Student and staff perceptions of decolonisation at two South African universities: a capabilities analysis

Abstract

Although the topic of decolonisation, as a concept and as a process, has been widely debated in the media and in academic circles around the world, it remains a highly contested issue, due to its complexity. In South Africa, it has been adopted widely in higher education transformation discourses, but there is no consensus on its meaning, or on how it can be implemented and measured. A central question asked in this study was why and how individuals would value decolonisation, and what we can learn if we ask staff members and students about the concept and its connection with their aspirations for the future of higher education in Africa. Through a qualitative design, a non-representative sample of 44 participants (university students and staff members) from two diverse universities in South Africa (one historically disadvantaged, the other historically advantaged) were interviewed. The data were coded and analysed thematically using Amartya Sen’s capability approach as an interpretive framework.

The findings indicate six capabilities and functionings that are valued by students and staff: • The capability to participate in decolonisation processes; • The capability to decolonise through competent and confident use of language; • The capability to participate in dialogue and public deliberation that facilitates decolonisation; • The capability for recognition, respect, inclusion, and belonging in decolonised institutions; and • The capability for decolonisation through epistemic contribution and engagement in local and global bodies of knowledge.

The capability approach was adopted because it provides an expansive vocabulary and conceptual tools for exploring the inequalities individuals experience in relation to their positionalities in the world, and within institutions; because it encourages questions about the effective freedoms and opportunities that individuals value in higher education settings, for themselves and for others. By foregrounding a capabilities analysis of descriptions and experiences of decolonisation, a new way of operationalising the way to transform universities is proposed, focusing on human development – the enhancement of individuals’ well-being, and valued freedoms. The study, therefore, makes a novel contribution to literature and the debate on decolonisation, both conceptually and empirically.