Search

In this article we discuss the difference between curriculum studies (as a field of inquiry) in the posthuman condition and posthuman curriculum (studies). The posthuman condition is characterised by both posthumanism and post-anthropocentrism and relates respectively, to how we now define human given humans' entanglement with new technologies, and the ethical response-ability of humans in intra-action with the more-than-human-world in a context of impending ecological disaster. In this article we shall argue that although Enlightenment humanism has been challenged philosophically/conceptually both in discourses on anti-humanism and posthumanism, humanist approaches to curriculum studies remain with us in the posthuman condition - the ghosts of Dewey, Tyler, Freire, etc., imbue much of curriculum work. However, the posthuman condition also produces posthuman thought that makes it possible to reimagine curriculum studies, that we shall call posthuman curriculum (studies). We shall review different approaches to curriculum studies in the posthuman condition, and then turn our attention to posthuman curriculum (studies). We argue that curriculum (as a vital concept) in posthumanist terms is intelligible and manifests through intra-actions, processes of becoming and experimenting. Set against sedentary states of being that mark curriculum studies in the posthuman condition; becoming, intra-acting and experimenting in posthuman curriculum (studies) are acts, doings in and of this world. The acts and doings in posthuman curriculum (studies) that are mostly written about include: improvisation, theorisation and diffraction. To these we add and specifically discuss quantum tunnelling, tracing, and desiring. Other forms of curriculum experimentation worthy of consideration in posthuman curriculum (studies) but not discussed in the article are queering, imagining, and writing. Towards the end we make the point that although some connections with the past (such as those that haunt curriculum discourses) can be threatening to life, connections of the thick now hold potential and radical openness for newness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the “#RhodesMustFall” and “#FeesMustFall” student protests of 2015 and 2016 there has been much written about decolonisation in South Africa, particularly in relation to the curriculum. However, not much has been written about individual responsibility in the process of decolonisation, which Fanon (1967) argued is a necessary condition for decolonisation. In this article I argue that the autobiographical method, currere is one form of decolonisation. I use currere to document my own journey of decolonisation. I conclude that taking individual responsibility in decolonising the university curriculum involves a lifelong affair of unlearning and relearning from which no one is exempt because even those leading the decolonial project take in coloniality on a daily basis. Such a lifelong affair will involve multiple cycles of currere’s four steps so that currere, as a form of decolonisation, becomes a spiral of multiple cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The student protests of 2015 precipitated a renewed interest in the decolonisation of the university in South Africa, and by association the decolonisation of the university curriculum. The decolonisation of the curriculum is an important conversation, and long overdue, given that the Western model of academic organisation on which the South African university is based, remains largely unchallenged. In this article I add to the conversation by discussing what decolonisation entails, why the need for decolonisation, the importance of rethinking how curriculum is conceived, and outlining some possible ways of decolonising the university curriculum. The purpose is not to provide a set of answers but to open up ways of (re)thinking the university curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Even though the term 'curriculum' has its origin in higher education it is a neglected term in discourses on higher education. In the field of Curriculum Studies it is the school rather than the university curriculum that is mainly studied. This may be due to the relative autonomy that higher education institutions (HEIs) enjoy and the academic freedom granted its members. The downside of institutional autonomy and academic freedom in the South African context is that the Africanisation/decolonisation of curricula has been left unaddressed by some universities. Twenty years into South Africa's democracy it is an opportune time to again ask the key curriculum question: What knowledge is of most worth? What knowledge is of most worth to South African university students located on the African continent and who form part of a global society? In this article, the author shall discuss the Africanisation of the university curriculum by drawing on insights from: the sociology of knowledge; indigenous knowledge; a different reading of the knowledge economy (different to the neoliberal reading). The author shall argue that Africanisation of the university curriculum is dependent on understanding the active force of the etymological root of the term currere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their article Ogunniyi and Ogawa explore the prospects and challenges of training South African and Japanese educators to enact an indigenized science curriculum. They discuss the nature of science and the nature of indigenous knowledge (IK) and also that IK is acknowledged alongside Western science as a legitimate way of knowing in the new curricula of both countries. Ogunniyi and Ogawa argue that although indigenous knowledge is recognized in the science curricula of the two countries, successful implementation will require specific teacher training. I wish to address three areas of their work that afford an opportunity for further discussion. First, I argue that a focus on the performative side of science provides a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between Western science and indigenous knowledge. Second, I discuss the role of indigenous knowledge in a global knowledge economy, an area that Ogunniyi and Ogawa do not give much attention. Third, I elaborate on the challenges that an indigenized science curriculum has for teacher education, another area which I feel Ogunniyi and Ogawa do not do justice to. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on educational curriculum as a neglected part in the discourses of higher education. He argues that curriculum is an ignored area in higher education specifically in South Africa. He suggests several important curriculum issues that must be considered by the policy makers. Areas that offer challenges and provide opportunities in setting the issue right is also presented.