Copyright © 2025
Print ISSN: 2960-1541
Online ISSN: 2960-155X
Inclusive Society Institute PO Box 12609
Mill Street
Cape Town, 8000 South Africa 235-515 NPO All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the permission in writing from the Inclusive Society Institute D I S C L A I M E R
Views expressed in this report do not necessarily represent the views of
the Inclusive Society Institute or those of their respective Board or Council
members.
JANUARY 2025
by Prof Aslam Fataar
The movement to decolonise education has become a pressing concern for those critically engaged with the nature and purpose of university and school curricula. The decolonisation call echoes the intellectual currents and shifts of the 1950s and 1960s on the African continent, when many African countries gained independence from European colonial rule.
Those few decades led to a revolution in the understanding of Africa, however its impetus was thwarted by the political authoritarianism and economic decay of the post-independence period, which was particularly destructive for Africa's universities. The movement towards decolonisation has recently gained traction once more in challenging the entrenched dominance of Eurocentric knowledge systems in higher education. At its heart is a call for inclusivity and the centring of decolonial and Africa-centred epistemologies within university and school knowledge frameworks.
Students have advocated for an all-inclusive approach to inform curriculum reform, urging that decoloniality and Africa-centredness should form the foundation of educational knowledge. This impulse to decolonise education has generated significant discourse, reflected in academic scholarship and popular media. The #RhodesMustFall Movement of 2015, where groups of students and staff members mobilised for urgent action against institutional racism, catapulted South Africa’s decolonisation and Africanisation agenda forward and inspired the emergence of allied student movements at other universities and around the world. However, in order to genuinely and effectively respond to these calls, there first needs to be an exploration of what the epistemological underpinnings of decoloniality are and how its principles can guide curriculum knowledge selection within universities.
Universities and schools are intricate systems comprising diverse knowledge domains – disciplinary, applied, vocational, and professional – all of which have distinct structures and logics. Understanding these structures provides the basis for exploring how a decolonial approach can inform curriculum reform. A conceptual toolkit or ‘educational knowledge approach to curriculum selection’ is useful here. To develop this framework, there are two theoretical resources that have traditionally been seen as incommensurate: the decoloniality literature and social realist approaches to educational knowledge (see Fataar 2022).
Within this framework, there are three interconnected parts. First, decoloniality critiques the coloniality of power, knowledge, and being, emphasising the colonial subjugation of knowledge systems through epistemic violence. This critique underscores the centrality of race in colonial epistemology (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2013) and advocates for cognitive justice: the radical expansion and pluralisation of the Western-dominated knowledge canon. This entails recognising and incorporating subaltern and excluded epistemologies (Fataar & Subreenduth, 2015). Decoloniality calls for epistemic openness, fostering intercultural education and embracing the diverse ways of knowing that define humanity.
Decolonialising education favours an intercultural understanding of heterodox forms of being human. All knowledge forms have to be brought into play in an intercultural education that promotes epistemic openness to the knowledge of all human beings. This inclusive approach to knowledge puts paid to the idea that one person’s knowledge system is superior to another’s. Despite accusations of being caught up in 'obsolete' knowledge of the past, decoloniality is in fact focused on the complex challenges that characterise our 'posthuman' condition.
Questions about emerging life forms in the wake of climate change, artificial intelligence, and technological innovation take centre stage in their dynamic interaction with decoloniality. The call for decolonising education is thus nothing less than the full incorporation of all of humanity's knowledge systems, past, present, and in anticipation of future knowledge constellations, into the knowledge selection systems of schools and universities. However, not all knowledge can logically be included in the curriculum. Knowledge selection is required through the contingent curriculum processes of specific university and school programmes, curricula and modules.
The second part of the framework is based on the view that decolonising education advances three essential curriculum claims: centring decolonial epistemology knowledge – a comprehensive ecologies of knowledges approach (Santos, 2014) challenges Eurocentric dominance and fosters epistemic plurality; knowledge and identity – decoloniality seeks to restore the dignity of subjugated peoples, recognise their knowledge traditions and identities and unlock their full human potential; and knowledge relevance and contextualisation – this claim emphasises making epistemological connections between curriculum content and people's contextually contingent lived realities, indigenous knowledge systems, languages, and ways of knowing (Cooper & Morrell, 2014).
The third aspect turns to social realist theories, which offer valuable tools for curriculum selection. Social realism emphasises the conceptual schemes that structure disciplines, distinguishing between vertical knowledge structures (e.g., physics and chemistry) with tightly linked concepts and horizontal knowledge structures (e.g., sociology and political science) with more segmental conceptual arrangements. While these structures are distinct, both provide spaces for integrating decolonial principles.
For instance, disciplines with horizontal structures – such as sociology and journalism – can incorporate diverse theoretical perspectives to foster inclusivity and robust social science (Haraway, 1988). Conversely, decolonising vertical structures in science can involve acknowledging the historical contributions of non-Western epistemologies, such as Arab and Indian contributions to mathematics, African contributions to astronomy, and Asian medical traditions. This approach aligns with Santos's (2015) internal and external plurality concepts, emphasising the interplay of scientific and non-scientific knowledge over time.
Decolonising the humanities and social sciences would incorporate insights from figures like Ibn Khaldun, whose concept of ‘asabiyyah’ – an Islamic term referring to the deep sense of group connection and solidarity that can be felt between people in rural and urban contexts – predates Western theories of social structures, social cohesion or ubuntu-inspired philosophies that foreground African cosmologies (Alatas, 2006; Letseka, 2013). Similarly, history curricula could challenge Eurocentric periodisations by exploring multiple models of modernity and their global intersections, drawing on thinkers like Enrique Dussel and his notion of transmodernity, which celebrates epistemic diversity without collapsing into relativism (Grosfoguel, 2013).
In professional and vocational fields, disciplines such as design provide a clear case for contextual relevance. Design curricula can integrate Africa-centred aesthetics, languages, and architectures, demonstrating how knowledge structures can draw meaningfully from lived contexts. Similarly, applied disciplines like engineering and law can incorporate decolonial principles by emphasising their relevance to African contexts while respecting their internal conceptual logics.
The different academic fields can thoughtfully choose curriculum content. But, to make education relevant and inclusive, two main factors must be considered. First, how closely is the knowledge tied to real-world situations? Second, how well does it connect to other ideas within that field?
For example, subjects like design and fine arts are readily connected to real-world contexts, making them a good fit for including ideas from decolonial thinking. These subjects can integrate diverse perspectives and experiences more easily because they often involve solving practical problems or responding to specific cultural or social needs. In design, students might engage with local traditions, alternative cultural perspectives, or sustainability practices, making bringing in knowledge from different backgrounds and contexts relatively easy. In art, students engage with the imagery and symbols that surround us all, giving them a natural platform from which to mirror and respond to the current status quo visually in new, thought-provoking ways.
On the other hand, subjects like engineering are often focused on technical concepts and high requirements for internal conceptual consistency within the field itself. This does not mean engineering cannot incorporate broader contextual perspectives, but it requires more deliberate adjustments. For example, engineering programmes might include case studies or projects that highlight the social impact of technology or explore solutions relevant to underserved communities. By doing so, they can bring in a sense of context that aligns with decolonial aims without losing the strong conceptual structure needed for working in these applied technical fields.
Ultimately, the idea is to create a curriculum that balances each discipline's specific needs and strengths with a commitment to inclusion. There is value in intentionally selecting content that enriches students' understanding of diverse ways of knowing, even in fields that might initially seem distant from these concerns.
Incorporating a decolonial approach into university curricula requires nuanced, context-sensitive strategies. By understanding the dynamic interplay between context and concepts in specific disciplines, universities can create curricula that embody decoloniality principles and Africa-centred relevance. This process is neither straightforward nor exhaustive, but it is essential for constructing knowledge systems that reflect the richness and plurality of human experience. The work ahead demands intellectual rigour, institutional commitment, and ongoing dialogue across diverse knowledge traditions.
References
Alatas, F. 2006. Ibn Khaldun and contemporary Sociology, International Sociology, 21(6):
782-795.
Brennan, M. 2017. Struggles for teacher education in the age of the Anthropocene, Journal of Education, 69: 43-65.
Cooper, D. & Morrell, R. (eds). 2014. Africa-Centred Knowledge: Crossing Fields & Worlds. Woodbridge, Suffolk: James Currey.
Fataar, A. & Subreenduth, S. 2015. The search for ecologies of knowledge in the encounter with African epistemicide in South African education, South African Journal of Higher Education, 29(2): 106-121.
Fataar, A. 2022, Pursuing decolonial knowledge building in South African higher education. In Hlatswayo, M, Adendorf, H, Blackie, M, Fataar, A, and Maluleke P. (eds), Decoloniality and Knowledge Building in South Africa. (Routledge, London).
Grosfoguel, R. 2013. The Structure of Knowledge in Westernised Universities: Epistemic Racism / Sexism and the Four Genocides / Epistemicides of the Long 16th Century, Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, XI(1): 73–89.
Letseka, M. 2013. Educating for Ubuntu/Botho: Lessons from Basotho Indigenous Education, Open Journal of Philosophy, 3(2): 337-344.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. 2013. Why decoloniality in the 21st century? The Thinker, 48: 10-15.
Santos, B. 2014. Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This report has been published by the Inclusive Society Institute
The Inclusive Society Institute (ISI) is an autonomous and independent institution that functions independently from any other entity. It is founded for the purpose of supporting and further deepening multi-party democracy. The ISI’s work is motivated by its desire to achieve non-racialism, non-sexism, social justice and cohesion, economic development and equality in South Africa, through a value system that embodies the social and national democratic principles associated with a developmental state. It recognises that a well-functioning democracy requires well-functioning political formations that are suitably equipped and capacitated. It further acknowledges that South Africa is inextricably linked to the ever transforming and interdependent global world, which necessitates international and multilateral cooperation. As such, the ISI also seeks to achieve its ideals at a global level through cooperation with like-minded parties and organs of civil society who share its basic values. In South Africa, ISI’s ideological positioning is aligned with that of the current ruling party and others in broader society with similar ideals.
Email: info@inclusivesociety.org.za
Phone: +27 (0) 21 201 1589
Web: www.inclusivesociety.org.za
Commenti