Day 1: Echoes of Protest - Veerle Dieltiens

[Music]

Good afternoon everyone and welcome to

school. A special warm welcome to those

joining

and for

joining us face to face. My name is John

and I am from CCD. I am the facil

facilitator of the session and my

colleague Neil is joining me with

moderates in the chat and today we are

privileged to have our speaker

buildings and she will be speaking on

eolity

and curriculum relevance revisiting the

relevance of relevance. This is not just

a timely conversation but a present also

reflects what groups of knowledge we

center how we pray in relevance and how

we respond meaningfully to the voices

and the histories that continue to shape

our classrooms. So as we listen, we are

invited to think beyond the echoes of

the past lives and to imagine the

possibilities

of transformation

and what curriculum relevance and truly

look like when it is rooted in justice,

inclusivity,

and the live realities of our students.

So over to you

Okay. So, um hello everybody and it's

lovely to speak to you all today. So

what I um have been thinking about is a

little bit around relevance and I'm

going to talk a little bit about one um

an honors course but looking back at the

bees must fall

um looking back at the bees must fall

one of the demands that was coming from

the students was for a decolonized

curriculum and part of that demand was

for um a curriculum that was relevant.

So for the decolonial for the

decolonialists

universities had to be relevant in at

least two ways. First the curriculum had

to reflect local knowledge um African

indigenous knowledge systems in

particular and second what they wanted

is for what gets taught to be useful to

the needs of developing countries and

more specifically to the local. in fact

um very very much the local. So together

those two demands kind of can be summed

up by saying what they were looking for

is for universities to teach to teach a

curriculum that should offer African

solutions for African problems.

Um and the reason that this was

important, the reason relevance

is relevant is um first that there were

pressing socioeconomic challenges. And

so given these we had to be pragmatic

and sensible about what we teach, right?

Um to teach something that is of little

uh um to teach something that is of

little use is just a waste of resources.

The other a second reason for why they

wanted to go this route is that um um

given the detrimental legacy of

colonialism on identity and culture um

there had to be redress

um for the injustices that had been done

to the indigenous knowledge systems.

So we cannot as um in Gloeni said be

saddled with irrelevant knowledge that

disempowers rather than empowers

individuals and communities.

Um moreover there was this idea that

western knowledge was simply inadequate

to solve local problems.

Um and there was another there was

another reason which is that if a

curriculum was relevant or useful to

individual students um it would offer

epistemic access to those to those

students um since they would be able to

relate to the content. It would be a way

for them a way in for them into the into

the curriculum. Um there's also a theme

in the literature on the impact of

relevant curriculum on student

motivation.

So there were many arguing in that

literature that the more relevant the

content is, the more motivated students

would be to learn. These are all very

compelling reasons for having relevant

curriculum.

Um but these reasons all fall and

stumble into a critique that education

is being used in an instrumental way.

Right? So in these in the in the

arguments of the decolonialists,

education is seen as a means to an end.

Um in the same way that we um that

neoliberalism is attacked for its

subordination of education to profits.

So decoloniality had recruited

universities to solve the problems of

coloniality.

So the problems of the critique

or the problems of injustice this the

critiques would say um should we should

be dealt with politically or economic

not through the education system.

Okay.

So

um the instrumental argument assumes

that education can actually achieve what

its biders wanted to without any real

reckoning with the ontology of

education. Education

by was being used by the decolonialists

really to solve the problems of

injustice and decoloniality.

Um and it's this instrumental argument

that I think I'm trying to challenge

here but also move beyond.

So how do we what other alternatives are

there? So there is there is a a long

tradition

that goes way back to Aristotle

um that justifies education on intrinsic

grounds.

education

um here has its own ontology.

It's an end in itself rather than a

means to an end. We educate for no other

reason than that to be educated is

better than to be not to be educated.

We don't educate women so that they'll

be better wives.

We don't educate children to be better

citizens or young people to be better

workers. Education is simply a right

that people have.

the kind of curriculum that would

support this intrinsic or that the that

supports this intrinsic argument for uh

for for for what we teach is um often

known is one that's built on worthwhile

knowledge.

It's worthwhile because it's seen to be

valuable.

It's deep and broad and it's

definitively not specialized.

You wouldn't be called educator if you

knew only one thing very well. You can't

be a scientist and know no art. That

would that would disqualify you from

being informed educator.

Um so if you think about a way of if you

think about one way of thinking about

this is the kind of education of the

measured classes of Greece.

um

who um are studying arithmetic,

>> geometry, astronomy and music

and um and it go this is an argument

that kind goes all the way from from

from ancient Greek but in the 1960s RS

Peters was was most famously associated

with him with it and it's to be educated

is not to have arrived at destination

it's to It it it is to travel with a

different view.

What is required is not feverish

preparation for something that lies

ahead, but to work with precision,

passion, and taste at worthwhile things

that lie in hand.

So the idea here

that there is no relevance in education

is a really powerful defense of

education.

It says there's no instrumental reason

behind what we do, why we teach. We

teach because it's a good thing to be

taught and to learn.

Um,

and it would be it's an incredibly

powerful bullwark thought against um AI

for example.

So um and for those who've just come in

this I've been I've talked about how the

decolonialists

um have argued for an education that was

depended on relevance and I'm countering

that with the argument that education

should actually be or that education

should actually be justified on

intrinsic grounds.

Um the problem of course Luca's

intrinsic

justification for education is that it's

very archaic.

Right? Um it's difficult to think of

education today as only a contemplative

activity.

Even the ancient Greeks had trouble

holding this line

on education as having no extrinsic

purpose while recognizing that education

was enjoyed only by free citizens to

prepare them for public life. It turns

out that contemplation is good for

democracy. So there is always in a sense

an intrinsic purpose.

Emanuel Kant was a staunch defender of

an intrinsic

um argument for education, but he too

slips up um when he says children ought

to be educated not for the present but

for a possibil for a possibly improved

condition of man in the future that is

in a manner which is adapted to the idea

of humanity and the whole destiny of

man. So even his argument ends up saying

that we educating for some kind of

future um um rather than just educating

for the here and now

um and for the good of the individual at

that moment. There is of course one

other problem with the intrinsic

argument that I've just laid out and I'm

sure it's one all of you are already

thinking about and that is that

worthwhile knowledge is not well defined

but it does seem to be grounded or

centered in um western knowledge. So

although its proponents may might argue

that worthwhile knowledge is universal,

it's it's worthwhile because it's

necessary to live a worthwhile life.

Um for decolonialists,

the claim to universality is a sticking

point because knowledge is always

context specific.

So you've got an idea of trying to think

of how we how we justify what we teach

on the on on on an instrumental argument

which which I've said is a problem if

it's used only instrumentally.

Um, and the problem with the intrinsic

argument is that it doesn't it doesn't

really doesn't really gel with what we

do, right? We always we are in a in a

sense always educating for a purpose.

So I want to just take a side step here

um and talk about the course that

brought me

um

that brought me to um the problem to be

thinking about the problem of relevance.

So um it's an honest course in

educational theory. It covers

epistemology and the meta and meta

theories. Augustus um August K makes an

appearance so does Emanuel Kant. There

are lectures on positivism,

interpretivalism and political realism

along with Marxism. There's a section on

liberalism and postmodernism.

Um and a week on decolonial

decoloniality has latterly been

included.

So, it's a it's a course that in many

ways would irk the decolonialist. We've

mashed in a little bit of decoloniality,

but really this is a course of dead

white men.

Um, and the students are warned in the

course pack that this course offers a

challenging reading intensive

introduction to educational issues and

debates.

Um this is a course that that is

actually rationalized on intrinsic

grounds right it's theory for theory's

sake in fact it seems that when we teach

this course we assume that everybody is

going to do a PhD

um even the essay questions that were

given were had were related

um were very weren't really related to

the weren't weren't really applicable to

education. They weren't being applied to

to the to education problems and yet

this was an honors course in a very

applied field in education.

Surely we would be um we are educating

students for some more practical

purpose.

Um when I surveyed the honor students

this year um to ask why they were doing

the course, 18% said they wanted to work

in a district or a provincial office.

16% wanted to improve their their

themselves as teachers. 30% said they

were doing it for self-development.

There was a whole lot actually 14% much

more than would eventually do it who

said they wanted to do this for a PhD.

um the course actually rather dreadfully

I have to tell you was um a lot of those

students I think there was 79% were

under the age of 30 and as many as 18%

um were

called themselves um teachers and there

was a a whole bunch I even if I'm not

correct if I'm not incorrect was eight

8% of of them called themselves

unemployed employed. And when I looked

at the statistics carefully, it actually

turned out that the majority of our

students of our honor students were

unemployed teachers from from the year

before. They were fourth year students

um who just hadn't found a job. And so I

kind of stumbled back into into into

doing an honors course.

So

So we I think we needed to really like

really think about what it was we were

doing. Why are we doing this course? And

I think we if we imagine that what we

were doing is developing a leadership in

the education system from schools to

district offices to provincial to

national offices,

we we'd have to think about

if the if if if we're educating for the

next layer of education bureaucrats,

what is it that we wanted to teach them

and how would we rationalize

um why we were teaching them that

without falling into the traps

that I just explained of instrumentalism

um and of irrelevance.

So

um

so I think we needed to think about not

just what we were teaching but first

think about the justification of what we

were doing and um one way don't know if

anybody wants to think about what

alternative way of justification there

might be if not an instrumentalist one

and not one that

um entrance.

So I think that we needed an argument

that captures the strengths of both of

both the instrumentalists and the

intrinsic arguments and the least of

their flaws. And the argument that I

would go with is that we really should

be thinking about that what we're doing

is educating our students to become

autonomies.

So autonomy is what we want. What we

want are

students who or students who who will

become future bureaucrats, future

researchers, future principles in

schools,

um, HORDs in schools that have a sense

of justice

but are not supplicants to the

government or to industry.

We definitely want them to be able to

think critically,

which means that we want them to be able

to survey many options in making their

decisions in the future, understand the

benefits and drawbacks of each and make

reasoned decisions. They have to be able

to read research. They need to be able

to judge evidence and to come to

conclusions. And they have to do that

with critical reason.

So um in this way the course has a

purpose. We are not shrugging the fact

that we are we we we have we are um

teaching students to in with specific

idea uh ideals. Um but we're not

prescribing how students fulfill that

purpose. In a way, we want students to

be able to

to be autonomous thinkers, bureaucrats

of the future. Um, and that is quite a

it it's it's a um it's a way in which

the what we try to do is think about

this course. Um

so um so the other thing I wanted to

talk so how do we how does this change

the content of the course if we think

about this is what we're doing I don't

think necessarily that the content would

change very much they would still need

to know epistemology they would still

need to know the theory I think though

what would change um is that the way in

which we assess the students and is um

that that there would been far more

application in in in our assessments of

students and thinking about how they use

those theories um in in the assessments.

Um yeah, so that's that is where I'm

going to end. Um I was going to try open

this up as a workshop so that I don't

get too many questions to ask for you

about your your the about your courses

and um the relevance of your courses.

Maybe I should take some pictures.

I know some people came in late. So I

hope you follow like the the the the the

my presentation from from its attempt to

think about the decolonialists and their

and and the ways that they justify

curriculum to an intrinsic approach to

thinking and then thinking about it

differently and

[Music]

you have a question and they say you

never ask a question if you don't know

the answer but I don't I don't I really

don't

>> but maybe others in the room would so

you mention and I mean education's so

far away from my field but you mention

the um the dead white men are they not

also dead non-white

people

who could add to this. I I and I really

have no answer. I don't know whether or

not one could include something like

that in in your course

>> teachers

people from

>> so always my approach in trying to think

about teaching is and which is why I'm

taken by the idea of worthwhile

knowledge I have to say is as the

intrinsic approach is because education

should always be beyond the here and now

and as much in a way what you want is to

do you want to grab as much as possible

there will always obviously be you

you're not going to be able to do

everything there will be selection but

you know I think to be as broad and deep

as possible is what you want to do

so yes you know you would add as much as

you could in a way of different

perspectives and I think that the I the

the the the education for autonomy is

also very very much about trying to

teach people different perspectives as

many different perspectives as possible

because the responsibility of an

autonomous

person is to be able to understand many

viewpoints and to be able to make their

own to choose their own. But that that

choice is always determined on being

able to survey lots of different things.

So it's so so in in that way

I might be pretty.

>> Thank you so much for me. I understand

your

justification I should say. I understand

um what you're trying to

get us to think about in terms of the um

the education being you with a bigger

kind of um purpose than just you know

where we are right now but I'm just

wondering whether it's even possible

because from what you're saying already

you're saying the students who were in

this course are themselves unemployed

and and and you cannot run away from the

fact that people are wanting to get

educated just to get a job. And so it it

it seems to me it would be quite a long

way before we can start thinking about

the luxury of

you know educating for

um for for what you you you are you are

saying I do you understand what I'm

saying? And that that's a really good

insight music because that's where the

decolonialists come from, right? Yes.

>> It's we have pressing social.

>> Yes, that's what I think.

>> And we have to deal immediately with

>> um

>> um with with with those. And so you are

you are pointing to a tension

>> a little bit in where I where where I

end up. Um, but I would still want to I

would still want to argue that

that the responsibility of education

is to

is to develop autonomous

individuals.

Um, and so yeah, I mean, I would

probably need a few lines extra to try

and defend myself against what I think

is a is a really important problem that

you are raising, which is which is which

is what stirs the decoloniality argument

that this is a luxury and this but I

would say it's not okay. I would say

it's not a luxury. Um, we we we need

people who

make the right decisions and I think

they can only make right decisions if

they

if if they if they have

the full Yeah. If if they they if they

can think critically.

>> Yeah. So for for me critical thinking is

really is is a is a really central aim

for for education and that goes with

autonomy.

>> Just going to say that I did that in

2017 and I think I can't hear you. Oh,

sorry. I was saying I did that course

myself in 2017

and I think learning all those other

theories I think for me personally was

important again um how you write and how

you think about

that

>> in 2017 long time ago

just

long time ago but so I'm just thinking

now like it did um because those other

people I studied during my time. So my

PhD but then it did allow for critical

thinking about even

all these theories and stuff. So I think

um it was important depending on the

route you were taking in terms of your

career as well. I mean even just

throughout your masters and if you've

done those course that specific course

for education for example I think it

would force you to think differently or

more critically about about things even

about decolonization transformation

instead of just looking at surface level

or what it means but the challenge.

Yeah. And you are reflecting on a lot

again. I interviewed students um from

last year to find before I started

coordinating this course. I interviewed

students from last year to ask them what

they thought of the course and I thought

they would tell me it was horrible

and too difficult. I mean it really

isn't a course that was too difficult.

They were reading like five works by co

and um you know Marx's reply to Alaba

was their first reading on it was like a

but in fact all the students I

interviewed said it is a fabulous course

I spend it so you know um yeah I guess

this I can't

um yeah it's So I needed that needed

that you really needed to ask the

question is this relevant.

Uh I was just thinking that looking at

your slide on intrinsic justifications

for education

uh where it says education is an end in

itself rather than a means to an end.

and thinking

how can education be an end in itself

rather than ministry an end and also

basing it on our social economic

problems that are still prevailing by

the way uh I'm asking myself when does

education start and when does it end

uh when we start getting education from

our parents from our homes from things

that maybe we have not yet been uh

exposed to in higher education but then

by the time you go to higher education

now it adds to whatever education that

you've been given by the parents by the

society you know because you continue to

learn I don't know if I'm having it this

wrong by the time you come to university

you already have some education that you

growing up with so obviously university

now is sort of picking up where it can

now augment or you know increase or

deepen your knowledge and perhaps Now

when we talk about autonomy now then you

suggest that university we should teach

for autonomy so that that young student

now comes for education in the

university learns

to take from all that they're learning

uh what is best for me what is

applicable what is it that can I use for

the future because at the end of the day

uh as much as you learn today you still

need to think of the future

Uh so to me when he says uh

education is an end I guess it's kind of

confusing to me because I'm feeling like

education is a journey to take you to

where you want to be. If you want to go

I think somebody was talking about when

you come into the university as the

first year you come dreams with goals

with ambitions you want to change the

world but all of those uh what do they

call them in English rosecolored glasses

you know you have all of these things

that you want to do in the world but

then you learn you grow you learn from

every corner of the university that the

world is not as actually what you

thought it to be. So therefore this

education what is it that is going to do

to you or do for you do for your

community because we still live in

communities that still need

that are still affected by socioeconomic

factors is South Africa it's it's not

just diverse in race and color it's in

economic

so I'm just saying that perhaps then we

should reook at what is education number

And number two,

if we teach for autonomy,

what is it that we teach the students so

that even if you drop up at the second

year, you can still use part of that

university learning.

If you find yourself because there are

some unforeseen circumstances that force

students to leave the university. So if

they you leave the university unlike

those students who had to come back to

your class because they have not gotten

any jobs. now they're forced to come

back inside and maybe with a hope that

once they have honors they'll be

employable maybe I'm waffling but just

thinking that uh don't we teach for a

purpose towards a reason uh if you're

going to change the world there's got to

be a purpose from what you learned

don't worry

>> I mean yeah I mean I think that's what

my presentation was trying to do was to

show um two different accounts of

justifying education. One was the

decolonial decoloniality

decoloniality

of course say it

the decoloniality

um argument which is that um education

must have a um is an instrument for some

other purpose. And the argument there is

well you know if you can't actually

expect education to solve the problems

of new coloniality or or of colonialism

those are problems that need to be dealt

with by the politicians or by the

economies. I mean, and I think the

Marxist agree with me, right? The real

problem with the with colonization is is

materialist is the is a is the material

um impact that it's had. And for the

decolonia with the colonialists,

much of that much of what they have

focused on is the cultural um and the

identity issues in the curriculum. But

um and I think those are those are

important. I want to hold you know I

want that that some of that needs to be

addressed but education can't can't

solve all the problems of coloniality.

And I think that that that's kind of

what I'm signaling there that that using

education as an instrument to try and

solve the problems of of colonialism is

is to misunderstand what education can

and can't do. And then and then I and

then to say well the opposite of that

would be to say can education be an end

in itself right and there's a I mean

this is these are that argument goes

back all the way to Aristotle you know

and and it's an argument that is picked

up from to the enlightenment in Kant um

and and to the to to RS Peters and verse

four verse in the 1960 60s that argument

for an in that there is I mean so what I

was trying to say is I think that that's

a very powerful argument in defense for

education but but it it slips but it's

very hard to hold on to because even as

I said even Aristotle or even Emanuel K

even even even the even the the liberals

of the 1960s kind of end up saying yes

but you need education

political to make a democrac

so there's always in a sense they always

end up having a reason for it

um so what I what I'm trying to say is

that we we do need to we do need to have

a justification because having a

justification for what you teach for for

for having a justification for why you

teach

being able to explain why you

will give you a handle on what so that's

what I'm coming to at this

and that's what I'm trying to say that I

have a just education which is both the

inferences and the extensive arguments

for education and then that argument is

one that is for autonomy

>> okay and I haven't had any anybody

say that that is

But there will be peace if they explor

and and I think that it will come

from like one or the other of my

struggling. I was just thinking I'm

going to say about uh

what

so now

how do you define

you

always

if I don't

Well, what you brings the curriculum can

be you could be a student and it's also

influences

the mind is the body. So how do you

think

you know

from the mind and body

curriculum but um I mean I think that I

think that I miss about what I what I

kind of want to begin is I only miss

about the quantities of the curriculum

as long was not yet is that I had any

opinions that um

that that students learn to think

through critically. I mean that's the

bottom line for them. Um and

um and I think that that that that is as

much as as many viewpoints as possible

that we need to get into the thinking.

One of the changes I made this year in

that education honors course is to add

more in. Um it didn't mean like kind of

flattening points out of it. They didn't

have to be Marx's response to power.

Um so they didn't go deep into Marxism,

but they got they got more

um more perspectives

um and maybe a little less a little less

scared. But I was hoping that getting

more perspective meant that they could

start to see education problems more

than one more than just one

investigation. But there were any other

ones. So, so that you know in terms of

con

[Music]

>> I missed something. Earlier on when you

presented you said the purpose of

education is to liberate men. In fact,

the purpose of education is it to

liberate men.

>> It's not what I said.

>> It's not to liberate me.

>> It's to liberate

>> a person. It's to liberate men.

>> Not quite sure.

>> I'm I'm think I'm not sure if I've heard

this from I heard it from Sunday, but I

always hear people saying education. You

educate people to liberate people. Now

you are saying that

we cannot use education to answer

political problems.

When we do research as researchers, we

are saying we do research to solve

social problems and that's the purpose.

And I want to believe as well that the

purpose of education is to solve

problems that are out there. And um if

then

education

cannot answer political

mainly political challenges, political

issues which sphere,

which discipline, who must talk to those

problems?

I I don't know. So that so your question

helps me come to where I was going to my

conclusion right which is that I think

that we that we do need to match purpose

with so we we do need to try and match

purpose with uh the with an interim

defense quality and I think that

autonomy does that. So what we want is

autonomous individuals

who are able to solve um to solve

um problems in in in South Africa or so

that they so so there is there's defin

so I'm not so where I get to is that

education does have a purpose it's not

entirely intrinsic but it does hold on

to something very fundamental about what

education is right the it holds on to

the account of um an an intrinsic

argument is that you can't be that

um education

is is for critical thinking and for

autonomy. So you can't you you can't

tell you can't teach people how to solve

the problem.

What you can do is give them the the the

instruments on how to think and

I'm not I'm getting tired here. But I

want to give them I want to they need to

be able to read, write, and think,

right? And to make decisions and to

understand a whole range of views.

So they can make the decisions to solve

problems, but you're not going to tell

them exactly how to do it. Does that

make sense? I'm not so I'm trying to

avoid I'm trying to avoid education

becoming an instrument of any particular

ideology or

ideology is too big a word but any

um any any obvious solution

but that the so so that's how I'm kind

of doing these two things

in the ideal

I don't know what

[Music]