Nkosinathi ‘Nathi’ Madondo is an external expert in the Higher Education Research Group at York St John, bringing theoretical expertise and practical experience of decolonisation of the higher education curriculum and the epistemic inclusion of marginalised students in higher education. What follows is a shortened version of an online interview with him by Dr Margaret Meredith at the York Festival of Ideas 2024 to launch her edited book Universities and epistemic justice in a plural world: Knowing better, in which Nathi’s chapter features. He reflects on his own experiences of apartheid, why the post-apartheid era still raises issues of exclusion for rural students and how he has worked towards their inclusion.
In his chapter Rural Students and Science: Curricular Justice, Epistemic Justice and Epistemic Freedom, Nathi’ considers the teaching and learning in a previously privileged institution in post-apartheid South Africa. He argues that in this historical, political and institutional context, access to higher education has to go beyond inviting previously marginalised students onto courses. He questions university knowledge, based on colonial ways of knowing, and considers how he supported students in achieving access on an epistemic level.
Interview
Margaret: Could you tell us something about your own background?
Nathi: I grew up in a Township called Mpumalanga or Hammarsdale in the outskirts of Durban in South Africa which emanated from the segregation policies of the then apartheid government. People like myself were displaced at the time because of the regime. During the mid 80s people of my age and colour – we found ourselves moving from one place to the next, because of what was happening at the time in our townships. It’s what we could call black on black violence. Of course, this was perpetuated by the regime of the time, because it was easier for them to pursue their segregation policies if there was violence among blacks themselves. There were always killings and burning of houses. So, from then we were running away, moving from one place to the next.
So my generation became aware of politics and displacement at that age of 13 and 14. But wherever I went I always wanted to find a school. I don’t know why. And so eventually when I came back to the Township in the early 90s after Mandela’s release,
I already had high school certificate.
Margaret: And you then went on to get a PhD, which is remarkable.
Nathi: Yes, you could say that. There were structural constraints, like the system of apartheid. I guess as much as the system was designed to make us powerless, because of one’s agency, one was able to move beyond such constraints. But how did that happen? Really, I cannot tell you how.
Margaret: Which university were you working in when you did the research for the chapter in the book?
Nathi: I was working at Rhodes University, in South Africa.
Margaret: Could you tell us about the context of that university?
Nathi:Well, as I’ve just indicated, the nature of South African society was institutionally segregated, where some people would be enabled to access top universities. Some universities were structurally designed to cater for different racial groups, so Rhodes University was one of the universities which was designed to cater for the white population, mainly English speaking. So you had universities for whites, English and universities for white Afrikaans, and you have black universities. And what happened within these universities was that the quality of resources, human capital, infrastructure, nothing was the same. So white universities were more advantaged and privileged and research intensive. And Rhodes emanates from that background, and so it is historically a research intensive quite advantaged university.
The doors of institutions were then opened after the new dispensation of democracy, so the doors of learning and access were then open. So I was able to find myself in that space.
Margaret: And what did you teach?
Nathi: I was employed as a language specialist in science, and my job was to enable epistemic access to the disciplinarity of science. What that means is that when the doors of learning were opened for all races, the idea was to make sure that everyone gets quality education. The problem was that the focus of the teaching at most was on the content that needed to be taught but not on how that content was constructed, and of course different disciplines construct and identify themselves through language, and so my role was to enable students access the disciplinarity of science. I worked collaboratively with the lecturers from physics, chemistry, Geology and Human Ergonomics. I would take some students on my own, to enhance what was happening in their content modules, focussing on academic writing in science, the social aspect of science, among other aspects that enables epistemic access beyond content.
Margaret: And what was the profile of the students at the university when you were teaching there?
Nathi: OK, well maybe I can start by saying that since the university was historically white about 2 decades back, the public, the cohort of student was predominantly white. When I joined the university around 2015 towards 2021, the student that I taught mainly came from rural areas of South Africa and were mainly black and rural areas in South Africa are characterised by disadvantage and limited access to material resources. So these students come mainly from lower class backgrounds.
Margaret: And how did you feel about your work there?
Nathi: You know, finding yourself in that space for anyone, I think is a dream come true, because it is associated with privilege. And so you see yourself moving from a lower-class background, to at least some kind of status. I was happy to be there. But at the same time, I saw myself in the shoes of the students I was teaching, because we came from more or less the same background, and I could notice and observe some of the challenges that they were facing in relation to the modules that they were enrolled in. I would say my feeling was twofold, if you like. I was happy but at the same time I was noticing things which were rather challenging for students if I may put it that way
Margaret: What were some of the concerns you had in relation to knowledge and epistemic justice?
Nathi: So when I would take these students who were in my classes, one of the things that I noticed was the level of participation. Just to get them participating was very difficult. You had to try different strategies. It seemed to suggest that the students are not motivated enough, or some said, intelligent enough. Based on research I found these assumptions very problematic. It did not make sense to me. There was something beyond what one was seeing, and for me that needed to be
Investigated in one way or the other.
Margaret: So what did you do? What action did you take to start to address your concerns?
Nathi: I engaged in some practical activities, to try and understand what was going on, through research to make a case, to make an argument. As an academic, you can’t just make assumptions that are not based on evidence, so research had to be done. I did research on trying to understand who was in my classroom. What it is that they bring with them? Who are these students that I’m teaching? Where do they come from? What is it that they bring with them? Of course, when you do research, you make some assumptions, so some of the assumptions I made was that these students are not blank slates and are not deficit in themselves as people. You know, they might be coming from deficit backgrounds, but then as people are not deficit.
Can we learn something from what they bring with them? And if that is the case, how that can be used as a pathway to epistemic access?
Margaret: Could you give an example of a different approach that you took or an activity that you did in the class.
Nathi: OK, alright. In science you talk about observations, measurements and experiments as methods of knowing. I gave students some questions to find out about their background, about biographical information, where they come from, who they are and what they know. And I asked a question specifically about some incident, critical incidents that they have observed that they’ve seen, from home that might have scientific underpinnings, in one way or the other.
And so in their response, the students indicated that they have observed certain things, I mean observations of things that take place in their surroundings, and from what they gave me then I could start from there. In other words, I worked from the context of the student and then moved towards the context of the discipline. And I tried to make links between the two so we could identify interactions and clashes, and work around those. The discipline of science itself is abstract, and so if I start from a very abstract complex nature then it becomes difficult for students. I had to start at a very concrete level at a very context-based level. Much as science is decontextualised, but the context for me is important.
Margaret: In your chapter you use a lovely example of cow dung. Could you explain that?
Nathi: Yes. One of the things that was, that they have observed that around the ‘kraal’ – which is a piece of land that is surrounded with poles or a fence where you keep your farm animals like cattle. And around the kraal they observed that the grass is always green, you know even in winter, while in other spaces it is yellowish. So that for them created some kind of curiosity, but they did not know what to do with that. But they were curious to know why the grass is always green there. And that for me was a very good way of starting to teach science because science starts with carefully rigorous observations. And they could see that their observations in the kraal have scientific underpinnings. The point was I wanted us to talk about this, to have a conversation, to participate, to see that at least what they already know can have some bearing in what we are doing in class. So, in other words, learning does not only take place within the classroom, it can also take place elsewhere and the students arrive at university with a lot of knowledge.
Margaret: And what main insights would you like others to get from your chapter?
Nathi: I think one of the challenges is that when we go into our classrooms, into our lecture halls most of us what we do is to teach for grading. But maybe what we need to do is first to teach for learning. Before you teach for credits, how do you teach for learning? In other words, you need to make the ground fertile for everyone within the classroom so that they are able to participate. How do you do that? Students should be able to see themselves in curriculum because curriculum in a broader sense is not just about the subject, or the topics that we choose to teach. It moves beyond that. You know it is about who is teaching, who is being taught.
Who is participating in class and who is not and why they are not participating? What is the hidden curriculum? So there’s a broader concept of curriculum. If we understand curriculum from that position, then we can begin to start by teaching for learning, by making the ground fertile, let’s know who is in our classroom before we teach them to assess for grading. We can use what they bring with them. That can be a leverage or a pathway to access complex science. Teaching science is not as simplistic as it sounds here but it can be starting point. How can we give examples from the backgrounds of the students to teach complex concepts, to enrich the curriculum and the student experience more broadly?
Margaret: What would you say the advantages are of cross-disciplinary work (such as in the Higher Education Research Group)?
Nathi: While my expertise is in language but as a language specialist in science, I have observed that the importance of cross-disciplinary work. Enabling epistemic access to science disciplinary knowledge or for students to become effective participants, they need to know how and why language is used in science. How do we account for objectivity, generalisability or reproducibility in science through language. Evidently, I observed cross-disciplinarity or interdisciplinarity in action and practically.
Such cross-disciplinarity was also observed during Covid-19 where scientists worked closely with social sciences to find ways to cope with the challenges brought about by the pandemic.