Integrating Indigenous Knowledge into Science Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics using Virtual Space: A Mission Impossible?

Document Type : Brief Report

Author

Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (DMSTE), University of Limpopo, Polokwane, South Africa

Abstract

While South African curricula require the incorporation of Indigenous Knowledge (IK) into Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), it is not clear what IK educators should include in STEM. The onus is on lecturers to decide what exactly should be taught and what pedagogy to use. The purpose of this discourse is to explore the integration of IK into Western knowledge (WK) using virtual space. The discourse is about the challenges of using virtual space to increase the applicability of IK in STEM subjects at schools and institutions of higher learning. These challenges emanate from IK being tacit and not digitized, place-specific, and incompatibility with WK. The IK knowledge is with custodians who share it with their few selected children, which makes it less accessible to schools. Also, because of a lack of curriculum clarity of what is available either in print or in digital formats that can be taught and assessed, there is a lack of skills in IK teaching, educators’ negative attitudes towards IK, and a lack of learning materials to support learning. Despite these challenges, the Information, Communication, Distribution, and Transaction (ICDT) model and the Indigenous Institutional Theory (ITT) can be blended, forming Valorizing Indigenous Knowledge (VIK) to integrate IK in STEM. Hence, the impossible mission can be possible. 

Highlights

Israel Kibirige (Google Scholar)

Keywords

References

  1. Green LJF. The Indigenous Knowledge Systems Policy of 2004: Challenges for South African Universities. Social Dynamics. 2017;33(1):130–54. doi: 10.1080/02533950708628746.
  2. Msila V. From Apartheid Education to the Revised National Curriculum Statement: Pedagogy for Identity Formation and Nation Building in South Africa. NJAS. 2007;16(2): 146-160. doi: 10.53228/NJAS.v16i2.63.
  3. Tabata IB. Education for Barbarism. University of Michigan: Pall Mall; 1960.
  4. Jansen J, Taylor N. Educational Change in South Africa 1994-2003: Case Studies in Large-Scale Education Reform. Country Studies Education Reform and Management Publication Series. 2003;2(1):1-47. Available from: documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/129941468778149162/pdf/282500PAPER0Ed1outh0Africa01Public1.pdf.
  5. Motala E. Transformation of the South African schooling system. The Centre for Education Policy Development (CEPD): Braamfontein; 2017.
  6. Harden RM. AMEE Guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: Part 1-An introduction to outcome-based education. Med Teach. 1999;21(1):7–14. doi: 10.1080/01421599979969.
  7. Pinnock A J E. A practical guide to implementing CAPS: A toolkit for teachers, school managers and education officials to use to assist in managing the implementation of a new curriculum. Alexandra: NAPTOSA; 2011.
  8. Angehrn A, Designing mature Internet business strategies: the ICDT model. Eur Manag J. 1997;15(4):361-9. doi: 10.1016/S0263-2373(97)00016-9.
  9. Madiope M, Mendy J. Curriculum transformation: A case in South Africa. Perspectives in Education. 2020;38(2):1-9. doi: 10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i1.1.
  10. Ngubane NI, Makua M. Intersection of Ubuntu pedagogy and social justice: Transforming South African higher education. Transformation in Higher Education. 2021;6(1):1-8. doi: 10.4102/the.v6i0.113.
  11. Moremoholo TP. The Role of Culture in Shaping the Curriculum of Higher Education in South Africa. JCSR. 2023;5(2):37-55. doi: 10.46303/jcsr.2023.17.
  12. Kaya HO, Seleti YN. African indigenous knowledge systems and relevance of higher education in South Africa. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives. 2013;12(1):30-44. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1017665.pdf
  13. Tamene EH. Theorizing Conceptual Framework. Asian Journal of Educational Research. 2016;4(2):50-6. Available from: https://ju.edu.et/education-and-behavioral-science/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/01/THEORIZING-CONCEPTUAL-FRAMEWORK.pdf
  14. Jaakkola E. Designing Conceptual Articles: Four Approaches. AMS review. 2020;10(1):18-26. doi: 10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0.
  15. Lukka K, Vinnari E. Domain theory and method theory in management accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. 2014;27(8):1308-38. Available from: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-03-2013-1265/full/html.
  16. Tong T. Ten steps toward effective knowledge audits. Knowledge Management Review. 2005;8(3):1-5. Availabe from: https://primo.qatar-weill.cornell.edu/permalink/974WCMCIQ_INST/1e7q4lh/cdi_proquest_reports_217490092.
  17. Dinur A. Tacit knowledge Taxonomy and Transfer: Case-based Research. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management. 2011;12(3):246–81. doi: 10.21818/001c.17865.
  18. Kibirige I, Van Rooyen H. Enriching science teaching through the inclusion of indigenous knowledge. IK in the science classroom, in de Beers, J & van Rooyen, H (eds), Teaching science in the OBE classroom, Johannesburg: MacMillan; 2007; P. 235-247.
  19. Jessen TD, Ban NC, Claxton NX, Darimont CT. Contributions of Indigenous Knowledge to ecological and evolutionary understanding. Front Ecol Environ. 2022;20(2):93-101. doi: 10.1002/fee.2435.
  20. Semali LM, Kincheloe JL. Introduction: What is indigenous knowledge and why should we study it? In: Kincheloe J, editor. What is indigenous knowledge? New York: Routledge. 1999; P. 3-57.doi: 10.4324/9780203906804.
  21. Sanders M. What exactly do I have to do? Understanding the requirements of the new curriculum. Proceedings of the South African Association of Science and Technology Educators; 2006 Jul 3-6; Durban, South Africa.
  22. Coates SK, Trudgett M, Page S. Indigenous institutional theory: a new theoretical framework and methodological tool. Aust Educ Res. 2023;50(3):903-20. doi: 10.1007/s13384-022-00533-4.
  23. Nakata M, Disciplining the savages, savaging the disciplines. Aboriginal Studies Press: Canberra; 2007.
  24. Lammers JC, Garcia MA. Institutional theory approaches. The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication. 2017;1–10. doi: 10.1002/9781118955567.wbieoc113.
  25. Ryan T, Evans M. The wisdom of differentiating between Indigenous leader and Indigenous leadership. In: Intezari A, Spiller C, Yang S ying, editors. Practical Wisdom, Leadership and Culture - Indigenous, Asian and Middle-Eastern Perspectives. 1st ed. Routledge; 2021.
  26. Gottfredson RK, Reina CS. Exploring why leaders do what they do: An integrative review of the situation-trait approach and situation-encoding schemas. The Leadership Quarterly. 2020;31(1):101373. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101373.
  27. Masoga M. How indigenous is the Bible? Challenges facing 21st century South African biblical scholarship. Journal for Semitics. 2004;13(2):139-58. Available from: https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC101034
  28. Horak E, Fricke I. Building Capacity by Mentoring Mathematics and Science Teachers. Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Asphalt Pavements for Southern Africa (CAPSA'04); 12–16 September 2004; Sun City, South Africa. Available from: researchgate.net/publication/228949598_Building_capacity_by_mentoring_mathematics_and_science_teachers.
  29. Rodolico G, Hirsu L. Virtual Reality in education: supporting new learning experiences by developing self-confidence of Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) student-teachers. EMI Educ Media Int. 2023; 60:2, 92-108. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2023.2262195.
  30. Chen PH, Ho HW, Chen HC, Tam KW, Liu JC, Lin LF. Virtual reality experiential learning improved undergraduate students’ knowledge and evaluation skills relating to assistive technology for older adults and individuals with disabilities. BMC Medical Education. 2024;24(1):101. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05085-y.
Interdiscip J Virtual Learn Med Sci
Volume 15, Issue 3 - Serial Number 58
September 2024
Pages 214-220

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics