Post-colonial educational reforms in Zimbabwe: A fake badge of decolonisation of the curriculum

Abstract

While educational debates on the decolonisation of education have gained momentum in Sub-Saharan Africa, little is known about the success and progress made thus far, leaving a critical gap in our understanding of the accomplishment of the decolonisation agenda and whether what has been reformed is of use. Using document analysis, the qualitative study used Zimbabwe as a case to explore the progress made in the decolonisation of the education system to address the needs of the local population. The findings reveal that post-colonial educational reforms in Zimbabwe remain cosmetic and without meaningful thrust to assist in the socio-economic development and success of the once underprivileged. The study concludes that post-colonial education in Zimbabwe and other African states despite more than four decades of reforming the education system, the plight of the ordinary graduate seems little improved. It recommends that post-colonial states in Africa must interrogate the central purpose of education, the intended audience, the way people learn, and the subject matter and how it should be organised and presented. The study contributes to the topical debate on the need to transform the African education systems and their curricula in response to the decolonialisation agenda in the Global South.

Introduction

While colonisers have used education to maintain control, the coming of political independence in the once colonised countries provided them with an opportune time to engage in transformation with a focus on access, equality and relevance. The issue of relevance also triggered a form of transformation called decolonisation of the education system. While educational debates on the decolonisation of education have gained momentum in Sub-Saharan Africa, little is known about the progress made so far and its ramifications on the lives of people intended to benefit from it, leaving a critical gap in our understanding of what has been done so far to decolonise the wholesome education system and whether what has been done is of use to the less privileged. We fill this gap by using Zimbabwe as a case to explore how the country has trekked the trajectory in decolonising education with the view to check the progress made thus far and whether that aligns with the intentions of the decolonisation of the curriculum. In the study, we crack the answer to the question: how far has Zimbabwe decolonised the education system to answer to the needs of the once dominated people?

By exploring the progress made in the decolonisation of education, the study will inform policy on what must be done should we desire the decolonisation of education to be meaningful to the local people. Premised on the findings, we will proffer suggestions to the once colonised countries on how best to delink from the Eurocentric hegemony and make education relevant to the local communities. We contribute to the topical debate on the need to transform the African education systems and their curricula in response to the decolonialisation agenda in the Global South. We use the case of Zimbabwe to check the success of educational reforms in Africa that are continually being refracted, mediated and reproduced. We acknowledge that much has been written about how best to deconstruct the inherited educational systems that were erected to maintain the colonial social order, foster neo-colonial dependency, promote elitism and inadequately prepare individuals for living successfully in their communities and a rapidly changing world (Kanu, 2007). To adequately put this study into context, we begin with the conceptualisation of decolonisation of the curriculum followed by an analysis of what was relevant to education by the colonialists, then move on to unpack the methods used to generate data and then present the findings and discussions. Thereafter, we motivate why the educational reforms were cosmetic and discuss the suggestions that can be roped in to make education relevant to the Africans in Africa leading lastly to the concluding remarks.

Literature review

Decolonisation of the curriculum

To glean insights on why educational reforms in post-colonial states in Southern Africa are still irrelevant, we employ the decolonial lens and make a case that the education system in Zimbabwe continues to navigate a colonial legacy within the context of global shifts and societal changes. According to Stein and Andreotti (2016: 370), decolonisation is an ‘umbrella term for diverse efforts to resist the distinct but intertwined process of colonisation and racialisation, to enact transformation and redress… and to create and keep alive modes of knowing, being and relating that these processes seek to eradicate’. Decolonisation of the curriculum is generally defined as a process whereby educational institutions that are dominated by foreign educational practices, as well as Eurocentric epistemologies in their existence, are dismantled to accommodate the disadvantaged and the once colonised groups in the Global South (Chimbunde and Moreeng, 2023a, 2023b; Cross and Govender, 2021; Faatar, 2018). As argued by Olivier (2021) that it is used to refer to the process of changing content and processes to situate the content within the Global South milieu whilst being critical of existing biases towards the West and Global North. Cross and Govender (2021) following Fataar (2018) call it a type of cognitive justice based on an overhaul of the Western knowledge canon and argue that decoloniality offers three curriculum knowledge claims. While the first claim is based on the centring of an all-inclusive ecology of knowledge approach, the second claim is centred on the productive recognition and restoration of the full dignity of subjugated peoples aimed at unearthing their full human potential. The third claim hinges on knowledge relevance and contextualisation wherein are the ideas that curriculum knowledge ought to make epistemological connections to the pieces of knowledge of people, their contextual life circumstances, indigenous knowledge systems, languages and ways of knowing (Cross and Govender, 2021). We use the third claim and argue that the decolonisation of educational reforms involves people who were previously marginalised under colonisation, choosing to embrace and recognise their own cultures, tell their histories, a study from books written by Africans, and run institutions based on values that are reflective of African culture, as opposed to Eurocentric models. In the same vein, Fanon (1967a, 1967b), one of the proponents of decolonisation theory, views decolonisation as a set of beliefs that favour community, indigenous life and epistemology. Within the context of this study, decolonisation is focused on the curriculum revisionist project in Zimbabwe. The decolonial lens will provide insights into whether Eurocentric epistemologies are still firmly entrenched in educational reforms made in Post-colonial Zimbabwe from 1980 to date. If found wanting, then we will beam the decolonial lens to direct how the country can call for the intellectual spaces to be decolonised in the African context.

Education during colonial times and its relevance

Several studies report that the provision of education to Africans in colonial states was a combined effort of Christian Missionaries and the Colonial government concerned (Bhurekeni, 2020; Mavhunga, 2006; Zvobgo, 1994). While the two institutions had different agendas, their goal was to extend Western influence in colonial states (Mungazi, 1991). As explicitly explained by Chimbi and Jita (2023), colonial administrators ensured that Africans became labourers for the growing colonial economy by offering them minimal practical education in agriculture, building, carpentry and domestic science while missionaries were eager to spread literacy that was instrumental in converting them to Christianity. That kind of divisive education system was mooted by the settlers themselves. For example, H. S. Keigwin, the head of the Department of African Education in colonial Zimbabwe from 1918 to 1926, was the principal architect and proponent of the educational programme for African children. His vision of a meaningful curriculum for Africans was that which prepared them to be effective servants to the European master (Zvobgo, 1994). The curriculum designed at that time was intended to instill in African children the qualities of industry, diligence, cleanliness and obedience. They were intended to be submissive citizens who did not question the status quo. Academic education, according to Keigwin, was unsuitable for Africans because that would create lazy Africans, ones he described as ‘educated vagabonds’ (Mavhunga, 2006; Native Affairs Department No. 1924 cited in Zvobgo, 1994: 17). No wonder why Rodney (1993: 380) described the colonial schooling system as an education for ‘subordination, exploitation, and the creation of mental confusion and the development of underdevelopment’.

As if they were not in the same community and environment as the African children, the education system for the European children was designed to make them effective future rulers (Rodney, 1993) because the curriculum was planned in such a way that it developed an elite European ruling class among the recipients; a class that looked down upon Africans and a class that was capable of exploiting the African to the fullest (Mavhunga, 2006). The education system was therefore meant to foster in European children wisdom to make them effective future rulers over Africans. Dorsey (1989) observes that the European and African education departments, while administered by a single Ministry of Education, nevertheless developed as separate and distinct systems. Conceived this way, the education policies that ensued from such motivation were segregation between Africans who were the ruled and Europeans who were the rulers, resulting in an inferior education system for the Africans alongside a carefully crafted curriculum that was meant to facilitate the achievement of the objectives of colonialism. In Keigwin’s words cited in Maravanyika (1990: 18):

If we do not intend to admit Blacks, be it now or by degrees to encroach on social equality, let us not put false ideas into their heads nor encourage them to foster hopes of equality.

Other than the works of H. S. Keigwin in the education systems were some Commissions that were set up to investigate the education of the Africans in colonial Zimbabwe. In 1951, the government established the Kerr Commission to give suggestions on African education that would aid policy decisions. The Commission’s recommendations resulted in a Five-Year Plan designed to foster tight collaboration between government and mission authorities. ¹ Thereafter, the Judges Commission was established in 1962 and recommended, among other things, a full primary education for all, regardless of race; a junior secondary course with an emphasis on vocational training, reflecting local employment opportunities; and a merger of the two educational systems, that is, bringing together the European and African divisions of education (Chimbi and Jita, 2023). However, the timing of these progressive ideas was unfortunate because a new government was brought in, which had its agenda. The result was that the curriculum in Black schools improved over the years to a watered-down liberal curriculum (Makura, 1978; Zvobgo, 1994). Notably, no major shifts were made concerning the kind of education offered either to the Africans or Europeans. Rather than equalising access and enhancing relevance for Africans, the commissions extended and solidified what was earlier started by H. S. Keigwin during his tenure in the education sector. For example, George Stark argued that the purpose of African education was to train Natives to live under tribal conditions as well as to enable them to work in European-controlled industries (Chimbi and Jita, 2023: 719). The Judges Education Commission of 1962 suggested the launch of an ecological curriculum where two streams of education at the secondary school level for African students were introduced. The first stream that was called F1 concentrated on teaching purely academic secondary school curriculum and prepared African students for white-collar jobs in colonial administration and education. The second stream (F2) targeted the teaching of basic practical subjects that prepared Africans as semi-skilled labourers and technicians but under white supervision in colonial urban industries, mines and towns (Chimbi and Jita, 2023)

Taken together, colonial education, whether for the altruistic purposes of the missionaries or the naked exploitative strategies of the colonial administration, was used to engineer the production of the minds and souls upon which to erect a new society in colonial Zimbabwe. As attested by Mavhunga (2006) the education policies that ensued from such motivation were segregatory between Africans who were the ruled and Europeans who were the rulers, resulting in an inferior education system for the Africans alongside a carefully crafted curriculum that was meant to facilitate the achievement of the objectives of colonialism. The achievement of that goal was through an African education that was designed to be of utilitarian value to the coloniser by training African children in industry and agriculture. As such, colonial administrators alleged that academic education made Africans haughty and unenthusiastic to manual labour (Mungazi, 1991; Zvobgo, 1994: 18). Another reason proffered by studies to justify the racially divided education system was that it was a ploy by the Europeans and their surrogates to control the economy without confronting any meaningful interferences and competition from the Africans (Bhurekeni, 2020; Gomba, 2018; Hoadley, 2018). We can conclude that the colonial education inherited by Zimbabwe was regarded as racist, individualistic, competitive, Eurocentric and capitalist-oriented, and thus, we argue that it must be reconstructed to serve the people of Africa (Chimbunde and Moreeng, 2023a). We contend that this education was relevant for the Europeans because it established and entrenched their political and economic interests though from an African perspective, it may be viewed as not being meaningful because it was, according to Rodney (1993), not an outgrowth of the values and needs of the people it sought to represent. Notwithstanding, we claim that the Europeans studied the African milieu and then crafted the curriculum to be used in that context for their betterment which explained their goal of why they came to settle in Africa. Taken this way, their education was thus relevant and worked for them. Under normal circumstances, education must grow out of the environment and the learning process must speak to the needs of society. That is what the Europeans did to design the education system that works for them and as such Africans must copy from them. It is against this backdrop that Africans too must study what is in their continent and make use of that to make their home-grown curriculum for the betterment of themselves, rather than to look for outsiders to assist them in the designing of the education system. Thus, the Africans will continue to cry foul once they import the education system from the Global North.

Methodology

We draw insights from the decolonisation lens to interrogate the nature of the deconstruction of the education system that has been implemented since 1980 when Zimbabwe became independent from British rule. The research adopted document analysis of policy documents, books, journal articles and institutional reports which proved useful because the data generated were unaffected by our influence (Morgan, 2022). This was pre-eminent in helping us to scrutinise what is contained documents with regards to efforts done to decolonise the curriculum. We searched the literature written in 1980 or after in different electronic databases, for instance, ERIC, Google Scholar, JSTOR and Science Direct, using the phrase ‘Post-colonial educational reforms in Zimbabwe’ as search words. More than 3000 journal articles appeared. However, we only retained 22 articles for thematic analysis based on whether the papers answered the focus of the paper. We screened by reading the abstracts. The documents were helpful as they were able to provide us with a means of tracking educational change and development in Zimbabwe. The various drafts of the educational reforms document were accessed, and we compared them to identify the changes and to get a clear picture of how Zimbabwe and its educational reforms fared over time. The employment of documents to generate data was beneficial because written documents are non-reactive data sources that could be read and reviewed several times, remaining unchanged by our bias and influence (Cohen et al., 2018). This improves the trustworthiness of the study, as findings can easily be replicated using the same documents (Creswell and Creswell, 2022). The fundamental procedures for coding proposed by Miles and Huberman (1994) were used to analyse the data generated. The data were analysed along with the themes that emerged from the inquiry in line with the demands of the research’s focus. The data were thus coded, categorised and thematised document by document and then cross-checked to reveal the major findings of the study (Denzin and Lincoln, 2018; Yin, 2018). The themes were able to elicit meaning, gain understanding and develop empirical knowledge of the extent to which decolonisation of education had progressed.

Findings and discussions

What then did Zimbabweans do to reform their education to suit them? The next section unpacks this question and presents the themed findings.

The reforms made in post-colonial Zimbabwe

Calls for decolonising education first emerged on the African continent in the context of decolonising struggles against colonial rule during the 1950s and 1960s (Faatar, 2018). It emerged from document analysis that the Zimbabwean electorate guided by the philosophy of socialism, embarked on educational reforms. Embarking on reforms with a focus on content and structure is consistent with the ideals of decolonisation as it proposes the dismantling of irrelevant education that undermines indigenous people. As supported by Du Plessis (2021) following Lopez and Rugano (2018), colonised history and knowledge must be disrupted in whatever space it is found. However, as good as the idea sounds, the herculean attempts to restructure the form, content and orientation of an inequitable education system inherited in 1980, remains the unfinished agenda because what we now have in Zimbabwe is the continuation of the old state in a new state or what Antonio Gramsci refers to as revolution-restoration (Dzvimbo, 1991). On the same wavelength, at the continental level, it is also reported that since the advent of political independence in African States as from the 1960s, much has been written about how best to facilitate nation-building in Africa after European colonisation (Kanu, 2007) but with little success. For example, using the Ghanaian perspective, Busia (1964) disapproved of colonial education in Ghana for taking students away from their lives and the needs of their community. While Mazrui (1978) criticised contemporary education in Africa for widening the rural-urban divide, Tedla (1995) labelled both colonial and post-colonial education as a catalyst that perpetuates cultural and intellectual servitude and the devaluation of traditional African cultures.

It was also evident that in Zimbabwe, several studies (Mavhunga, 2006; Mungazi, 1991; Siyakwazi, 1996; Zvobgo, 1994) bemoan the limitations of colonial education and blame it for churning out Africans deeply rooted in Western ideals, norms, values, beliefs and knowledge systems that alienated them from mainstream African ways of life. To address these limitations, Zimbabwe upon attainment of nationhood in 1980, embarked on a series of educational reforms. Soon after independence, the direction of government policy on education was captured in the Transitional National Development Plan Volume 2 document that articulated thus:

The government recognizes that education is a basic human right. It also recognizes that education is an investment in human capital that sustains and accelerates the rate of economic growth and socio-economic development. The challenge for educational development in Zimbabwe is not only one of redressing the educational qualitative and quantitative imbalances in the inherited system but also that of meeting the exceedingly large new demands with limited resources (Maravanyika, 1990: 34).

That underscored the importance of maintaining high educational standards while also broadening access to education for all that tallies with the decolonisation lens. As a result, the new Zimbabwean government prioritised the rehabilitation and reopening of learning institutions that were previously closed during the conflict for independence, encompassing almost a third of both primary and secondary schools in rural areas, with many students and teachers displaced (Dorsey, 1989). The second objective was to expand the provision of education at all levels, notably secondary school, to correct the great imbalance and inequality left over from the time of colonialism. Such reforms corroborate with the tenets of decolonisation as it is a response to the need to embrace social justice that has been dented by colonisation.

Within 5 years of independence, Zimbabwe shifted its focus from an academic-oriented education to a hands-on approach driven by scientific socialism ² which was adopted after the attainment of nationhood. As articulated by then the Minister of Education in 1985:

The curriculum in our education system should be seen and considered as a vehicle towards the establishment of a socialist society. It should have a marked emphasis on scientific and technological content to promote productivity in which society can benefit. This kind of curriculum would be achieved through the philosophy of Education with Production (Maravanyika, 1990: 18).

The philosophy of Education with Production meant that all academic subjects were to have a practical application and must be used to solve real-life problems faced by people in trying to improve their environment and their standard and quality of life. While marrying theory and practice was a noble idea with a novel intention, it was, however, fraught with challenges that emanated from that most of the teachers did not understand the philosophy of Education with Production as envisioned by the policymakers. Instead, they perceived it as producing vegetables and breeding rabbits and chickens in schools, and activities connected with vocationalism, which Africans had long rejected throughout the time of colonial rule (Maravanyika, 1990).

Then the early 1990s to mid-2000s in Zimbabwe marked a shift from reforms that were mainly planning and efficiency reforms to a more focused approach to ensuring educational quality and relevance (Ndawi and Maravanyika, 2011). The focus was on revising the approaches to content, technologies, teaching methodologies, skills provision and employment-related skills, which culminated in the introduction of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and the Education 5.0 policy (MoPSE, 2015). The need for such an education system gained momentum when unemployment became a national problem, as reflected in speeches by political leaders, with Robert Gabriel Mugabe, the then president of Zimbabwe, in 2013 noting the need to transform the structure and curriculum of the education system of the country to adequately meet evolving national development aspirations (MoPSE, 2015). Emphasis was then placed on the teaching and learning of science, technology engineering and mathematics, including prioritising youth empowerment and entrepreneurship development. Based on this reasoning, Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education set out major changes that required students to get their hands dirty and lay a solid foundation of professional skills that will enable them to grow businesses and contribute to socio-economic transformation. This challenged old narratives that education was responsible for developing strong content knowledge at the expense of critical skills and competencies. Murwira (2019) argues that Zimbabwe has redesigned university education to have five missions, namely, teaching, research, community service, innovation and industrialisation to improve the education system. In support, Mudondo (2020) posits that educational institutions have been called upon to redesign curricula that promote the production of goods and services anchored on the modernisation and industrialisation of the country. Were these reforms in line with what we have in Zimbabwe? Why is it that unemployment and poverty are on the increase then? Why are the educated people leaving the country? What is wrong with the curriculum then? We contend then that the reforms made were cosmetic and did not answer the needs of the Zimbabwean community. We argue that the school curricula in Zimbabwe have remained largely irrelevant to the needs of indigenous people and that explains why most people in that country are walloping in abject poverty.

The fake badge of decolonisation

It was a finding of this study that the school curricula in post-colonial Zimbabwe, despite tinkering with the curriculum, have remained largely irrelevant to the needs of indigenous people and are thus a fake badge of decolonisation and deconstruction of the curriculum. This is because their schools import education systems from abroad. That is not only a finding in Zimbabwe but extends to other African countries such as Botswana, Zambia and South Africa (Sibanda and Young, 2019). As argued by Laakso and Adu (2023) following Hountondji (1995) and Eisner (2004) that in the quest for world recognition, African schools orient to the sources, theories and methodologies of their former colonisers and turn away from African problems. For example, some degree programmes in Zimbabwe such as Art History, Politics and Public Administration and Local Governance continue to be taught as inherited disciplines, despite debates about their unsuitability to societal realities on the ground (Sunday News, 2019). These degree programmes churn out job seekers rather than entrepreneurs which is what Zimbabwe needs. In concurrence, while Govender and Naidoo (2023) argue that the humanity of the colonised, particularly black people, is doubted and pushed aside, Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2013: 10) claim that it is ‘saddled with irrelevant knowledge that disempowers rather than empowers individuals and communities.’ For example, in the South African context, an obvious curriculum problem in schools is reported by Suarez-Krabbe (2017: 62) as the over-determination and over-representation of ‘whiteness’ in which black voices are deafened. A recent study by Govender and Naidoo (2023) reveals that while scholars and academics in South Africa have participated in decolonisation debates, the implementation of the decolonisation curriculum project in the Global South remains in its infancy because little has changed in curriculum policy and practice, despite such efforts. Another example is from Gyamera and Burke’s (2018) whose review of university curricula in Ghana criticised the vocational approach that puts more weight on job markets than independent thinking. We argue in consistency with Laakso and Adu (2023) that the prevailing hegemonic structures of global academia and the subordinate position of African schools in it are evident in the tensions between differing demands of relevance and excellence. We conclude that the state of education in Zimbabwe is against what Zimbabweans, before colonisation, practiced because according to Woolman (2001), education took place in the context of family, community, clan, and cultural group and emphasises learning by doing based on the needs of the community and was transmitted through observation, imitation and participation. While we are not calling to a total return to this kind of education and its pedagogy, we argue for the solidification of its potency in its relevance in addressing community needs. The approach currently in use is limited in that some of its pedagogies continue limiting students to actively participate in the construction of knowledge that is useful in their locale. Rather, the approach is problematic because the education is detached from the society in which it should serve and rote learning is still evident in areas such as humanities and social sciences (Chimbunde and Moreeng, 2023b). That mismatch between education and societal needs defeats the purpose of education and training that must be in sync with the perceived needs for national socio-economic development.

The decolonisation process in Zimbabwe began soon after political independence in 1980, when several reforms were made to negate the impacts of colonial education. For instance, Religious Education in Zimbabwe has undergone numerous phases and modifications from 1980 as attested by the ever changing titles of the subject from Christian Education to Bible Knowledge, then to Religious and Moral Education and to now Family, Religion and Moral Education. However, the teaching and learning of Religious Education has largely remained Eurocentric and Christ-centric irrespective of the diversity of the inhabitants of Zimbabwe (Museka, 2012). This suggests that Religious Education pedagogy is perpetuating Eurocentric and Christian values at the expense of other values, including the indigenous ones which must be dismantled. The same applies to the history curriculum that underwent several reforms since independence. As was the case in colonialism history as an inquiry has been sacrificed on the altar of political expediency in a post-colonial dispensation (Sibanda and Young, 2019). Furthermore, students continue to learn European History together with African History, which shows little progress on decolonisation of the curriculum. Rather, the history curriculum is still dominated by Western content (Dube and Moyo, 2023; Moyo, 2014) rather than being Africanised, localised and glocalised considering that there are more than four decades after attainment of political independence. Moyo (2014) cited in Sibanda and Young (2019) indicates that the content of history in Zimbabwe since independence excludes the history of other social groups, and hence, the content is still Eurocentric and far removed from the students’ context and reality. In addition, the education system in Zimbabwe is still examination focused like was the case when Zimbabwe was a colony of Britain wherein colonial assessment placed greater emphasis on public examinations as a means to select students to the next level in the educational ladder (Sibanda and Young, 2019). While the current examinations has been localised, which a remarkable stride towards decolonisation, it is has been fraught with security issues as leakages of question papers is now incessant unlike what the Cambridge Examination that were kept safe. We contend that post-colonial curricula in Zimbabwe are still haunted by vestiges of colonialism (Shizha, 2013). Mavhunga (2006) asserts that curriculum reforms merely tinkered with the colonial curricula and left colonial fundamentals intact. Put differently, what is taught; how it is taught and assessed; classroom climate and organisation; as well as teachers’ beliefs and attitudes remain as they were during colonialism.

This study contends that curricula in Zimbabwe remain irrelevant. Indeed, though worrying, post-colonial education in Zimbabwe and other African states despite more than four decades of rapidly reforming the education system, the plight of the ordinary graduate seems little improved. Challenges in the country are more than solutions wherein absolute poverty is chronic and pervasive. The economic disparities between the rich and the poor widen with each passing year. Unemployment and underemployment have reached staggering proportions, with the educated increasingly swelling the ranks of the unemployed. What then is wrong with education systems in Africa in general, why do we have educated but poor citizens? Undeniably, we need to reconfigure the education system to spearhead development and reduce poverty.

We argue that Zimbabwe is in this mess because what we call educational reforms is following the Eurocentric approach, for example, Higher Education in Zimbabwe resembles the blueprint envisaged by the Western countries. As observed by Thondhlana and Garwe (2021), the term ‘universities in Africa’ refers to a situation whereby the curriculum these universities follow imitates with a high degree of exactitude Western universities’ academic curricula objectives, content, assessment approaches and learning materials. So, what is done in universities in Zimbabwe mimics what European universities are doing, which is in dissonance with what Zimbabweans’ challenges, needs and aspirations. This then is a fake badge of decolonisation because the processes of national development after the attainment of political independence in Zimbabwe must be centred on what Hwami (2016) calls the phenomenon of decolonisation. An instance which show that the reforms are fake badge of decolonisation include the failure of the country to decolonise the use of the English Language as medium of instructions in schools and universities, despite acknowledging that Zimbabweans have 16 official languages at their disposal (Chimbunde and Kgari-Masondo, 2023). Rather than using the local languages as medium of instruction throughout all levels of education, the use of indigenous language is confined to the first 5 years of education in Zimbabwe. Other than that, for a student to be considered to have passed Ordinary Level for entry into tertiary education in Zimbabwe; one has to pass English among other subjects. This position was inherited from the colonial system (Sibanda and Young, 2019). In view of such situations, Fanon warned against mimicking Europeans, and he wrote: ‘Let us decide not to imitate Europe, let us combine our muscles and our brains in a new direction’ (1967: 236) for the betterment of ourselves. If we continue to import their educational reforms, then can we safely conclude that Zimbabweans do not trust their education systems? Failure to come up with strong African policies in education might be traced to the lack of knowledge and will by those in control. If the importation of educational reforms continues unabated in Zimbabwe, then graduates from Zimbabwe will continue to be the fodder for the cheap labour market in industries of the capitalists.

We advance the argument that most of the African elites who fought for independence were educated in the West and believed in the education system introduced by the colonisers and thus modified it but kept the structure and content as it were (Abraham, 2020). That suggests the lack of willingness by the African elites to partake in educational reforms that could challenge their status quo because they had assumed the positions left by their colonisers. Considering this, we contend that educational policymaking in Zimbabwe since the colonial era has always been historically dominated by a small white minority and now it is dominated by educated African elites who top the echelons of the policymakers. Seen this way, education is still being used to reproduce the hegemony of dominant groups in Zimbabwean society. As such, whatever is regarded as decolonisation of the education system as articulated at the 2011 Malaysia conference, the 2014 demonstrations at the University College of London and the subsequent 2015 #Rhodes Must Fall movement in South Africa is thus a façade and a fake badge in the education systems in Zimbabwe. All the above-cited student movements challenged the European hegemony in the education system and ushered in not only new thinking in curriculum reforms but also ignited the decolonisation project, which demands a transformed, relevant, Africanised and decolonised curriculum. Seen this way, decolonisation of education means a reversal of the white curriculum reforms which consist of white ideas written by white authors and are the result of colonialism that had normalised whiteness and made blackness invisible (Charles, 2019). For complete decolonisation of the education reforms, the curriculum must be synchronised with what local people cherish and must be endowed with African ideas propelled by African epistemic legitimacy rather than clinging to the Western hegemony that is currently inherent in African knowledge and education systems.

The way forward

We contend that school curricula in post-colonial Zimbabwe have remained mainly irrelevant to indigenous peoples’ demands. For example, Du Plessis (2021) reports that Eurocentric epistemologies are still firmly entrenched in South African education institutions because many of the structural elements of the education system have remained unchanged. These effects of colonisation on post-colonial states’ education system are still seen in the prevalence of centralisation, standardisation and a system that perpetuates Africa’s existing class structure and access to quality education (Lopez and Rugano, 2018). Despite tweaking programmes following political independence in the guise of educational reforms, the basics appear to have remained intact in Zimbabwe. Several authors claim that the current crisis in education reforms stems from various reasons. For example, to explain the crisis, Zvobgo (1999: xi) wrote:

Western models of education were imported by the new states in the belief that they only had to Westernise their education systems to modernise their societies and so become industrialised and rich.

To further clarify the sources of the crisis, Siyakwazi (1996: 15) argues that:

The problem of the African school system is that it originated in a European environment that was alien to the African people and divorced from African daily life and in this way failed to prepare the African youth for life within an African environment.

It is not our intention to contribute further to the discussion of how the weight of importing the education system continues to be problematic for the African education system. Rather, we take that as our point of departure. To ameliorate the crisis, Mavhunga (2006) calls for the Africanisation of the school curriculum, which to him means making the curriculum meet the needs, interests and aspirations of the African people as determined by the Africans themselves. While his examples of Africanising the curriculum are relevant, we argue that we need to go beyond this claim as leaving it at that stage is inadequate. In and of itself, the heavy weight must be on answering the question: ‘What fundamental knowledge is of most worth’? The question is succinctly answered by Lawton (1975) who argues that any curriculum that is deemed relevant should essentially be based on a selection from a people’s culture, certain aspects of their way of life, certain kinds of knowledge, certain attitudes and values. What we see in the Education systems in Africa is divorced from our context and that explains why educated people in Africa are poor. They know quite well the geography of their countries and the resources within but do not know how to exploit them like what the settlers did when they came. For example, while the greatest motivation for missionaries in providing Africans with education was to facilitate the conversion of Africans from their pagan beliefs to Christianity, that of the colonialists was basically to subjugate, control and exploit the Africans (Chimbi and Jita, 2023; Mavhunga, 2006; Zvobgo, 1994). To fulfil that motivation, education policies were guided by the need to preserve White interests against the possible Black competition in controlling the economy, the politics of the country and its administration. Thus, in broad terms, African school curricula were designed to provide labour for low-level rural employment such as teaching, nursing and joining the police force. Africans who found work in cities worked as clerks and messengers, as well as partially skilled and low-skilled labourers. Post-colonial states must decolonise that approach by imparting relevant knowledge, skills and attitudes by developing conceptual and logical competencies and broadening the mental horizons of its people that are in line and commensurate with the dictates of the local communities from which they belong.

Using Zimbabwe as an example, what might we call relevant curriculum to be learned in schools that are sensitive to the Zimbabwean context? To answer this, we contend that we must first study what is in Zimbabwe before prescribing what should be taught and learned in this country. We need to unpack the country’s resources and then figure out how residents can use them for their use. The subjects taught must be related to the country’s natural resources. What did Zimbabwe have at the time of its independence in 1980? According to Mlambo (2017), Mugabe inherited a vibrant and diverse economy that was supported by three important economic pillars: agriculture, mining and manufacturing. This indicates that educational reforms must revolve and focus on the viability of these three entities. Accordingly, and since Zimbabwe is an agro-economy nation that is primarily reliant on agriculture, its curriculum must be both biased and based on agriculture. Thus, rather than having several universities that look like those in Europe, we need universities that specialise in agriculture. While Zimbabwe is rich in minerals such as gold, diamonds, nickel, platinum and lithium, mining studies are deferred until one reaches university. Considering this, learners must therefore be guided through the mining process from elementary school to university. Additionally, Zimbabwe is rich in fauna and flora that represent the natural heritage. As such, the curriculum in Zimbabwe must be crafted with these issues in mind since it is indispensable for post-colonial education systems to embrace heritage education because heritage knowledge and practices form part of African people’s lives. This is because heritage education can develop a sense of ownership, identity, and responsibility in communities and consequently ought to be perceived as fundamental to people. Zimbabwe is a landlocked country with large chunks of both arable and non-arable land which can be put into use by practising crop farming and animal husbandry, respectively. Given such a blessing, the curriculum must therefore be centred on agriculture which must be taught at all levels. Perhaps this can be a compulsory subject rather than making history a compulsory subject which is not key to the socio-economic development of the country but has been wrongly used for political socialisation (Moyo, 2014) by glorifying the ruling elite. Additionally, Zimbabwe is blessed with sunshine throughout the year. So rather than depending on hydro-electricity and thermal power, the country must make use of the sunshine to provide energy to the industries. As such, the curriculum should also focus on issues that assist in the tapping of these natural resources such as solar energy.

We argue Zimbabwe and other countries in similar contexts must contextualise their education system rather than imitating and importing educational programmes from abroad. The essence of any education programme in a country is to constantly serve the community where it is implemented and if not then we must question its rationale. Post-colonial states in Africa must therefore interrogate the central purpose of education, the intended audience, the way people learn and the subject matter and how it should be organised and presented. The books must talk to citizens of Africa which reminds them of their situations. That claim is not new, for example, Diop (1974) cited by Abraham (2020) observes that the Egyptian civilisation developed from local education systems and enabled Egyptians to develop alphabets, complex symbolic systems, building skills and religious rituals. That is supported by great engineering skills which were used to build the pyramids and other buildings of their time from local experiences, knowledge and education systems that existed before the arrival of the European colonisers. As Mudimbe (1985: 206) asserted that academics need to establish themselves and their societies ‘as “subjects” of their destiny’ as well as to reinvent their past and envision their future. We therefore need to dare recast, redefine and revise the very notions of educational reform and its application to establish a solid platform for meaningful change in our communities.

Conclusions

Based on the arguments alluded to above, we conclude that Zimbabwe was driven by the demands of the electorate and was guided by the philosophy of socialism in the immediate 1980s to embark on educational reforms. However, brilliant as the idea may have appeared, the herculean attempts to restructure the form, content and orientation of an irrelevant education system inherited in 1980 remain the unfinished agenda. The study uses the case of Zimbabwe to question why educational reforms in Africa are continually being refracted, mediated and reproduced but remain inappropriate, despite that much has been written about how best to deconstruct the educational systems. We advance the argument that decolonisation of the curriculum in Zimbabwe, just like in any other African country, remains cosmetic and without meaningful thrust to assist in the socio-economic development and success of the once colonised. The key point is that invaluable aspects embedded in colonial education must be dismantled, then synchronised and endowed with African ideas propelled by Africans’ desire for self-discovery, recognition and global scholarly affirmation of Africa rather than clinging to the Western hegemony inherent in African education systems.

We contend that post-nationhood reforms in most African countries, including Zimbabwe; fall short as they are European copycats and thus lack relevance because the African elite has modelled education in Africa after educational institutions in Europe and North America, with little attempt at domestication. While the educational policies evolved, adapted and were adjusted overall, there was a sense of movement in one direction as had been set by the colonisers. If post-colonial governments are to profit from education, the reforms must be relevant and audacious enough to equip graduates to contribute to sustainable development, national building and economic development. Educational changes intended for countries must be aimed at improving the community, society and nation. If education is anticipated to benefit members of society, it must be designed accordingly. The desire to import education systems from Eurocentric models is an indication of national weakness that must be addressed. Often, the imported education system is incompatible with the requirements and demands of the communities in which such curriculum is implemented. When deciding on the content of educational reforms, it is critical to contextualise the curriculum so that it speaks to the needs of the community as well as national interests. The context determines what must be reformed in the education system for the betterment of society. This echoes the findings of McLaughlin and Ruby (2021), in a cross-national study of education reforms in seven nations, that context mattered. We argue that educational reforms require a detailed analysis of the context in which the practice is being implemented. Those working with governments on educational reforms must ensure that such reforms are undertaken in a way that is congruent with the realities of the needs of the communities and does so with the interests and concerns of Africans as a guiding principle.