Decolonisation of science:
a way backward
Emeritus
Prof. Tim Crowe
It is good
to see that people are discussing the “decolonization” of Science.
Sadly, the infamous
video clip they refer to does not constitute “discussion”. http://int.search.myway.com/search/video.jhtml?n=782b680d&p2=%5EY6%5Exdm010%5ES19139%5Eza&pg=video&pn=1&ptb=EFE19F51-3563-4ECE-83A7-9175081A7420&qs=&searchfor=decolonizing+science+video+clip+south+africa&si=CKWn3oi8lNACFZIaGwodVFIE_Q&ss=sub&st=tab&tpr=sbt&trs=wtt&vidOrd=1&vidId=C9SiRNibD14 It was a monologue packed with grossly
incorrect statements and extremely disturbing proposals, against which opposing
views were aggressively suppressed.
Enough said on that.
I am also
concerned that the goal of others is to find “a consensus view of what a decolonised science education means
to staff and students”. http://www.groundup.org.za/article/science-and-decolonisation-way-forward/ I would
prefer the term synergistic synthesis.
The word “consensus” reeks with the notion of compromise resulting in
mediocrity. But, before I go into
detail, I want to outline what many of those who favour the process of
decolonization clearly define it to be as it relates to academic staffing, curricula
and teaching methods.
What is
“decolonization”?
As far as I can determine (and please correct me), it is a
process that inter alia:
1. 1. dismisses
the validity of ideas based, not on merit determined by rational debate, but on
the ‘race’, gender, age, geographical origin and historical provenance of their
promoters;
2. 2, rejects
their comparison via unfettered debate because they have merely been reified
and have no ontological status;
3.
3. assumes
that there was a pre-colonial knowledge that was suppressed and can be
resurrected;
4. asserts
that there may also be new post-colonial knowledge/paradigms that can compete
(even out-compete) existing alternatives (‘colonial’ or otherwise); and
5. 4, questions
the notions of what constitutes knowledge, who should produce, teach it and be
taught - and how.
In the absence of 3 and 4,
decolonization is inherently locally socio-economico-politically selective,
potentially exclusionary and deconstructive, and requires ideological
expurgation and non-epistemic-based staffing attrition before there can be
reconstruction.
Under these circumstances, if it
fails to offer (to quote one UCT ‘decolonialist’ professor) something to “take
the university to a higher level” adjudged by respected international
reviewers, and (I would suggest) most of
South Africa’s currently unheard, un-consulted, “silenced” academics (and
students, fee-paying parents, alumni and donors), regardless of how they
“self-identify” would adamantly oppose such a process.
This is in sharp contrast to
UCT’s long-established policy of “adaptive transformation” that maintains that:
1. 1. the
potential validity of ideas should be based fundamentally on academic merit
determined by rational debate;
2. 2. the
primacy of potentially valid, opposing ideas be determined by further
unfettered comparison/rational-debate and scientific competition assessed using
internationally respected criteria and within peer-reviewed literature;
3. 3. pre-colonial
knowledge that was suppressed/ignored must be resurrected and debated on equal
footing;
4. 4. new
post-colonial knowledge/paradigms (regardless of the provenance) must also compete
with existing alternatives (‘colonial’, ‘Eurocentric’ or otherwise);
5. 5. knowledge
constitutes reasoned information uncircumscribed by the conditioning effects of
historical/socio-economic/political circumstances, and can be produced and
taught by anyone assessed by epistemic peers on merit.
Now to some specifics.
1. Yes, science should be taught in
its historical context; ethical considerations of both research and the
opportunities that new technologies offer need to be widely debated; and it is
important to demonstrate how their training in science can be applied in
careers outside of academia.
2. Yes, teaching and research should
focus on subjects that will
positively affect the majority of South Africans, or at least specifically
African questions. But I would
substitute focus with emphasize to minimize the danger
of excluding perfectly applicable ideas because they are non-African-sourced.
3. I don’t know what changing the
culture of universities and the demographics of the staff entails. If it means academic ‘cleansing’ under any
guise other that merit assessed using internationally accepted criteria, I
oppose it. If it means
hiring/firing/promoting people on any basis other than merit, I oppose it
adamantly. If a university adopts such a
new culture, it will retrogress from a being centre with delusions of grandeur
to becoming a collection of buildings populated by academics and students with
aspirations to mediocrity driven by the desire to ‘unoffend’.
4.
I agree that applied research can
be prioritized, but not to the exclusion of own-choice, curiosity-driven
research. I abhor the terms “basic/blue-skies”
and “ivory tower” research. But,
regardless of how it is characterized, poor research should not supplant
good-to-outstanding research assessed by epistemic peers. Self-praise is no praise.
5.
I don’t agree that the general
public is unaware of the content of university research outputs. These are
splattered all over the pages of the social media. It’s the researcher’s job to do communicate
her/his findings, emphasizing their Afrocentricity – I prefer Afro-relevance,
since it can be a key factor in obtaining employment.
6. Yes, “We can and should do more”
if only the unlawful actions of protesters were curtailed and ‘core’ academics
would buy into adaptive transformation.
If the current educational/research momentum is lost, it may never be
regained.
7. Those favouring decolonization
should reflect on the consequences of the Cultural Revolution in 1960-70s
China. If a similar movement happens in
South Africa, it probably won’t recover.
Just see what’s happened at many universities elsewhere in Africa.
8. There is only one viable
strategy: education should be taught at the highest international standard, so
that students trained in Africa can become international leaders in all fields.
Science is an international endeavour.
9. Yes, many students admitted to
South African universities have been educationally ‘disabled’ by a collapsed
Basic Educational System described by some as inferior to the vile Bantu
Education. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3679706.stm
For 30+ years, the University of Cape Town, for example, has ‘addressed’
this ‘handicap’ using various forms of academic support provided by academic
staff effectively outsourced from the ‘Core’ departments. This approach has failed many students who
form the legitimate core of the protesters.
But, in short, ‘core’ academics need to become ‘insourced’ into the
process, adapt (not-decolonize) curricula (making them job – especially school
teacher – relevant) and mentor students face-to-face and one-on-one from day 1
to graduation to ensure that they get the most special of degrees, a JOB.
The time is
over for the students to be ‘sinking or swimming’. If the academics don’t ‘stand and deliver’,
it will be them who sink.
No comments:
Post a Comment