eLearning in an African Place: How ‘Alien’ eLearning Models Are Failing Many in Africa

Chapter (PDF Available) · April 2019with 210 Reads 
How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-19115-3_35
In book: Molecular Logic and Computational Synthetic Biology, pp.421-432
Cite this publication
This paper discusses eLearning in contemporary times in an African place. While the paper acknowledges the importance of eLearning in that it facilitates distance learners’ activities and bridges geographical gaps across the world, it notes that in convoluted environments such as those of Africa, eLearning raises a lot of critical questions, some of which are cultural, and others are ethical and epistemological. This ambiguity emerges largely because eLearning, as it is understood in Africa, comes in foreign packages. The paper argues for the decolonisation of eLearning – that external practices of eLearning, particularly those ‘imposed’ on Africa from Europe and North America, fail many environments in Africa. This failing is because such practices rubberstamp the long-criticised philosophy of one-size-fits-all which has been blamed for impoverishing Africa besides underestimating the potential contribution of the African continent to the global world. On this note, the paper concludes that unless we decolonise eLearning and consider the issues of sensitivity, inclusivity, and attainability, eLearning will not be palatable or at least beneficial for most in Africa.
eLearning in an African Place: How
alieneLearning Models are Failing Many in Africa
Munyaradzi Mawere1 and Gertjan van Stam2
1 Great Zimbabwe University, Masvingo, Zimbabwe
2 Macha Works, Zambia
corresponding author: gertjan@vanstam
Abstract. This paper discusses eLearning in contemporary times in an African
place. While the paper acknowledges the importance of eLearning in that it facil-
itates distance learnersactivities and bridges geographical gaps across the world,
it notes that in convoluted environments such as those of Africa, eLearning raises
a lot of critical questions, some of which are cultural, and others are ethical and
epistemological. This ambiguity emerges largely because eLearning, as it is un-
derstood in Africa, comes in foreign packages. The paper argues for the decolo-
nisation of eLearning that external practices of eLearning, particularly those
‘imposed’ on Africa from Europe and North America, fail many environments in
Africa. This failing is because such practices rubberstamp the long-criticised phi-
losophy of one-size-fits-all which has been blamed for impoverishing Africa be-
sides underestimating the potential contribution of the African continent to the
global world. On this note, the paper concludes that unless we decolonise eLearn-
ing and consider the issues of sensitivity, inclusivity, and attainability, eLearning
will not be palatable or at least beneficial for most in Africa.
Keywords: eLearning, Africa
1 eLearning in an African place
The received practices and theories of eLearning, mostly from the USA and Europe,
may represent internationally accepted good practice yet they also embed deep politi-
cal, epistemological, and cultural assumptions that may be incongruent with the cultural
knowledge of users in many communities in Africa. Generally speaking, eLearning is
learning that uses electronic technologies/media such as the internet, intranets and ex-
tranets [1], also referred to as educational technology. Typically, this learning takes
place outside of a traditional classroom, for example, online, or blended and somehow
informal as was the case in African education systems before colonialism. While this
kind of learning seems worthwhile as it facilitates distance learning, provides conven-
ience, and tries to bridge geographical gaps, in an African context, eLearning raises
many questions some of which are cultural, and others are ethical and epistemological.
The first question that [African] critical minds engage with as soon as they receive
eLearning guidance from outside is: who designed the eLearning model and for what
reason? Given the exclusion of Africa in the designing of most contemporary dominant
eLearning applications, from a cultural and political perspective, this overture could be
interpreted as cultural imperialism as just like what colonialism did to Africa. In this
manner, a theory can impose cultural ethos of Europe and the Americas on Africa. The
question that remains perturbing is where Africa in this whole eLearning discourse and
model designing is? The second question is to what extent does e-Learning speak to the
cultural and ethical concerns of Africa? This question, as is the issues raised above, is
critical because any learning carries with it cultural and moral sensibilities of a people.
Now, if Africa is excluded as was the case during the 1884-5 Berlin Conference when
the continent was partitioned in the absence of African representatives, isn't it that im-
position of eLearning on Africa tantamounts to a recolonisation of Africa? Putting it
more precisely, why are most Africans remain unrepresented in the designing of theo-
retical and practical models that affect them directly or otherwise? The third critical
question pertains to affordability where most African rural areas are without electric-
ity and internet connection. Is eLearning useful and practical to people living in such
areas? This issue points to the fact that the imported theories of eLearning are not only
culturally problematic but also morally, politically and epistemically problematic. Of
course, there is a wide variety of proposed theories and practical approaches. They de-
pend on how one approaches learning, but as noted earlier, many as they are, little
comes from African perspectives.
2 Methodology
The authors of this paper are academics with decennia of experience in African insti-
tutes of higher education in Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
Through living research [2], they study how communities (of belonging, as will be
shown in this paper) engage, review cultural heritage and contemporary cultural prac-
tices and paradigm switching and shifting in sectors which include, among others, ed-
ucation, health, and digital technology.
For this paper, the authors researched technology and African communities from an
African positionality, embedded in institutes of higher education, supporting institutes
in health, and rural communities. The authors tested these insights in e/merge 2018, an
online festival of e-learning in Africa, 9-20 July 2018.
3 Discordances of eLearning with African cultural expressions
Kwame Nkrumah [3], an influential philosopher and political leader, provided an intel-
lectual framework on social conscience founded in the African values of communal
solidarity in his book consciencism. Paulo Freire (2000), the author of the widely read,
Pedagogy of the Oppressed, documented his participatory practice from culture circles
in North-eastern Brazil in the 1960s. However, it seems, contemporary, imported
eLearning models are entirely ignorant of the various epistemai in the world.
It is necessary to pinpoint that half of the world is not connected to the Internet and
that in Africa, less than a quarter of the population is using the Internet [4]. When as-
sessing eLearning theories and practices in Africa, they need deconstruction and recon-
struction as to review how they fit with features that are salient in African locales, at
least, those that have existed over a substantial amount of time. There is identity
grounding of African cultural properties that existed long while been recurrent in many
African places in a way they have tended not to be elsewhere [5]. Although there are
many and convoluted realities present in the pluriform African realities, from an as-
sessment of the kind of African properties Thaddeus Metz [5] alludes to, we identify
three main areas of discordance. These are paradigmatic, concern the channel, and deal
with platforms and practices.
3.1 Paradigmatic discordance
eLearning theories rely on the epistemic grounding of the researcher and those who are
being researched. It reflects the learning-perspectives adopted, mostly categorised as
associationist/empiricist, cognitive, or situated [6]. These perspectives, however, are
also located. Subsequently, the models and technologies that come out of them are el-
ements of a system of behaviour. Through models and technologies, they pass from one
person to another. Therefore, eLearning models and technologies represent memes.
Contemporary theories, mostly originating from outside of Africa, are said to be un-
dergirding ‘internationally accepted good practice’. Cognisant of the multi-epistemic
world, in the complex African environment and a multi-epistemic world, one must
question from which paradigm such claims of ‘good practice’ have been generated.
Have Africans been widely involved, and have African communities been part of the
process of research, validation, development, implementation and assessment? There-
fore, on which grounds is the claim of ‘internationally accepted’ being made?
Most conventional eLearning examples put the human learner in the centre. In such
an approach, invariably the learner is set as a persona in a cultural setting that aligns
with a postmodern Western urban culture that wishes to be free, with the individual
being self-sufficient and self-centred. African cultures, however, put the community as
the centrepiece of their worldview [7] unaligned with normative epistemologies but
featuring dynamic, integrative epistemology [8]. African frameworks of how societies
or nature works regard the individual to belong to a layering of communities, being an
intrinsically and always connected part of such communities [9].
So far, we are not aware of eLearning that put ‘the community’ at the centre. Of
course, in contemporary learning, there is ample recognition that education is a social
activity and learning approaches based upon constructivism appear to align with life in
communities, but they do not do so at the paradigmatic level. The individual learner is
solidly posed at the centre. eLearning and its contemporary practices that come from a
paradigm reasoning from a personal self in an atomistic universe, culminated in indi-
vidualism, clash with the cultural knowledge of African students across African educa-
tion [10]. African paradigms view reality from social personhood, in a universe of co-
herence, focusing on social cohesion and collective unity, culminating in communal-
ism, social bonding, balancing of duties and rights, and reciprocity. It is, therefore, not
strange that there appears little uptake of eLearning in African institutes [11].
In many parts of Africa, learning focuses on how the community learns, and from
such learning, how community members gain understanding [12]. The concept of ‘com-
munity of practiceand learning approaches based upon constructivism do not ade-
quately cover this kind of meaning-making, because they focus on the individual first
and upon their relationships in a community second. In many African cultural expres-
sions, the concept of the collective surpasses the individual. These expressions pre-date
the concepts of communities of practice. In many parts of Africa, an approach putting
the individual as the central focus of attention is not seen as aligned with local cultures
but pushing learners towards self-cultivation, individualism and, ultimately, assimila-
tion with foreign ways of thinking. In that sense, eLearning facilitates alien ways of
meaning-making and links to gaining a different way of living, e.g. set in capitalism.
3.2 Channel discordance
At present, eLearning is mostly proposed from ‘the West’ and aligns with the think-
ing/paradigm that created the information and communication channels (for instance,
the internet) and tools (for instance mobile devices) that dominate in the global society.
These models are complementary to, and intertwine with, broadband internet network-
ing. eLearning platforms and services bank upon the ubiquitous use of computing de-
vices and digital platforms, a setting that Dourish and Mainwaring [13] show to be
inherently colonial. The apparent positioning of the use of internet telecommunications
channels and (imported) computing devices as the preferred channels for eLearning is,
therefore, quite problematic. This discordance can be explained as an analogy to the
differences between narrowcasting and broadcasting. In line with the paradigmatic cen-
trality of the individual, the current channels for eLearning link in with narrowcasting
[14]. A community-centred paradigm, however, would need channels that would map
with broadcasting. In the African society, one’s membership of the community is not
the result of one’s ‘own choice’, but memberships are set by, for instance, one’s birthing
into a family and introductions into groupings of people in a geographical area. In the
Shona language, this is signified by the reference to ‘kumusha’ as this touches upon
issues of identity. Although constructivism regards learning as behaviour, learning as
the construction of knowledge and meaning, and learning as social practice, the channel
of Eurocentric Information and Communication Technologies is forcing its users into
individualistic framings as the technology is geared towards establishing channels with
and to the individual but does not do so for the community and with the community.
For instance, there is a significant difference in using the means of the Internet on mo-
bile devices or the use of ICT in the form of radio and call-in programs.
3.3 Platforms and Practices
Western knowledge systems are structured along disciplinary boundaries, while Afri-
can knowledge is embodied in a transdisciplinary community, geared towards orality
[12, 15]. Therefore, eLearning can only work well when the disciplines become un-
disciplined, ensuring conviviality, intellectual freedom and generative symbiosis, in
line with Ubuntu principles [16]. No wonder that the paradigm mismatch and channel
mismatch have stalled eLearning praxis to be ‘more of the same’ in Africa. This situa-
tion calls for decolonisation of science and indeed the African academy [17] and mov-
ing the centre of conceptualisations near the community of users [18].
Current eLearning models and practices facilitate the belief in technology determi-
nation, as if the availability of computing devices and other tools and eLearning plat-
forms will, by their sheer availability, lead to learning outcomes [19]. However, when
underlying technologies do not necessarily align with technical, organisational and ped-
agogical systems that are current in African communities, such techniques are catering
for foreign agendas, in their wake disrupting systems of knowing that have been work-
ing well. Thus, contemporary eLearning models and practices are discordant with Af-
rican cultural expressions, because
the paradigm mismatch negates necessities of belonging
the channel mismatch negates the issue of identity
the platforms and methods align with (digital) imperialism.
4 African considerations influencing eLearning
From our long-time experience in higher education and research, we noted three aspects
of African culture that set boundaries for eLearning. These are 1) sensitivity, 2) inclu-
sivity, and 3) attainability.
4.1 Sensitivity
Learning in an African environment is intertwined with content for specific groups and
life-periods, where information transfer depending on time, place, and authority. There
are great sensitivities where particular pieces of knowledge and values reside. Infor-
mation can be considered sacred or subject to taboos such that they should be imparted
only to specific individuals or groups of people. There are, for example, epistemic val-
ues such as on certain rituals and rites of passages meant explicitly for women, girls,
boys, or men. In an African context, these values are not imparted in undesignated set-
tings. eLearning is, however, not sensitive to such forms of knowledge, hence the prob-
lems when the foreign e-learning models are applied as they are in African contexts.
4.2 Inclusivity
There is a void of a decolonised understanding of the characteristics of eLearning that
would make it useful for engaging African communities and their members and facili-
tate learnings sensitive to belonging, identity, and societal cohesion. The colonial his-
tory and presence of supremacy, hegemony, and domination, results in significant dif-
ferences in the perception and realities of perceived value of what comes from ‘the
outsideand what comes from ‘the inside, and with which system of thought, or reality,
even paradigm, one links up [20]. Africans live with a history of having had to accept
foreign ideas and absorbing them without critically investigating their source, history,
necessity, and workability in the context of the African space. Systems of thought were
introduced which instigated rebellion against the established (and working) indigenous
systems of local governance and knowledge transfer. Currently, imperialistic digital
systems overlay and build out these colonial systems. Subsequently, such systems sus-
tain the continuation of the expropriation of resources out of Africa through, what we
call, super-colonialism [21]. African communities are located networks of relationships
and interactions, often in line with Ubuntu defining ‘good behaviour’. Community
instigates collective identity, local participation, and diverse support networks. Com-
munity membership and participation involve aspects of belonging, identity, participa-
tion, informedness, and associations like support networks.
eLearning is designed to result in targeted outcomes. Such a design approach im-
poses models or ‘solutions’ upon communities and learners without them being able to
decide if and what should be structured and, often, without their involvement. We rec-
ognise five main cultural ingredients that African eLearning practitioners could look
for to be facilitating [cf. 19].
1. Putting the community, ‘being together’, at the centre. Ubuntu, for instance, is a
crystallisation of African philosophy in a culture that is inclusive, focusses on the
contribution of everyone in its vicinity [22].
2. Focus on oral and holistic means of communication, where the aim is for embodied
knowledge, a knowing that develops while sharing and discussing information in-
volving all present while working things out together, continuously and for the
good of everyone, which we dubbed ‘oratio’ [12, cf, 23].
3. Focus on sharing, recognising the learner as a representative of community life and
its collective (embodied) human repository of knowing, dubbed relatio’ [24].
4. A focus on the here-and-now, the ongoing experience, having a constant re-estab-
lished history and accepts an unfolding future, dubbed ‘animatio’ [cf. 25].
5. Respecting maturity and recognised and authorised leadership, dubbed ‘dominio’.
In African eLearning, the focus would not be innovation, or ‘new knowledge’ per se,
but is explicitly focussed on both improvisation [example in 26] and diversity.
Richard Heeks [27] positions ICT in ‘ICT4D 2.0’ as a transformative platform. How-
ever, if such a platform does not align with local realities, its transformation might not
be development but an upsetting disruption of existing established and stable commu-
nity practices. Sustaining community is an iterative process in which community mem-
bers, together, continuously develop and amend what binds them, in a continually
changing awareness and knowledge base that informs, shapes and triggers improvisa-
tions in community life. The main opportunities for eLearning, thus, are the engage-
ment of community members and the provisioning of space for shared development, in
the community, for the community. Without such a facility, one sets up individuals with
individual knowledge which might be detrimental to the development of the community
and may, ultimately, lead to expulsion or migration of such individuals.
The knowledge creation and sharing in the communities are profoundly holistic and
transdisciplinary [28]. This creation involves a complex context of relations and inter-
actions with all kind of entities, both with humans and non-humans. These conversa-
tions are supported by a robust and multi-layered infrastructure of existing and chang-
ing technologies, like transport, communication tools, and meeting facilities. Contem-
porary eLearning models fall short of facilitating such a complex environment in many
African communities.
4.3 Attainability
We must consider the qualitative and broad political, cultural, macroeconomic, and in-
stitutional drivers of eLearning and its proposed positive and potential negative conse-
quences. Digital colonialism, also through eLearning platforms, can be sources of im-
poverishment and underdevelopment [29]. The so-called 21st-century skills often ne-
cessitate imported and expensive devices and the use of foreign platforms.
5 Discussion
If we seriously consider the issue of sensitivity, inclusivity and affordability, then
eLearning could be usable in Africa, otherwise, for now, the current proposals appear
fruitless packages for Africa. We are not aware of research that proves or disapproves
that attention to eLearning is more effective than direct support for educators, improve-
ment of school infrastructures and labs, and such kind of interventions, the improving
existing systems [30]. Reports are suggesting either way, providing a narrative of suc-
cess [31] or deficiency [32]. Andreas Schleicher of OECD’s directorate for education
and skills concluded cautiously: “the connections among students, computers and learn-
ing are neither simple nor hard-wired; and the real contributions ICT can make to teach-
ing and learning have yet to be fully realised and exploited.[33] It is clear; the verdict
is not yet out and, thus, research is crucial to determine the impact of different methods
on learning and their influences. In Africa, eLearning is a new realm, mostly apart from
long existing processes, and invariably linked to Western notions of modernity.
The underlying and long-term effects of eLearning are yet unknown. There is a lack
of longitudinal and qualitative research, embedded in African communities and sensi-
tive to the epistemology, culture and embedding of people in Africa. Further, eLearning
research seems often linked to a particular intervention or platform (e.g. Content Man-
agement Systems or Learning Management Systems) with a multitude of technologies
that, in practice, have different meanings in different contexts. As all hegemonic theo-
ries and practices, eLearning needs decolonisation. Such an orientation puts communi-
ties of belonging at the centre of theory and practice. Thus, this is not the community of
learners at the time of learning, but, first, putting the community that one belongs to,
the complicated African citizenship at the centre [34].
What eLearning ‘isand an understanding of the undergirding theory is constructed
contextually and locally. The moral grounding of currently used eLearning seems
mostly (if not exclusively) framed in Western culture. As morality is a cultural variable
[35], the ethical mismatch of eLearning models engendered through Western lenses and
the use in non-Western societies result in severe dysfunctionalities. Most eLearning
models proposed for Africa fall short in how they include the local perceptions of af-
fection, loyalty, authority and spirituality, among others. The process of the creation of
eLearning theory and practices, and the focus of its facilitation (e.g. towards the com-
munity instead of the individual) call for putting those being affected in the driving seat
of their developments which includes in the conceptualisation of the facilities for hu-
man behaviour and learning.
Current literature on eLearning cases and tools appear to prioritise ‘doing' its inputs
and outcomes often vocalised in weaponised language as ‘targets’ or ‘penetration’.
Such descriptions and vocabulary negate its ‘being’ and are strongly influenced by mil-
itary, gender, and technical perspectives. The resulting models, therefore, are value-
laden. This concoction, in an Africa place, acts out super-colonial [21]. Therefore,
eLearning theory and practice insensitive to the local, African contexts are actors, or
instigator, of a social change in the direction of the researcher’s and designer’s motives,
instead of being facilitators of an ongoing, locally validated and embedded social life.
Linking eLearning models to contextuality, both for the positionality of their origins
and for the positionality of its use does not make it a form of relativism but constitute
a call for discussion of the kinds of values that were involved in their conceptualisa-
tions. Drawing on the emerging understanding of African expressions of eLearning,
there will be tools that give direction to the deconstruction of received guidance of
eLearning. From careful thinking, we can be able to understand and, subsequently cre-
ate and maintain eLearning facilities that support communities and decolonised educa-
tion in African societies and beyond. Such a learning-(eco-)system is aligned with the
resource availability and social cohesion in a context of inclusive and respectful accom-
modation of all people in African lived-lives.
The contemporary monistic approach to eLearning links in and strengthens the po-
sition of the dominant (often US-based) platforms. These platforms are closely linked
to (usually US-based) institutes of Eurocentric (higher) education, perpetuating its
views and neoliberal ideologies. This singular process aligns with the internationalisa-
tion of education, ushered forth by globalisation that fails to deliver social, political,
administrative, distributive, cultural or ecological justice [36]. Likewise, the current
framing of eLearning complicates and imposes the political, economic and cultural he-
gemony of the West by entrenching its power seeking and defining what knowledge
gets validated and what not. This framing has many drawbacks, as diversity is chal-
lenged, like those of languages, culture, and indigenous knowledge and epistemologies
for instance, on how to interact with nature. As a result, the exploitation of the less
powerful by a rent seeking elite accelerates. Current eLearning rely heavily upon the
ideology of market, choice and unlimited growth. Its proposals are positioned as offer-
ings in a market, based upon unfettered freedom, for individual choice, upon the adagio
that the homo economicus knows best. The models seek the maximisation of ‘educa-
tional returns’ in a considered stable, efficient and just society. In this ideology of indi-
vidual choice, the externalities, as presented in this discussion is delegated to be sorted
through ‘the market of sciences’. In the current dispensation, this market is colonised
by Eurocentrism and (e-)realities framed by rhetoric from corporate businesses [37].
These contexts actively omit, or nudge out, unwelcome information and ways of know-
ing by shifting the baselines, negating that what is considered ‘not helpful’ for their
production [38]. In the meantime, (foreign) governments and (international) corporates
harvest a vast amount of data through digital educational systems and platforms, gain-
ing knowledge of academic performance and personal backgrounds within settings
where the local or national guardians or societies bear responsibilities for. The genera-
tion that grew up with computers (and dominant eLearning models and systems) think
that the ecosystem in which one lives is ‘normal’ [39] although the systems pose sig-
nificant dangers by their potential to distract, facilitate harm (e.g. bullying), and lower
productivity. The de facto situation of a limited choice of ecosystems (with the current
one neutralising ‘other ways of knowing) represents poverty in thinking and systems
conceptualisation. The result is a shrinking variety and multiplicity. Decentralisation
the conceptualisation of eLearning and recognising a poly-episteme world is crucial for
an eLearning transition for the field of research to be relevant (and aiding) eLearning
use in many (most?) parts of Africa.
There is ample need for multiple perspectives on various purposes of eLearning in
different contexts. Such is a venture to discover and formulate decolonised African ex-
pressions of eLearning. The collective action, struggle and study towards such recog-
nition is an essential process that, by and through itself, will recreate an African identity
in eLearning. This endeavour could well lead to the development of new technologies
that amplify African intentions, set to support the needs and desires within African par-
adigms, e.g. sustaining social-cultural constructs like Ubuntu. Most probably, such a
theory and practice might well be unaligned with the coloniality embedded in contem-
porary digital systems and platforms. They will not facilitate nor sustain the extracting
of African labour for a foreign private benefit. Such an eLearning will not necessitate
people to leave rural areas for the city to seek connectivity to access appropriate edu-
cation. It will support education geared towards sustaining a quality of life within Af-
rican communities and not set up people to have to leap beyond one’s physical borders
to sustain life. The alleviation of Africa’s dependency on foreign platforms and the
blocking the tromboning of African information where a communication starts and
ends in Africa, yet transits in an intermediate country outside of the continent is crit-
ical for African improvisation of its life-conditions.
6 Conclusion
The worlds of learning and technology are both complex and diverse. In this paper, we
endeavoured to show that the current rendering of these worlds in eLearning is difunc-
tional for African settings. Significant flaws denote omitting a diversity of both
worldviews and cultural practices with regards to Africa. Africa’s diverse and dynamic
cultural expressions centre around communities, oral communication methods, sharing,
timely relations and the recognition of authority, among others. Lived-lives in Africa,
set in spirituality and social belonging, and a community life that is always available
and engaging, seem to be uncatered for by current renderings of eLearning.
Contemporary eLearning theory and practices are set within powerful and framing
forces of digitisation and communication technologies. The nature of eLearning, to-
gether with the use of equipment that mesmerises, appear to put constructors of models
in the position where (western) thoughts and technologies limit the view on potential
‘constructs’ of their implementations, as they catalyse changes not only in what we do
but in how we think. This subjective effect influences the fields of understanding, link-
ing eLearning models actively with euro- and technocentric, western narratives. This
linking combines with a general ignorance of western-centric academia, especially in
the field of natural sciences, of other epistemologies and of different ways of knowing.
Therefore, it might well be that relatively few researchers have the critical background,
knowledge base, and awareness to resist such a dominant framing that is part and parcel
of a global narrative of technology solving problems. In this paper, we endeavoured to
step back and assess eLearning according to its merit, or lack of it, in Africa. There is
a great need for transmogrification of eLearning, which could, indeed, be surprising for
western actors. Such an eLearning would ‘be’ in line with African ways of knowing
and learning, so both knowing and learning are supported seamlessly within African
cultures and established ways-of-living in communities.
eLearning practices mostly frame its use from foreign settings. They are uninvolved
with African strains of philosophies of education and technology and therefore are not
reflective of how eLearning could be constructed in Africa. Therefore, contemporary
eLearning theories are mostly philosophically unsatisfying and its practices too rigid to
cover the vastly potential of perceptions of eLearning.
African guardians of knowledge, the African academia, has a significant task to
generate awareness to fulfil the vital role in safeguarding African and indigenous
knowledge. In many African places, actors have multi-vocational responsibilities. Cre-
ativity and energy exist at what imperialism considers ‘the periphery’. There lies a
prime source for dynamic and integrative contributions for policy development while
catering for multiple worldviews, for instance, supporting students at a school, commu-
nities in the lived environment, and religious institutes in the experience of their faith.
1. Welsh, E., Wanberg, C., Brown, K., Simmering, M.: E-learning: emerging uses,
empirical results and future directions. International Journal of Training and
Development 7, 245258 (2003).
2. van Stam, G.: Method of Research in a We-Paradigm, lessons on Living Research
in Africa. In: IFIP WG 9.4 Conference, 1-3 May 2019, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
3. Nkrumah, K.: Consciencism. New York: Monthly Review Press. (1964).
4. International Telecommunications Union: ICT facts and figures 2017. ITU,
Geneva (2017).
5. Metz, T.: How the West Was One: The Western as individualist, the African as
communitarian. Educational Philosophy and Theory 47, 11751184 (2015).
6. Mayes, T., de Freitas, S.: Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models.
London: Joint Information Systems Committee (2004).
7. Mawere, M., Mubaya, T., van Reisen, M., van Stam, G.: Maslow’s Theory of
Human Motivation and its Deep Roots in Individualism: Interrogating Maslow’s
Applicability in Africa. In: Mawere, M., Nhemachena, A. (eds.) Theory,
Knowledge, Development and Politics: What Role for the Academy in the
Sustainability of Africa?, pp. 5572. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2016).
8. Bigirimana, S.: Beyond the thinking and doing dichotomy: integrating individual
and institutional rationality. Kybernetes 46, 15971610 (2017).
9. Nyamnjoh, F.: Drinking from the Cosmic Gourd: How Amos Tutuola Can Change
Our Minds. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2017).
10. Mawere, M., van Stam, G.: Paradigm Clash, Imperial Methodological
Epistemologies and Development in Africa: Observations from rural Zimbabwe
and Zambia. In: Mawere, M., Mwanaka, T. (eds.) Development, Governance, and
Democracy: A Search for Sustainable Democracy and Development in Africa, pp.
193211. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2015).
11. Aguti, J.: Capacity building for teachers: The weakest link in transforming ICT
integration in education. In: e/merge 2018, Festival of elearning in Africa, 9-20
July 2018, online (2018).
12. Mawere, M., van Stam, G.: Oratio: A Framing of Knowledge in the Context of
Technology and Academia. In: Mawere, M., Mubaya, T. (eds.) African Studies in
the Academy. The Cornucopia of Theory, Praxis and Transformation in Africa?
pp. 251264. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2017).
13. Dourish, P., Mainwaring, S.: Ubicomp’s Colonial Impulse. In: UbiComp’12, 5-8
Sep 2012, Pittsburgh (2012).
14. O’Hara, K., Stevens, D.: Inequality.com Power, Poverty and the Digital Divide.
Oxford: Oneworld Publications (2006).
15. van Stam, G.: Information and Knowledge Transfer in the rural community of
Macha, Zambia. The Journal of Community Informatics 9 (2013).
16. Nyamnjoh, F.: #RHODESMUSTFALL. Nibbling at Resilient Colonialism in
South Africa. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2016).
17. Mawere, M., Mubaya, T. (eds.). African Studies in the Academy. The Cornucopia
of Theory, Praxis and Transformation in Africa? Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG
18. Bidwell, N. Moving the centre to design social media in rural Africa. AI &
SOCIETY, Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Communication 31, 5177 (2016).
19. van Stam, G.: Reflections: a narrative on displacement of technology and meaning
in an African place. Harare, Masvingo, Macha, Tilburg: Gertjan van Stam (2017).
20. Mawere, M., Awuah-Nyamekye, S.: Between Rhetoric and Reality. The State and
Use of Indigenous Knowledge in Post-Colonial Africa. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG
21. van Stam, G.: The Coming-of-Age of Super-Colonialism. In: Mawere, M.,
Mubaya, T. (eds.) African Studies in the Academy. The Cornucopia of Theory,
Praxis and Transformation in Africa? Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2017).
22. Mawere, M., van Stam, G.: Ubuntu/Unhu as Communal Love: Critical Reflections
on the Sociology of Ubuntu and Communal Life in sub-Saharan Africa. In:
Mawere, M., Marongwe, N. (eds.) Violence, Politics and Conflict Management in
Africa: Envisioning Transformation, Peace and Unity in the Twenty-First Century,
pp. 287304. Bamenda: Langaa RPCIG (2016).
23. Bigirimana, S.: Patterns of Human Knowing in the Information Society. A
Philosophical Study of the Epistemological Implications of the Information
Revolution. Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg (2011).
24. Sheneberger, K., van Stam, G.: Relatio: An Examination of the Relational
Dimension of Resource Allocation. Economics and Finance Review 1, 2633
25. Bidwell, N., Reitmaier, T., Rey-Moreno, C., Roro, Z., Siya, M., Dlutu-Siya, B.:
Timely Relations in Rural Africa. In: Proceedings of the 12th International
Conference of the IFIP 9.4 Working Group on Social Implications of Computers
in Development Countries, 19-22 May 2013, Ocho Rios, Jamaica (2013).
26. MoHCC: The National Health Strategy for Zimbabwe, 2016-2020. Equity and
Quality in Health: Leaving No One Behind. Ministry of Health and Child Care,
Government of Republic of Zimbabwe, Harare (2016).
27. Heeks, R.: ICT4D 2.0: The next phase of applying ICT for international
development. Computer 41, 2631 (2008).
28. Du Plessis, H., Sehume, J., Martin, L.: The Concept and Application of
Transdisciplinarity in Intellectual Discourse and Research. Mapungubwe Institute
for Strategic Reflection, Johannesburg (2013).
29. Kwet, M.: Break the hold of digital colonialism. Mail & Guardian (2018).
30. van Stam, G.: Preparing the Next Generation of Teachers. In: National Dialogue
on ICT for Education for Sustainable Development, 11-14 March 2014, Juliasdale,
Zimbabwe (2014).
31. Chen, M.: Education Nation: six leading edges of innovation in our schools.
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2010).
32. Biagi, F., Loi, M.: ICT and Learning: Results from Pisa 2009. European
Commission, Luxembourgh (2012).
33. OECD: Students, Computers and Learning. Making the Connection. OECD
Publishing, Pisa (2015).
34. Nyamnjoh, F.: From Bounded to Flexible Citizenship: Lessons from Africa.
Citizenship Studies 11, 1–11 (2007).
35. Haidt, J.: The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology. Science 316, 9981002
36. Olivier, B.: Ethical Challenges Regarding Globalization of Higher Education. US-
China Education Review 6, 816823 (2011).
37. UNCTAD: Trade and Development Report 2018. Power, Platforms and the Free
Trade Delusion. United Nations (2018).
38. Mansell, R.: Our digitally mediated society. In: Büllesbach, D., Cillero, M., Stolz,
L. (eds.) European Alternatives: Shifting Baselines of Europe, pp. 119128.
Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld (2017).
39. Ndemo, B., Weiss, T.: Digital Kenya. An Entrepreneurial Revolution in the
Making. Palgrave Macmillan, London (2017).
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
  • Chapter
    Full-text available
    This paper paints a picture of how a method of research in an African we-paradigm looks like. The paper describes living research, where the researcher is an integral part of a community, being a recipient of communal grace and partaker in, and reporter of, the communal development of embodied knowledge.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce a dynamic and integrative epistemology as a substitute to normative epistemology. Design/methodology/approach A philosophical argument based on the critique of literature. Findings Normative epistemology implies that knowing leads to certainty, and it has to be objective and universal because it is an accurate representation of reality. Dynamic and integrative epistemology uphold that knowing leads to accumulating insights though information processing. Knowing is a unified but fourfold process of experiencing, understanding, judging and acting (Lonergan, 1990). It occurs at four levels of consciousness: the empirical, the intellectual, the evaluative and the pragmatic (Lonergan, 1990). Dynamic and integrative epistemology extends rationality, knowledge and intelligence to non-humans because institutions have substantive, structural, behavior and teleological dimensions and processes that enable them to process information, i.e. to know. Research limitations/implications Translating a conceptual paper into practical action, organizational structuring or product design can be difficult. Practical implications Extending the concept of rationality to non-humans implies realizing that human abilities are limited and need to be augmented by proper institutional design and artificial tools. Social implications The design of intelligent organizations, societies and artificial tools. Originality value Normative epistemology which considers reason and faith, empirical (experience) and rational (understanding), positive (facts) and ideal (principles, representations or wishes), physical (objects) and “mental” (ideas or concepts), practice and theory, knowledge (episteme) and opinion (doxa), reflection and action as opposed and mutually exclusive can be replaced by a dynamic and integrative epistemology which puts emotional, intellectual, evaluative and pragmatic dimensions of human knowing in an order of succession through a unified but yet differentiated process which can be augmented by non-human “experts”.
  • Thesis
    Full-text available
    The doctoral thesis examines the introduction of external ICT technology in a rural African environment, in Zambia. This research examines the question: Within the African, indigenous context, and the setting of Macha Works, how do narratives of engineering practitioners – those that shape technology – construe relationships with foreigners, how do they reference colonialism, and what happens at the node of the interaction of these narratives that would inform a narrative of the future? The thesis is a research report to the local authorities of the African organization ‘Macha Works’ in the village of Macha in Zambia. The thesis describes experiences and observations in the African practice and the candidates’ reflections on the introduction of, and interact with, technology in a rural African community. He analyzes the usefulness of technologies introduced from the outside, in the community of Macha. He concludes that a new conceptual framework is needed to derive meaning in the stories about technology in Africa. In African communities, significance is understood through the lens of shared values. In this context, the candidate proposes a new conceptual framework with five essential African values. He calls these the Big Five. African core values are critical to derive contextual understanding of African stories of technology and society. The Big Five are: • Ubuntu, understood as ‘communal love’, • Oratio, positioned as ‘communicating embodied knowledge’, • Relatio, involving ‘relational resource allocation’, • Dominatio, focusing on ‘maturity’, and • Animatio, being the ‘continuous present moment’. The research shows that these qualities distill meaning from narratives in Africa. In his dissertation, the candidate concludes that the meaning that African societies attach to technology is connected to African worldviews – and that the introduction of external technology poses problems when insufficient account is taken of such African virtue epistemologies. Usually, technology is introduced from the West without taking into account an African view of the world. It is remarkable that via technology the historical structures and colonial relationships continue to be confirmed. In this way, imperialist and orientalist images keep defining African worlds. Therefore, many introductions of technology are unhelpful in the local community, precisely because there is no connection with African meaning making. Technology – introduced without respect for African values and meaning making becomes part of a supra-colonial relationship between the West and Africa. The local experience and history that determine an African worldview are left invisible or denigrated. When a respect for the indigenous values for social significance in Africa is lacking, technology (which has been introduced from outside) has become an instrument of domination and inequality.
  • Article
    Full-text available
    This paper places the question of ethical challenges in relation to the process of globalization concerning international education and the mobility of international students worldwide. It focuses on five areas of " justice " , namely social and political justice, administrative justice, distributive justice, cultural justice and ecological justice. These areas of justice cannot be separated from one another, given the interaction among international students from different cultures, which do not all share the same level of cultural, economic and political power and influence internationally. While stressing the importance of all the areas where justice is called for, it is argued that the area pertaining to ecological justice enjoys primacy in relation to the others, given the growing indications that all of the world's inhabitants face an uncertain future on the planet in the face of anthropogenic eco-systemic degradation. If this is not addressed educationally, all the others would be addressed in vain.
  • Chapter
    Full-text available
    Since the postulation of Abraham Maslow's theory of human motivation, the theory has been celebrated as the determining factor to account for and explain human wants and needs. While the theory has its genealogy from an individualistic society, the United States of America, where it was crafted and propelled to take a stand as a universal theory determining human wants and needs across the world, little has been done to critically examine its seemingly perceived universality and applicability in societies such as those of Africa, where collectivism and conviviality bear centrality. The theory has enjoyed more acclamations than critical appraisals. This paper is a critical appraisal of Maslow's theory of human motivation. It examines the applicability and universality of the theory outside the context in which it was created, tested, and applied, such as Africa, before it received what seems to be a worldwide endorsement. Author's observations in Southern Africa recognised behaviour motivated by pursuit of relationships, strengthening of community, acknowledgement of authority, sharing, and avoidance of shame. The paper concludes that the theory of Maslow is not applicable to many settings in Africa, in the past or even today. The claim for universality of the model proposed by Maslow is therefore questioned and its universal application is discredited. This conclusion calls for further interaction with the subject of human motivation outside of Maslow's framing, by contextualising such theory(ies) in space and time.
  • Book
    Full-text available
    Presenting rigorous and original research, this volume offers key insights into the historical, cultural, social, economic and political forces at play in the creation of world-class ICT innovations in Kenya. Following the arrival of fiber-optic cables in 2009, Digital Kenya examines why the initial entrepreneurial spirit and digital revolution has begun to falter despite support from motivated entrepreneurs, international investors, policy experts and others. Written by engaged scholars and professionals in the field, the book offers 15 eye-opening chapters and 14 one-on-one “conversations” with entrepreneurs and investors to ask why establishing ICT start-ups on a continental and global scale remains a challenge on the “Silicon Savannah”. The authors present evidence-based recommendations to help Kenya to continue producing globally impactful ICT innovations that improve the lives of those still waiting on the side-lines, and to inspire other nations to do the same.
  • Article
    There is a kernel of truth in the claim that Western philosophy and practice of education is individualistic; theory in Euro-America tends to prize properties that are internal to a human being, such as her autonomy, rationality, knowledge, pleasure, desires, self-esteem and self-realisation, and education there tends to adopt techniques focused on the individual placed at some distance from others. What is striking about other philosophical–educational traditions in the East and the South is that they are typically much more communitarian. I argue that since geographical terms such as ‘Western’, ‘African’ and the like are best construed as picking out properties that are salient in a region, it is fair to conclude that the Western is individualist and that the African is communitarian. What this means is that if I am correct about a noticeable contrast between philosophies of education typical in the West and in sub-Saharan Africa, and if there are, upon reflection, attractive facets of communitarianism, then those in the West and in societies influenced by it should in some real sense become less Western, in order to take them on.
  • Article
    The aim of this thesis is to introduce a dynamic and integrative epistemology based on the notion of information. This thesis is mainly a critique of normative epistemology on the grounds that normative epistemology through its adoption of the assumptions of methods of modern sciences, models all processes of human knowing to the physical sciences and henceforth upholds a mechanical model of the universe which is indistinctly applied to natural phenomena and human behavioral and cognitive processes; (2) reduces human knowing to logical-deductive processes in the attempt to achieve a degree of certainty that is comparable to the one achieved by mathematics; (3) reduces knowing to achieving accurate representations of reality (true-justified-beliefs or clear and distinct ideas) with the assumption that the knower is a passive and impartial spectator of reality. The dynamic and integrative model of epistemology that this thesis advocates rejects the modeling of all processes of human knowing on the physical sciences basing itself on evidence from neurophysiology, cognitive and behavioral sciences. The knower is not a passive spectator of reality but an active agent who (1) is continuously in relation with his or her environment; and who (2) is involved processes of meaning and value creation as the knower pursues various goals. Dynamic and integrative epistemology defines knowing not in terms of achieving accurate representations (true-justified-beliefs or clear and distinct ideas) but as accumulating insights through information processing i.e. enriching the immediate data of experience with value and meaning for the purposes of decision-making and problem-solving. Dynamic and integrative epistemology is only possible in the context of a paradigm shift from mechanical (causal) to cybernetics (information processing) models. It overcomes the analysis and synthesis dichotomy characteristic of mechanical models and upholds systems thinking as a way of tackling in inherent complexity of reality. Dynamic and integrative epistemology rejects the reduction of wisdom to certainty or knowing to thinking that led to top-down logical deductive systems. It advocates a bottom-up approach that aims at wisdom in experiencing, understanding, judging and acting within the limits of a human “bounded rationality” i.e. subject to humanly attainable pre-determined goals (satisficing rather than optimizing), complexity of the subject matter and the limited human computational abilities. This is possible through processes that apply the methods of heuristics rather than clearly determined algorithms in processes that span at Lonergan’s four levels of consciousness (the empirical, the intellectual, the rational, the responsible) and that require attention, intelligence, reasonableness and responsibility as resources.