life as an African. Questions asked referred to steel buckets and washing, tyres placed on a tin roof etc. A conversation started that contextualized African living.  Learning became personal, a conversation and meaningful. I just can’t do justice to his talk in this potted summary.Somehow it seems that decolonizing the curriculum brings a human touch to both the lecturer and the student. Understanding one another in the classroom and understanding the harsh reality out of the classroom is an experience that comes from conversations in the knowledge space - another term for classroom. Philip shared his creativity in making the classroom a place where both the teacher and the student are able to achieve their goals. Philip’s talk was brilliant from his worldview. He felt that students should have their own epistemologies reflected in their curriculums, and in the methods of teaching in learning.

     

Did you know that Epistemology is the study of our method of acquiring knowledge? It answers the question, "How do we know? "Why is Epistemology important? Epistemology is the explanation of how we think. It is required in order to be able to determine the true from the false, by determining a proper method of evaluation. It is needed in order to use and obtain knowledge of the world around us. Without epistemology, we could not think.

 

It’s a concern that student’s worldviews of day to day experiences are mostly invisible in the teaching and learning system. He argued that this should not be so and must change. He went on to share how he decolonized the curriculum to engage with his students.  He quoted Gordon Pass – ‘learning begins with each student’s aims and outcomes’. He spoke on working with the students’ goals, getting to know them and then quoted Vygotsky – ‘when we are in the class together we learn in community’. An inspiring quote indeed. This led his talk to his second point on 'Conversation'. He talked on understanding goals from the student frame of reference and not from his own assumptions of their goals. By this point he had my attention gripped because I could feel that his story was more a revelation than an experience (in my opinion).  He said that he cannot just assume that he knows what his students needs are because he does not.  He needs to be curious. Through curiosity a conversation started. And so Philip created conversation space in the classroom. So, – How do we contextualize content? Well the worldview and the content of the majority needs to be reflected in the curriculum. Students must not only benefit in terms employment but also personal learning that is meaningful.  This removes abstraction in the past and brings in local content.  He gave an example of when he taught a class on lightening and earthing. The course was about how to protect power-stations, sub-stations and buildings.  A student put up his hand and asked - ‘do rubber tyres on the tin roof reduce the chance of a lightning strike? Although he answered the question he wanted to know what made the student ask such a question. (This is the reality of living in informal dwellings). Not everyone has everything that everyone else has - so many people live in informal dwellings. Philip would not have thought of this otherwise unless he included the context eg, steel buckets and washing, trains etc. Philip went on to say that learning must be meaningful and personal and he also needed to learn. By this point I knew that Philip Barron was passionate about his cause to decolonize the curriculum. He went on to say that it is his job to be creative and take the challenge and to take the course and contextualize it so that it becomes interesting for the learner. Lastly, he spoke of mutual reciprocity - If I distinguish myself from you and I consider myself intelligent I must consider you, who I distinguish from I, might also be intelligent - This means that if I think I’m clever then I must allow it at least possible that you too are clever because intelligence is in the between. It is in the interaction. So we share this: if my class is boring then we are all boring.   

Prof Nyasha



Prof Nyasha started with a story in Ghana while on research about a woman who sells wares and makes about – converted – R30 a day. She takes care of her family, children etc. and survives on that money. A cleaner in SA earns R1500 a month and stretches that money with her family, for fees, books, cloths, food, shelter, transport. Both ladies – how do they raise families on R30/day or R1500/month? His analogy of the hawker and the cleaner to that of an accountant and economist was a practical way of making sense and connecting with concepts that intertwine unknowingly in our everyday lives. We tend to categorize people without degrees as not knowing. The student is the one who pays fees, comes to learn and get the grades and the teachers, educators and knowers are the doctors, professors, lecturers, etc. Real people living in the reality of an African lifestyle, he deems are economists, accountants, strategists etc. yet they do not earn that title. We don’t believe that these women have the capability to teach students in academia. That’s the reality we live in. He has 2 Master students and they sit in Freedom Park because they choose the community as their co-supervisor. They want to go out to the communities and find out why they are so angry, why they burn, is it survival? Every Saturday in Freedom Park the community holds political classes. They sit in shacks and talk on political issues.  The students camp and listen. They are in constant contact with the people in the community. The student’s dissertations are actually co-supervised by the community. Efforts to alert the media on what’s happening e.g. political parties started the Xenophobia attacks are in vain.  The media is not interested in warnings they only respond to crisis situations. How do we de-colonize? By knowing that we lie to ourselves if we think that the University is where knowledge is made – it’s not where knowledge is made, it is where knowledge is contained. It is where it is put into books & CD’s. If you want to know where knowledge is made then you have to do what Walter Rodney (famous historian - West Indies), who was murdered by the CIA in 1989, did. He was fired by the University of WI because he could not contain it anymore so he went out to the dumps of Jamaica and sat with the locals and spoke about politics, history, cultural studies, economics etc., this is where the real learning was made.. Interesting words from the talented Prof Nyasha.  

The different speakers come with different worldviews of their experiences. How do we engage and make meaning of their experiences? It’s mind provoking – don’t you think? What is society’s measure of what an acceptable change is and what is not? Language is a barrier – I agree. However what in your opinion would be the universal language for conversation when we engage with one another that will take us from the classroom to the corporate world. What are your thoughts? 

Dr Carina van Rooyen

Dr Carina van Rooyen’s talk focused on what does decoloniality mean for Honours level learning and teaching at UJ. She began with a careful consideration about whiteness and what it means to talk from this position. Decolonizing is not an event it’s a process. The focus should   be on ‘How’ we teach.  There must be student participation. There must be, love, interest, connection and discipline. The role of love finally came out towards the end. She spoke on oppression and acknowledging our privileges. This was the subject of a bosberaad which they held with their students. She believes that trans-disciplinarity should be much stronger. There should be open digital scholarships - huge voices. Students should be taking the lead in course design. Dr Carina passion for this cause was undoubtedly noted. 



Tsepho Goba (student)



Tsepho Goba asked many questions,
-  How best do we shape the future?
-  Can we really have a decolonized university
    in  today’s world?
-  Epistemology of Authority
-  Politics and education
-  To read a book is to write a book
-  Reading is a confrontation of the world
-  Confronting reality
-  Interrogating

   

To be literate is to write one’s reality in one’s own culture. There is a gap in how communication is transferred. e.g. The BA degree in UJ is not equivalent to the BA degree in Fort Hare. He asked, who are we? How can we shape the world in a language we understand? There are deep-seated inequality gaps. How do we eradicate this problem when there is race and class based domination? A part of decolonizing is re-figuring the world. It should be a human effort. Again the question arises - Who should have the power and how do we take the power back? In closing - from a student perspective - We are in PAIN! I’m sure his voice will be heard.  



Kibbi Naidoo

Kibbi Naidoo (from Professional Academic Staff Development at UJ), was the final presentation in the panel. She did not question the needs of the students but rather focused on what university developers need to do to effect change. What does decolonizing   actually mean to staff-developers?  There has been a fundamental shift in the thinking process of the developers. Her task was to roll out teaching and learning, and the questions raised were,

1) How do we teach at University?

2) How do we create space for these types of engagement?

She believes it's  time to re-visit the 'How', and 'What' we teach. The process should involve students and faculties. Hence, we should set aside time for re-curriculation. She went on to say that the process will not happen overnight and that key strategies need to be developed. Actually a RADICAL change is required. In her conclusion she suggested that we use community as supervisors and engage with faculties and departments to start developing strategies. It’s most certainly a collaborative journey and staff must be open to the fact that they don’t know it all.  

So, will the University ‘walk the talk’? Time will tell…. That was the end of the panel discussion. The floor was then opened to the students. 

Student Participation

The student session was lively, and some of their questions were really a call for help. Brenda asked the students to think about what they would like to see in class ‘tomorrow’……and this is what they had to say....
- A 3 year degree is not recognized internationally
- Youth that don’t complete due to lack funding
- HS APS scores disqualify student entry into  university
- Gap of education at different levels
- Decolonizing is a process that will work if resources can
   be brought forward
- What is UJ willing to achieve-
- Where did colonialism start?
- We are only looking at a certain period
- Look at language
- We deal with symptoms not the core
- We are living a lie
- Re-write the true history of SA
- Emotional teaching is more important
- Why is knowledge drawn from western countries?
- UJ does not have the curriculum to engage in ethnic language
- Teaching methods do not consider students that do not have access to technology
- Why are we having student/teacher conversations, it will not change anything
- Decolonizing the system means not taking instructions from the minority
- We learn to be subject to the employer NOT a subject to transform
- We are living in a space that is anti-black
- Rural children do not have technology
- UJ systems prepare children to fail
- We are in PAIN...

Answers are needed for the many questions. Brenda went back to the panel for a closing statement and this is what they had to say….Philip – How best do we claim Power
Prof Nyasha – I am blessed. I spoke you and you listened.
Dr Carina – How do I change power relations
Kibbi Naidoo – The best way to understand student worldviews is to engage in collaboration and dialogue. 

Prof Cheryl Hendriks



Prof Cheryl Hendricks – very quickly touched on the fact that we as a nation have deep seated issues. We are all trying to find each other. We are looking for a broader  understanding on how to go forward. UJ is developing a charter to try and shift conversations to different campuses. Language is a barrier - an unequal relationship. The only way to move forward is to create a safe space.

  

 

Posted by Ro Govindasamy





An insightful session indeed? Don’t miss the next in the series…

The speakers where fabulous. We were able to draw from their experiences on how to do  things differently in a  collaborative way to mould our future.  The questions raised will undoubtedly be tabled for answers.

  

BOOK REVIEW: THE SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION - by Razia Mayet

BOOK REVIEW

TITLE: THE SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION: ON ITS CONSTITUTION AND TRANSFORMATIVE POTENTIAL

EDITORS: Shirley Booth and Laurie Woollacott

PUBLISHER: SUN Media under the imprint SUN PRESS. First edition 2015. SA Price: R250.00

The book introduces Earnest L. Boyer in 1990, as the creator of the concept of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) and goes on to show the historical and social evolution of the idea. The notion has grown to encompass many different views of the nature of SoTL since then. The book deals with the philosophical underpinnings that gave rise to SoTL and traverses thinking on the issue from Aristotle to the current times. The Aristotelian view that ‘Man by nature cannot be without others’ concurs with the African philosophy of Ubuntu and is reflected in the assumptions that underpin UNESCO's recommendations for Higher Education that, “Higher Education personnel …. are expected to enhance the observance in society of the cultural, economic, social , civil and political rights of all people.”

In the chapter “Invitational Pedagogy” by Teboho Pitso, he avers that, “The basis of developing the alternative pedagogy was mainly to restore students’ agentic and discretionary power through creating learning environments where students could engage in independent research.  Invitational dialogic constructions were central to these efforts.” He succinctly puts forward the case for SoTL and invitational learning in the creative approach he uses in his ‘learnshops’.

Chapters 4 will be of interest to those in teacher education specifically and those in the field of education generally. Laurie Woollacott presents an interesting case study in MEDIATED INTERACTION GROUPS (MIGs). His findings suggest that this innovative pedagogy (MIG) has a potential impact on educational practice.

The rest of the chapters consider SoTL and transformation through a range of pedagogical approaches in the Health Sciences, Engineering, Teacher Education and in Academic Development. Overall the book is an interesting account of the historical and philosophical aspects of SoTL together with real pedagogical experiences of academics in the field. It confirms for those of us in higher education that we influence, just as much as we are influenced by those with whom we converse at a given moment and that our influences range over the scope of the human condition – morals, habits and the political condition.

In the final chapter, the editors, Booth and Woolacott summarize by considering the five  core domains and two contextual domains of SoTL. The core domains are: didactic, epistemic, social, moral and ethical and finally societal. The contextual domains are the disciplinary and professional.

They conclude that SoTL has a bearing on the status of the profession and the potential for its transformation, at the individual, the institutional and the societal levels.

For those who want a deeper understanding of where SoTL started, and where it is now, the first chapter is lovely. it is also useful for those who want to incorporate it into their teaching, and to make teaching more invitational, this is a book to buy.

POSTHUMANIST PERSPECTIVES ON HIGHER EDUCATION PEDAGOGY

An ethics of becoming in a pedagogy for social justice - by Dirk Postma from Brenda Leibowitz                                                     

This presentation was by Dr. Dirk Postma, Faculty of Education, UJ, ON 25 Febr 2016. It included an analysis of the current problematic of neo-liberal dominance in higher education, the roots/tenets of posthumanist perspectices, and the implications for pedagogic practice.

Dirk Postma

Dirk’s session was well attended, the slides excellent, and the questions demonstrated serious engagement and appreciation for the issues raised.

The slides and presentation demonstrate neatly the philosophical method of inquiry – stating the problem, offering evidence of a problematic position, exposing the alternative worth consideration, structuring the dimensions of the counter argument, and illustrating the value of the counter argument.

The audience, at the Postgraduate Centre

It was good to be witness to Dirk's engagement with the posthumanist perspective – he’s well read, and could help the audience with their questions about the topic. (Sorry I couldn’t jump in, since I volunteered to make notes for this brief report.)

Dirk’s sharing of his inquiry into the value of the Posthumanist perspective for Social Justice pedagogy surely add much value to SOTL’s project of the advancement of notions and practices of SJP.

My rereading of the slides strengthened my inquiry into teacher education and professional learning, realizing that I need to stay with the following questions for time to come:

. What does it mean to be contextually aware? [of forces shaping our lives as academics in a Neoliberal era – what governs our work directly and indirectly?][slide 5].

.  In doing research and working with students UJ – what is the significance and possibility of each and every event/meeting/class – to help us understand how life is relative, progressing/becoming, and how it helps us grow as human beings?

. On the level of pedagogic practice – what strategies / actions / conversations are associated with becoming minoritarian? To affect and be affected? And work with desire and will to become different?

Gert van der Westhuizen - on the right

. In the case of each learning conversation with colleagues and students – how is power and desires used to affect the other? How are interactions used to constitute the self? [and so on].

Apart from these questions relevant to my own work at UJ, Dirk’s presentation elicited more than 15 questions from colleagues – needing further clarification, confirming key points, and raising new questions.

Gert van der Westhuizen

First Seminar at UJ: Decolonizing the Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at UJ

UJ kicked off its seminar series on decolonizing the curriculum in the library today. It was well attended, with a fabulous panel, and Cheryl Hendricks in the chair. Desiree Lewis from the University of the Western Cape began by saying that it is important how we define hegemonic knowledges. By way of example,  decolonization does not mean replacing all existing canons with new Afrocentric canons, if these should be equally exclusive, elitist or authoritarian. Similarly, replacing (all) knowledge from the North with knowledge from the South ignores the fact that knowledge can be hybridised and intermingled. Also problematic, according to Desiree, is to pepper the existing canon with new names, thus keeping the existing canon, which just looks a little more 'quirky'. What is more important is to get students to think critically about epistemology, where the knowledges come from, what the implications of the epistemologies are, and to think through the relationship of knowledge and power. Students need to explore knowledges, not just rote learn what is 'politically correct'. 
An interesting perspective from Alina Segobye, who trained first in the study of African languages, then in archeology, was how scientists can be so positivist. She illustrated her point with reference to the astrophysicists in South Africa, who attract large sums of money and occlude the work of afrocentric physicists. Indigenous Knowledge System (IKS) projects do not receive the kind of money other projects do. She said poignantly, it is not just about the present, but the pasts and the knowledges lost that one wants to reclaim.  (One would really like to have had more time to listen to these speakers, and I am sure I can't do them justice either in this potted summary.)  Tshepo Moloi from the UJ SRC acknowledged how the students have pushed the agenda to make us/the audience confront the violent practices in every lecture hall they go to. Further, he felt that the students' struggle at least got the topic of decolonizing the curriculum, to the point of today's session. He said there is nothing wrong with the current discourses, but "please let us see ourselves within the degrees that are taught - otherwise UJ - how is it an African university?"

Nelson Maldonado-Torres is another speaker whom I would not be able to do justice to, by summarizing his words. He introduced his own views by sharing with us, that he is from Puerto Rico, one of the oldest colonies in the world. And yet in South Africa many, white and black, view him as white, and reveal things they might not otherwise do, which gives him an unusual perspective on the local situation. He maintains that decolonializing generates anxiety because it unsettles one's sense of wellbeing and belonging, and in this way generates forms of bad faith. It is brutal because it calls identities into question, it calls the enlightenment into question. He made a distinction between colonialism over the past 500 years and the period before that. Colonialism over the recent past celebrates newness and secularism, over colonized and condemned subjects. He argued for the need to decriminalize student activism, and to see students as epistemological agents of change. Structural changes need to happen to empower students, as they are not unified and lack resources. Empower them and they will become sources of knowledge.

The time for panelists was running out so Nyasha Mboti made a dramatic input about the fact that the colony is a fiction, a lie, but one that remains extremely destructive. Related to this, given the myths that are perpetuated by colonialists, "knowledge is an active production of ignorance". Vineet Thakur spoke last, with some sobering realities from the Indian context where the romanticisation of the precolonial past (despite patriarchy and the caste system) has prompted the nationalist government to exercise oppressive actions agains those who criticize it, charging one student with sedition. For him, "decolonialisation involves continuous critique, a dialectical engagement".

Student contributions were lively and rambunctious, including comments that white intellectuals can learn from black thinkers; intellectuals should be more practical and side with the workers (rather than pontificate?); 'if you are choking me you are too close and are suffocating me, you feel the violence of my decolonization'. 'Africanity can be pretentious' And many more. During the wrap up, Nelson shared the importance of being able to learn from others, from many knowledges. Tshepo reminded that we should not be too polarizing, and should listen to each other. Cheryl, from the chair, emphasized that we can talk, but we need to go forward. This was the first of a five panel series. It was very lively and thoughtful, one just hopes that the series maintains a momentum, and that all colleagues and students who attend, get to express themselves, so that at UJ we can have a

 genuine engagement - especially if we really do want to decolonize the curriculum, as this requires much sharing, much collaboration, and hopefully some risk taking.