Endogenous Higher Education in Africa: A Sustainable Model

Abstract

This study is informed by the endogenous theory as applied to higher education in the context of Africa in general and Zambia in particular. The study explored the Global Knowledge Institute (GKI) as a prototype endogenous university education system: how it was designed

the extent to which, within the confines of its early development, was sustainable in Zambia

and the lessons that can be derived from its successes, failures and opportunities.

A mixed methods approach to action research that supports the exploratory and descriptive nature of the study was used. A between method-and-data triangulation was employed in data collection and analysis. This means research methods ? documentary analysis (different archival databases), oral interviews (GKI students, researchers, professors, civil society and community members) and personal diaries (based on participatory observation) ? were juxtaposed. The data was analyzed using a constant comparative strategy, a research analysis for multi-data sources which begins early in the study, is nearly completed by the end of data collection, and leads to both descriptive and explanatory categories.

The findings showed that the sustainability of an endogenously designed university education system lies in the changes its structure and ideology brings about, thus transforming the theory and practice of higher education, as traditionally conceived. Traditionally, universities are defined by campuses presided over by professors and libraries as the sources of knowledge. Students are required to master this knowledge, then get assessed, and if they pass, graduated to go and apply the acquired knowledge in society. The public is charged with the task of financing this schooling. While many children qualify to enter university, only a few make it, not necessarily because of their brilliance, but because of their financial capacity and, often, connections to realms of power. The endogenous university challenges this with its content and outlook characterized by transformative learning, global networking, local community engagement (which is a social collective problem-solving alignment), inter-and-transdisciplinary pioneer system approaches to learning, orientation towards universal higher education access to foster university leadership in social transformation through creative research and innovations, and inventive technological applications. With these traits, it systemically and adaptively causes fundamental shifts on hallmark areas of education practice: capital, value, assessment, knowledge sharing, staffing and access.

On capital, the discourse shifts from physical capital to social capital ? access to people, the dynamic resources incorporated in the local and global networks of individual persons, households, communities, businesses and organizations. The value shift is from things such as tuition (money) to knowledge and richness in diversity each individual learner, expert and community brings into the network. This is linked to the shift on assessment. Rather than focusing on test scores and economic value of certification, assessment turns to the co-creation of knowledge to solve real problems and, the capability and competence building processes to meet future learning needs of learners and communities. The old view of how knowledge is shared changes from restrictive, discriminatory and fiscally unsustainable approaches to more open access databases and crowd sourcing information networks. The discourse of staffing and brain drain shifts to ideas of wirearchy management systems and brain networking. Then, the discourse on access becomes universal access to higher education. It is within these new parameters that GKI, albeit with challenges, prove itself to be operational and sustainable.