Who drives academic
‘decolonization’ at the University of Cape Town (UCT), how and why?
Emeritus Prof. Tim Crowe
UCT is ranked 191 in the world, and 19th if the
search is restricted to BRICS countries.
However, it has dropped by 40 and 10 places respectively since the
‘rise’ of Fallism. Nevertheless, it’s
still number 1 in Africa. But, closest
rival, Stellenbosch
University (361st), has climbed by 31 places
since last year, and meteorically since the 1990s. Within UCT, ornithology has risen steadily,
and now ranks at 3rd
worldwide and 4th in African Studies. UCT researchers are still highly rated by
South Africa’s National Research Foundation, and attract considerable research
funds and publish innovative papers and books.
But, more than half or her A-rated researchers are emeritus professors
or 60+ years old, two-thirds of them are from the Faculties of Science and
Health Sciences, and A-ratings and published research ‘fruits’ are efforts
decades in the making.
So, with noteworthy exceptions, UCT is in overall academic decline as a
research university.
Despite this bad news, Fallists, the Black Academic Caucus
(BAC) and UCT’s Vice-Chancellor, DVCs and Executive Directors are determined to
pursue Fallists’ evidence-free demands for her further “decolonization”,
believing that it will reverse this trajectory.
They maintain that decolonization is also essential because UCT remains
institutionally racist and colonialist.
This is in sharp contrast to the recollections of past VCs Saunders and Ramphele, and my history: Was/Is UCT an institutionally
colonialist/sexist/racist institution?
(Parts 1 and 2 on my Blog Site timguineacrowe.blogspot.co.za). These scholarly publications
demonstrate that UCT became non-racial in principle from 1950 and, certainly
from +-1980, has striven to eliminate any vestiges of institutional (or
individual acts of) racism and dealt aggressively with alleged acts of colonialism
and sexism.
There is no documented, evidence-based Fallist history of UCT that
supports the persistence of racism and/or colonialism at UCT, institutional of
otherwise.
The one high-profile case of alleged racism in the public domain
involved a Sociology decolonist academic who accused colleagues of racism. His complaint was reviewed (with the approval
of all concerned) by DVC (and NRF-A-rated professor of law) Danie Visser. Visser dismissed the case, found that the
accuser had defamed the alleged racists and instructed him to apologize
publicly for this defamation.
He refused to comply.
Another recent racism ‘story’ at
UCT relates to the pioneer
Fallist and decolonist who “reprehensively”
defaced (without being held accountable) Rhodes’ statue with human excrement.
Subsequently, he was accused of psychologically and racially abusing
a woman lecturer. During the incident, he
is quoted saying: “it's time for all whites to go" and “whites
have to be killed". That case remains unresolved, and the lecturer
has had virtually no support from the UCT Management for more than a year. Still later, the same multi-amnestied Fallist
was accused of a assaulting
another woman (this time a ‘black’, lesbian
protester) and of arson during the Shackville
‘Protest’. For the latter, he was
effectively expelled. Yet, after being
once again ‘clemencied’ for this law-breaking, and allowed access to UCT via
the November
Agreement for non-violence, he violated that let-off a month later by invading
the AGM of the UCT Convocation and defaming a member of the Convocation. Most
recently, in August 2017 at the T.B.
Davie Memorial Lecture, he defamed VC Price saying: “Dr Price protects
white racists” (naming the alleged ones in Sociology) “who have not apologized
for questioning the actions of a ‘black’ professor” (naming the defamer). “Dr
Price has no courage, regard, wisdom and no vision to say to you I apologize
for this institutional racism. He is
morally bankrupt.”
Yet, this multi-lawbreaking,
multi-amnestied, unrepentant Fallist/decolonist whom VC Price has repeatedly ‘consoled’
and described as “outraged”
[rather than outrageous], apparently will re-register for his 10th
year as a UCT undergraduate student in 2018, despite failing many (most?) of
his courses.
Moving from lawbreaking and defamation back to decolonization, Fallists
and their supporters claim that “particular identities
and scholarly traditions and perspectives” - especially from Africa and the
global south - are marginalised and excluded at UCT within a static and
rigid academic climate that does not easily allow for alternative perspectives,
and is not responsive to society and public debate. Particular blame is focused on the cultural views of “collectively dominant Western ‘dead-white-men’” that are “lodged
at the heart of UCT’s curriculum and attempt to
perpetuate negative stereotypes in curricula and pedagogy”.
However, what is missing in Fallist statements is a
fact-filled, rational explication of what is “marginalized and excluded” and
documented evidence of resolute pursuit of an obstructive status quo. What arguments
they present refer to “subtle”,
nuanced, even “invisible” hegemonic Western influences and global thinking;
“internalised ‘white’ superiority”, “other exclusionary
practices”, “masked and cumulative and institutional racism”; and “also-invisible
culturally-linked, symbolic, structural, epistemological and psychological violence”. All of these ghost-like actions are
unsupported by documented evidence.
Nevertheless, Fallists and ‘decolonists’
claim that these invisible influences, violence et al. justify their overt
violence and other lawbreaking. They
claim to be alienated, and call for the creation of more opportunities to
expose students to alternative “ways of thinking” associated with disciplines
beyond their primary areas of specialisation.
But, once again, what are these “ways of thinking” and new “areas”?
Fallist
decolonists also call for the meaningful interrogation of these
subtle/invisible influences, and insist that all members of the university make
a commitment to participate in “winnable” debates within “safe spaces” to
enable change that addresses the challenges of transformation.
But, there are
such “spaces”: Jameson Hall, lecture theatres, seminar rooms, even the UCT
Club. Yet, when Fallists deem it
necessary, they disrupt sessions where such debate could occur. Just who amongst the UCT Community
uncompromisingly opposes change and refuses to participate in debate, other
than Fallists? Please provide a list of
names of ‘opposers’ and document this reticence.
In short, the academic decolonization
of UCT requires creating enabling environment that will promote debate, and
“critical reflection” on the politics of the production, application and
distribution of knowledge. This includes
what counts as academic excellence in teaching, learning and academic research
towards a socially responsive society.
Yet, until 2017, Fallists and their supporters failed to explain just
what the mean by “critical reflection”.
Reaction by the UCT Executive
Rather than
requiring faculties and departments to get their ‘decolonization acts together’
and giving them the authority and resources to do so, since the turn of the
millennium, a large, increasingly powerful, centralized management has taken
control of “transformation” leadership at UCT, at the expense of
academics. There is even a DVC post
created to facilitate the process. The
shift in academic power downhill to Bremner/Azania House is well-documented in
the “Moran Report” (available on page 4 of my Blog Site) commissioned in 2007
by VC Ndebele. The report strongly
recommended that academic authority, decision-making and accountability be
returned to faculties and departments, and UCT’s administrative sector revert
to its original role as a small, effective support structure that must
continuingly “justify its existence”.
These recommendations
were not implemented.
Rather than let
academics and students take the lead, the Price-led leadership created
commission after commission, committee after committee, working group after
working group and task team after task team, and ‘negotiated’ with unrepentant
law-breakers to determine UCT’s policies and how they are to be implemented.
Recent examples of
this ‘strategy’ relating to decolonization are Price and Price-Team’s creation
of the:
1. the Curriculum
Change Working Group (CCWG) to work with him and Prof. Loretta
Feris (DVC for Transformation) to facilitate
the engagement in decolonization by the “whole” UCT community, and
2. the Internal
Reconciliation and Transformation Commission Steering Committee
(IRTC-SC) set up according to the November
Agreement to deal with past, current and future
protest and chart UCT’s decolonization.
VC Price
even supported the release of one of the Shackville ‘expelees’ from jail so he
could negotiate and sign the Agreement. [He, like the faeces flinger, was
subsequently ‘clemencied’, but was later accused of breaking through the
door into the offices of the Campus Protection Services and of sexual harassment.]
After many
meetings over many months, the IRTC-SC has reached no consensus, let alone agreement, concerning what constitutes illegitimate protest
or how UCT’s management may deal with it.
There have been no discussions about what decolonization is, let alone
how to put it into effect. Currently, it
is in deadlock because of boycotts by representatives of pro-Fallist
“constituencies”.
Curriculum Change Working Group
By design, the
CCWG is led by black scholars (mostly from the Faculties of Humanities and Health
Sciences). CCWG members maintain that
the “notion of blackness in this context extends beyond simply a racial
category”. It embraces those who have a
particular consciousness around coloniality. According
to VC Price, the group has considerable experience, knowledge and expertise
related to the development of contextually and socially relevant curricula, and
are well versed in the use of inclusive approaches to teaching and learning.
CCWG members
developed a concept paper and terms of reference, collaborating closely with
faculty academic representatives, student representatives from faculty councils
and those academics and students “who wanted to get involved”. Price urged the CCWG to engage with Fallists
after it because there was deadlock between them and management.
The CCWG Terms of
Reference sets out
membership, reporting lines, accountability, timeframes and deliverables of the
working group. Its Preliminary
Conceptual Framework was
strongly influenced by student and staff protests of 2015. It was scheduled to complete a curriculum
change academic planning framework by October 2017. I have seen no such published “framework”.
CCWG members contributed to an article in The Conversation that purports to give a “clear and practical example” of the group’s work. This involved getting the Dean of Health Sciences to capitulate to Fallists’ demands when they occupied his offices, provided that they resumed attending classes.
The protesting Health Sciences students did not return to class.
Thereafter,
DVC Feris and the CCWG used a theoretical framework based “critical realism” (CR) to get to work.
The only
major Feris/CCWG decolonization effort to date was to recruit decolonist
mathematician Prof. C.K. Raju to epistemically challenge science in general at
UCT and “dogmatic” mathematical science in particular.
Raju’s actions at UCT had highly controversial consequences
to say the least, potentially disastrous ones at worse. For the ‘short story’ of the Raju ‘Affair’,
see the article in GroundUp. For the 100+-page ‘long story’, see the
three-part commentary “Decolonizing
Maths at UCT” in my Blog Site.
I deal with
CR in another piece.
No comments:
Post a Comment