Modernizing Tertiary Education - some ideas
Greetings Patrick, I saved this for the weekend so that I can reflect on it as I read it carefully. I almost shed tears at how good and elaborate the ideas you have proposed are. Thank you. Last week, I met a PhD holder who has lectured for more than a decade as a senior lecturer with no hope of progressing to professorship. Why? Today, to be considered for associate professorship in a Kenyan university, you must supervise two PhD seekers and four master’s degree students, working through their thesis. This was made necessary because oft times, a PhD candidate would submit his work to the supervisor who would then sit on it, since it did not affect the supervisor’s career prospects. However, now my “Dr.” friend is in a discipline that is not attracting a lot of research and thus PhD candidates. The few he has had to deal with try to push shoddy work, believing that he would stoop low and pass the work since he “needs” his professorship. He is resigned to the fact that though he is producing fresh knowledge that is being published outside the country, on the continent and beyond, he now seeks to retire from academia and pursue other literary interests. I contrasted his path with mine; non-stop learning, education delivered high speed on the Internet, designing and developing web software with no end in demand in sight. I just have to keep my mind sharp and eyes open for relevant technologies that are applicable in Kenya and Africa as a whole. My path was the non-standard one and for a long time my PhD friend use to worry for me. Now I am worried for him and for all the ones taking that “normal” path. Recently, I heard of a young “mechanic” who repairs the now electronic cars. Think of the latest Range Rovers. I was told that the cheapest he charges for a “look-see” of a car is 2,500/-. It hit me. That is what an chest specialist charges. TVET is going to be the way to go. Finland has the best offer in this area - http://www.euroeducation.net/prof/finco.htm <http://www.euroeducation.net/prof/finco.htm>. And I have not even discussed IoT. Best Regards, Jimmy Gitonga Lead, Design and Development at Afroshok LinkedIn: Jimmy Gitonga | Twitter: @Afrowave ______________________________________
On 28 Mar 2019, at 11:05 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Greetings Listers, The world is changing very rapidly and things that the older generations took for granted no longer apply. There are no jobs waiting for students when they graduate - that era ended decades ago (I believe in the 70s and early 80s). Yet, for some reason, academia appears to be stuck in time, doing things that no longer make sense.
Here are some thoughts / ideas on what can be done to reform and rescue our tertiary education sector. (PhD holders might be interested in debating point No. 6. - is it too harsh or the right approach in principle? HR Policy practitioners might be interested in point No. 5..):
1. There is need for Government to strategically position TVETs and Universities as direct implementers of Vision 2030 and Big 4 objectives. Example - academia role should include creating sustainable jobs directly, and taking measures to guarantee high employment of graduates; instead of mechanically preparing our young people for jobs that may, or may not exist, then leaving them trapped in debt.
2. Expand CUE mandate to cover TVETs (as Commission for Tertiary Education); and then Implement a Universal Credit Accumulation and Transfer System - that creates multiple pathways *of equal status* towards higher qualifications (i.e. including transferable credits for TVET education and/or credits for demonstrable on-the-job / startup experience). This calls for a national skills mapping database that is derived from, and/or supports strategic national objectives (as outlined in vision 2030 & Big 4 master-plans). Accelerate regional accreditation to leverage intra-Africa synergies in view of AfCFTA.
3. Require *all* form 4 / grade x leavers to first attend TVETs for at least 2 years to gain hands-on technical skills for real world self-sufficiency, before they (i.e. those who wish to do so) attend university. Rationale: We need to keep our eye on the goal. The goal of education, imo,is not to create "paper churning, hands-off, intellectual elites" who lack real-world-relevant skills, but to create a competent, grounded, hands-on, innovative and future-proofed workforce that is capable of applying knowledge by making or doing things that help solve, in tangible and measurable ways, very specific challenges faced by our country (primarily) or to help solve global problems in a way that primarily and tangibly benefits our country (enhancing our global brand / jobs creation / high-value exports / attracting high quality FDI etc).
4. De-eliticize university education by creating high-value technical specialist pathways via TVETs (for high paying jobs and societal status / recognition). This would temper the belief held by the general public that a university degree is the only path to success and social mobility / status.
5. Employers to emphasize and primarily rely on real-world achievements for competence signalling - rather than relying on academic papers. For example, job advertisements should stop asking for academic qualifications. This is a pointless, tick-box requirement that only creates a market for "River Road degrees".
For regulated roles, like medicine or engineering, having a valid practicing license should be a sufficient indicator of academic achievement as the license (hopefully) cannot be issued without verification of the required academic background.
We now have the indigenous capacity to implement competency-based hiring painlessly with technology (e.g. via ongoing programs of supervised, automated technical screening assessments to create a national pool of vetted job candidates - which incidentally would eliminate a lot of wastefully redundant HR activities - at macro level). Hopefully tenderpreneurs / MNC lobbyists will not hijack and subvert this idea. Shindwe! :-)
Incidentally implementing the above suggestion will reduce incentives for cheating or cram & dump learning.
6. Using policy and regulation to strictly limit career pathways for PhD holders such that they primarily engage in research and academia. Government and corporations should stop hiring PhD holders for full-time administrative roles, for example. It is wasteful, short-sighted and counterproductive (considering the massive resources expended to educate people to that level, as well as the need to productively leverage the intellectual potential of earned PhD holders as a super-scarce resource in Africa).
PhD holders should be primarily dedicated to pushing the boundaries of knowledge for the benefit of our country - and they should be rewarded very well for it and accorded top societal honors / as well as status (so they are not tempted to seek jobs that do not develop / challenge their intellectual abilities / potential).
The only exception would be for very specific, short term, high-impact, research-reliant-projects or initiatives with very precise and highly specialized objectives, where exceptionally high levels of real expertise is needed.
The PhD designation should have (3-5) designation levels that signify real-world achievement at post-doctorate level. PhD holders, other than retirees, who wish to permanently engage in non-research work (or work that can be done by Masters / Bachelors degree holders) should be required to permanently relinquish their PhD qualification and lose the "Dr." designation.
There needs to be a distinctive high-status designation for non-academic honorary doctorates e.g. "Exceptional Life Achiever Degree" with the title "Lx." in recognition of non-academic transformational achievements with high societal impact.
7. Academic institutions should form corporations to engage in intellectual property businesses for profit (e.g. IP licensing / manufacturing & distribution) to raise research funds. This requires a pragmatic expansion of institutional mandate as well as strengthening and contextualizing the indigenous IP framework.
8. Pedagogy should be driven by a projects-based learning paradigm with deep integration of learning and real-world work. Removing artificial (and retrogressive) boundaries or demarcations between industry and academia:
a. Why should learners first graduate before they can start working? This is a mindset problem. Does it make sense to have schoolwork and employment / MSME startups kept separate (yet they are complementary and interdependent)?
b. Why allow someone without real-world paid work (not industrial attachment, but a real job or real MSME startup experience) to graduate?
c. Why can't students learn and gain academic credits on the job (doing real, paid work for someone or in their own startups)?
d.? Why ask our children to choose the projects they want to work on without setting a strategic real-world context that is mapped to real world goals (e.g. Big 4) and real career prospects. Projects-based learning can solve this - with emphasis on projects that can create sustainable wealth for the country (sold to regional governments or the consumer public).
We need to train a generation of self-starters who can survive by creating their own opportunities - irrespective of the economy or jobs market.
Students should incorporate real startups (with seed funding from Government) during 2nd year - to make and sell products that solve real-world problems in our country / region - and then earn transferable academic credits for demonstrable experience.
Employers like Government, MSMEs and corporations can embed academia into the workplace by adopting an apprenticeship approach in partnership with Universities and TVETs to hire 2nd year students and assign them to projects that enable them to earn "on-job learning credits".
By the time they graduate, at least 99% ought to be gainfully employed (or running real businesses). This is how you tackle poverty and unemployment in a sustainable way. So what really prevents us from doing this - other than mindset?
I know the above might read like heresy to traditionalists - but before you grab the pitchforks and light the torches, look around you... status quo is not working, that's the reality - and things will get worse as 4IR gradually kicks in - if we don't effect radical transformation.
I'd be happy to have a round-table with the faculty of any tertiary institution that is interested in discussing / debating the above points.
Have a great evening! Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross Domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations]
Wow! Thank you Jimmy, for the deep, thoughtful and candid response. The example you have given goes right to the very the heart of the matter: Our value system, the essential "why" around everything we do, is poorly articulated and inadequate. Article 10. is arguably the most important chapter in the constitution as it governs the interpretation and application of the constitution, as well as, all laws and all policies made in Kenya. Yet it is one of the most vague and poorly thought out chapters in the document. Article 10 defines "national values and principles of governance" as: (a) patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, the rule of law, democracy and participation of the people;(b) human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusiveness, equality, human rights, non-discrimination and protection of the marginalised; (c) good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability; and (d) sustainable development. Even though the terms used in Article 10 sound nice and (perhaps were intended to) conform to donor buzz-phrases, no one really knows exactly what they mean, why they were chosen, why other values were left out and why the ones chosen are good/best for us! Change management practitioners will concur that it is very difficult (if not impossible) to have intrinsic community buy-in, ownership and actualization of "top-down" imposed values - notwithstanding the benefits. National values must be intrinsically held - and must make sense at a personal level - or they will not be practiced voluntarily and consistently, especially when "no one is looking". For example, what does "equality" really mean in Article 10? Is it about equality of opportunity or is it rooting for equality of outcomes or is it a paradoxical mix of both - and in what ways? Clear answers would/should fundamentally shape our choice of economic ideology and/or policies. Arbitrarily advocating for "equality" without defining the term, in view of strategic objectives, does not make sense. Even gender equality has certain implications which require careful thought e.g. how do we ensure that working parents are not sacrificing their kids values, wholesome development and future prospects by leaving them in the care of semi-literate, un-vetted guardians - in order to achieve present-day economic goals? Perhaps we need mandatory daycare and/or nursing centers in - or within walking distance of - all office buildings and at least 6 months maternity leave + 12 months flexi-time / remote work for nursing mothers for example...? which leads to... how does motherhood impact career options and does that affect the practicality of gender equality at vocational level? We need such discussions and debates in academia, media and policy circles. Other notoriously ambiguous terms in Article 10 include "democracy", "equality", "good governance", "integrity", "transparency" and "accountability". The assumption is that these oft-politicized words can have a universal meaning - which is simply not true. Article 10 conflates terminologies - which only adds more confusion: Is there / should there be a difference between national values and principles of governance? is the intention to make the two phrases synonymous or is it to restrict national values to the narrow context of governance? Again, it does not look as if adequate holistic thought was put into this laundry-list section. Crippling ambiguity can be addressed by having a "Constitutional Definitions Chapter" within the Constitution itself (something to consider if we are headed for a referendum), that allocates a reasonably precise or bounded meaning to notoriously ambiguous and/or oft-politicized constitutional terms. Resources are scarce and the idea of waiting for reactive precedence-interpretations to be made by the Supreme Court over the next 3-5 decades is sub-optimal and wasteful, in my opinion. BOTTOM-UP INDIGENOUS VALUES:-------------------------------------------------- Besides conformity to donor-imposed values, we do need our own indigenous values - purposefully designed to create conditions that guarantee our long-term prosperity and sustainability as a country. Article 10 should be the basis for the "Kenyan Dream". My thoughts about this include: a. A multi-dimensional definition of what "achievement" and "success" means in our society: What vocational archetypes should be honored, admired and emulated in our society? My suggestions include: - Vocations whose activities result in positive, direct and broad-scope societal impact (e.g. Educationists, MSMEs, Small business enablers e.g. investors, Medical practitioners, Farmers, Inventors / Innovators, Wealthy people whose wealth is traceable to fair business practices, and even Politicians / Community leaders who put public interest ahead of their own personal interests when setting policy). - A culture of aspiring for excellence for its own sake (e.g. life-long learning and self development; striving for maximum potential in chosen fields; vocational self-esteem; non-materialistic sense of worth). - Can we learn to see (and pride) ourselves as hands-on problem solvers by celebrating and empowering our indigenous innovators and inventors? - A culture that values home-grown solutions to local and global challenges (e.g. as a vehicle for economic empowerment). b. Critical Thinking as National value: For example: currently, displays of opulence are automatically interpreted as signals of competence and excellence. Very few people care to question how incredibly vast wealth can be "magically" acquired in such a short time. This allows white-collar criminals to launder their reputation and become dubious "role models" for our children - with damaging long-term consequences. Shouldn't these rags-to-riches overnight miracles be writing world best-sellers or giving business lectures in universities to help eradicate poverty? We all know they can't because the skills they have are best articulated in a confession. So, beyond feel-good terminologies, a lot of deep thought and economic architecture needs to go into the idea of a National Values System - and this should include design for linkages at strategic, tactical and day-to-day level. Best regards,Patrick. Patrick A. M. Maina [Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] On Saturday, March 30, 2019, 11:47:11 AM GMT+3, Jimmy Gitonga via kictanet <[email protected]> wrote: Greetings Patrick, I saved this for the weekend so that I can reflect on it as I read it carefully. I almost shed tears at how good and elaborate the ideas you have proposed are. Thank you. Last week, I met a PhD holder who has lectured for more than a decade as a senior lecturer with no hope of progressing to professorship. Why? Today, to be considered for associate professorship in a Kenyan university, you must supervise two PhD seekers and four master’s degree students, working through their thesis. This was made necessary because oft times, a PhD candidate would submit his work to the supervisor who would then sit on it, since it did not affect the supervisor’s career prospects. However, now my “Dr.” friend is in a discipline that is not attracting a lot of research and thus PhD candidates. The few he has had to deal with try to push shoddy work, believing that he would stoop low and pass the work since he “needs” his professorship. He is resigned to the fact that though he is producing fresh knowledge that is being published outside the country, on the continent and beyond, he now seeks to retire from academia and pursue other literary interests. I contrasted his path with mine; non-stop learning, education delivered high speed on the Internet, designing and developing web software with no end in demand in sight. I just have to keep my mind sharp and eyes open for relevant technologies that are applicable in Kenya and Africa as a whole. My path was the non-standard one and for a long time my PhD friend use to worry for me. Now I am worried for him and for all the ones taking that “normal” path. Recently, I heard of a young “mechanic” who repairs the now electronic cars. Think of the latest Range Rovers. I was told that the cheapest he charges for a “look-see” of a car is 2,500/-. It hit me. That is what an chest specialist charges. TVET is going to be the way to go. Finland has the best offer in this area - http://www.euroeducation.net/prof/finco.htm. And I have not even discussed IoT. Best Regards,Jimmy Gitonga Lead, Design and Development at AfroshokLinkedIn: Jimmy Gitonga | Twitter: @Afrowave______________________________________ On 28 Mar 2019, at 11:05 PM, [email protected] wrote: Greetings Listers, The world is changing very rapidly and things that the older generations took for granted no longer apply. There are no jobs waiting for students when they graduate - that era ended decades ago (I believe in the 70s and early 80s). Yet, for some reason, academia appears to be stuck in time, doing things that no longer make sense. Here are some thoughts / ideas on what can be done to reform and rescue our tertiary education sector. (PhD holders might be interested in debating point No. 6. - is it too harsh or the right approach in principle? HR Policy practitioners might be interested in point No. 5..): 1. There is need for Government to strategically position TVETs and Universities as direct implementers of Vision 2030 and Big 4 objectives. Example - academia role should include creating sustainable jobs directly, and taking measures to guarantee high employment of graduates; instead of mechanically preparing our young people for jobs that may, or may not exist, then leaving them trapped in debt. 2. Expand CUE mandate to cover TVETs (as Commission for Tertiary Education); and then Implement a Universal Credit Accumulation and Transfer System - that creates multiple pathways *of equal status* towards higher qualifications (i.e. including transferable credits for TVET education and/or credits for demonstrable on-the-job / startup experience). This calls for a national skills mapping database that is derived from, and/or supports strategic national objectives (as outlined in vision 2030 & Big 4 master-plans). Accelerate regional accreditation to leverage intra-Africa synergies in view of AfCFTA. 3. Require *all* form 4 / grade x leavers to first attend TVETs for at least 2 years to gain hands-on technical skills for real world self-sufficiency, before they (i.e. those who wish to do so) attend university. Rationale: We need to keep our eye on the goal. The goal of education, imo,is not to create "paper churning, hands-off, intellectual elites" who lack real-world-relevant skills, but to create a competent, grounded, hands-on, innovative and future-proofed workforce that is capable of applying knowledge by making or doing things that help solve, in tangible and measurable ways, very specific challenges faced by our country (primarily) or to help solve global problems in a way that primarily and tangibly benefits our country (enhancing our global brand / jobs creation / high-value exports / attracting high quality FDI etc). 4. De-eliticize university education by creating high-value technical specialist pathways via TVETs (for high paying jobs and societal status / recognition). This would temper the belief held by the general public that a university degree is the only path to success and social mobility / status. 5. Employers to emphasize and primarily rely on real-world achievements for competence signalling - rather than relying on academic papers. For example, job advertisements should stop asking for academic qualifications. This is a pointless, tick-box requirement that only creates a market for "River Road degrees". For regulated roles, like medicine or engineering, having a valid practicing license should be a sufficient indicator of academic achievement as the license (hopefully) cannot be issued without verification of the required academic background. We now have the indigenous capacity to implement competency-based hiring painlessly with technology (e.g. via ongoing programs of supervised, automated technical screening assessments to create a national pool of vetted job candidates - which incidentally would eliminate a lot of wastefully redundant HR activities - at macro level). Hopefully tenderpreneurs / MNC lobbyists will not hijack and subvert this idea. Shindwe! :-) Incidentally implementing the above suggestion will reduce incentives for cheating or cram & dump learning. 6. Using policy and regulation to strictly limit career pathways for PhD holders such that they primarily engage in research and academia. Government and corporations should stop hiring PhD holders for full-time administrative roles, for example. It is wasteful, short-sighted and counterproductive (considering the massive resources expended to educate people to that level, as well as the need to productively leverage the intellectual potential of earned PhD holders as a super-scarce resource in Africa). PhD holders should be primarily dedicated to pushing the boundaries of knowledge for the benefit of our country - and they should be rewarded very well for it and accorded top societal honors / as well as status (so they are not tempted to seek jobs that do not develop / challenge their intellectual abilities / potential). The only exception would be for very specific, short term, high-impact, research-reliant-projects or initiatives with very precise and highly specialized objectives, where exceptionally high levels of real expertise is needed. The PhD designation should have (3-5) designation levels that signify real-world achievement at post-doctorate level. PhD holders, other than retirees, who wish to permanently engage in non-research work (or work that can be done by Masters / Bachelors degree holders) should be required to permanently relinquish their PhD qualification and lose the "Dr." designation. There needs to be a distinctive high-status designation for non-academic honorary doctorates e.g. "Exceptional Life Achiever Degree" with the title "Lx." in recognition of non-academic transformational achievements with high societal impact. 7. Academic institutions should form corporations to engage in intellectual property businesses for profit (e.g. IP licensing / manufacturing & distribution) to raise research funds. This requires a pragmatic expansion of institutional mandate as well as strengthening and contextualizing the indigenous IP framework. 8. Pedagogy should be driven by a projects-based learning paradigm with deep integration of learning and real-world work. Removing artificial (and retrogressive) boundaries or demarcations between industry and academia: a. Why should learners first graduate before they can start working? This is a mindset problem. Does it make sense to have schoolwork and employment / MSME startups kept separate (yet they are complementary and interdependent)? b. Why allow someone without real-world paid work (not industrial attachment, but a real job or real MSME startup experience) to graduate? c. Why can't students learn and gain academic credits on the job (doing real, paid work for someone or in their own startups)? d.? Why ask our children to choose the projects they want to work on without setting a strategic real-world context that is mapped to real world goals (e.g. Big 4) and real career prospects. Projects-based learning can solve this - with emphasis on projects that can create sustainable wealth for the country (sold to regional governments or the consumer public). We need to train a generation of self-starters who can survive by creating their own opportunities - irrespective of the economy or jobs market. Students should incorporate real startups (with seed funding from Government) during 2nd year - to make and sell products that solve real-world problems in our country / region - and then earn transferable academic credits for demonstrable experience. Employers like Government, MSMEs and corporations can embed academia into the workplace by adopting an apprenticeship approach in partnership with Universities and TVETs to hire 2nd year students and assign them to projects that enable them to earn "on-job learning credits". By the time they graduate, at least 99% ought to be gainfully employed (or running real businesses). This is how you tackle poverty and unemployment in a sustainable way. So what really prevents us from doing this - other than mindset? I know the above might read like heresy to traditionalists - but before you grab the pitchforks and light the torches, look around you... status quo is not working, that's the reality - and things will get worse as 4IR gradually kicks in - if we don't effect radical transformation. I'd be happy to have a round-table with the faculty of any tertiary institution that is interested in discussing / debating the above points. Have a great evening! Patrick A. M. Maina[Cross Domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/ Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/pmaina2000%40yahoo.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
Thank you Patrick for a thorough response. This is packed with excellent gems that we need to unpack and ground them in a way that relates to technology as a whole and ICT in particular. Let’s start with “national values”. Kenya is a colonial construct that we can at best call a “multi-national state”. Kenya is not a nation and will never be, unless we change the strict meaning of "a nation”. "A nation is a stable community <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community> of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture>. A nation is distinct from a people <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People>, and is more abstract, and more overtly political, than an ethnic group <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group>. It is a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its autonomy, unity, and particular interests.” - Wikipedia This is a broader, modern definition that tries to include our present post-colonial territories and not what it meant before the 20th Century. The word “nation” comes from the word “birth” in Latin. A nation springs from people “born” from a particular origin, becoming an ethic group that then occupies a territory and develops a common language, material and immaterial culture and a history. Thus the Luo are a nation, The Maa are a nation, the Mijikenda are a nation. The political and abstract concept of a nation is what we now have in Europe. The important addition here is territory. England is a nation, Deutscheland is a nation, Italia is a nation. Switzerland, with three languages, is a nation. Annexation of land is an important concept since it is the minimum requirement for existence in a resource competitive environment. Once land was lost, a “nation” could disappear. This is a problem that East Africa in particular did not largely suffer from before the coming of the “White Man”. At that time, there was enough land for everyone. So Kenya is a group of nations whose territory was not defined, whether through war or diplomacy, by the people within but from powers without. Kenya is a state that appeared in 1963 since before then it did not have a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. Can we claim to be country in that sense? No. Before 1963, “Kenia” had at least three distinct governance systems. Inland (“bara”) made of “settler" and “natives", each run differently. The Northern Frontier, stretching from Turkana past Galla to Somalia. Pwani, a stretch that was run by the Sultan of Zanzibar. Having never resolved these different histories as a people within the territory of Kenya, we cannot honestly say we form a nation hence the constant, and morally right secession movements. We need to redefine who we are, from our places of origin and then look into what we can share with each other, the other nations within the Kenyan state. This is particularly important when it comes to " Indigenous Innovation”. Our present Kenyan culture is “colonial” because we appropriate from one another without acknowledgement. Look at how we treat the “Maasai Shuka”. Once it became a curio for tourist consumption, and not as dress for a particular people, Kenyans went ahead and now use it “fashionably”. The people we appropriate from, stop innovating and expressing themselves afresh through their material culture since they will continuously lose it. This is the collective pain Kenyans feel when we see the same shuka on European fashion runways but we are powerless once it comes to articulating what is wrong with that picture because we do the same to one another. The same has happened to the Kikoi. We do not acknowledge or even care about its history. But once an “enterprising” European wants to commercialise it, we up in arms but then cannot move to the next level. How do we make the Kikoi a “national” item of material culture that we can proudly wear and innovate around and other non-Kenyans must pay to use? This has not happened to the Somali “Macawiis”, the sarong' like garment worn by the men. Why? Because we do not “feel” we share anything in common yet. This is underlying reason why our “national" archives do not 'update' our Kenyan material culture. We have no permission to co-own what we are left with cultural materials stuck in their historical and ethnic settings. We have this discussion constantly with visual artists all the time. And now that we have the pressure of the “creative economy”, it is pertinent we move beyond conversations. The Khanga or Lesso is the closest we have to Kenyan clothing. We can already see how young fashion designers are reinterpreting it for modern use hence "Indigenous Innovation”. What can we learn from this particular garment and begin to appreciate one another and share responsibly? So we need to look and see one anther as people and not as political and resource contestants. We need to look at what we collectively have and can contribute to the Kenyan cultural kitty. Is it in the marriage ceremony, the similarities in the practices and thus the cultural meaning? How can this be intepretated across Kenya without taking away the particular differences and context? What does a wedding of Kenyans of Indian descent offer our mix? Only then can we will purposely begin to build national values. Best Regards, Jimmy Gitonga Lead, Design and Development at Afroshok LinkedIn: Jimmy Gitonga | Twitter: @Afrowave ______________________________________ Web: afroshok.com <http://afroshok.com/>
On 1 Apr 2019, at 5:59 PM, Patrick A. M. Maina <[email protected]> wrote:
Wow! Thank you Jimmy, for the deep, thoughtful and candid response.
The example you have given goes right to the very the heart of the matter: Our value system, the essential "why" around everything we do, is poorly articulated and inadequate.
Article 10. is arguably the most important chapter in the constitution as it governs the interpretation and application of the constitution, as well as, all laws and all policies made in Kenya. Yet it is one of the most vague and poorly thought out chapters in the document.
Article 10 defines "national values and principles of governance" as:
(a) patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, the rule of law, democracy and participation of the people; (b) human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusiveness, equality, human rights, non-discrimination and protection of the marginalised; (c) good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability; and (d) sustainable development.
Even though the terms used in Article 10 sound nice and (perhaps were intended to) conform to donor buzz-phrases, no one really knows exactly what they mean, why they were chosen, why other values were left out and why the ones chosen are good/best for us!
Change management practitioners will concur that it is very difficult (if not impossible) to have intrinsic community buy-in, ownership and actualization of "top-down" imposed values - notwithstanding the benefits. National values must be intrinsically held - and must make sense at a personal level - or they will not be practiced voluntarily and consistently, especially when "no one is looking".
For example, what does "equality" really mean in Article 10? Is it about equality of opportunity or is it rooting for equality of outcomes or is it a paradoxical mix of both - and in what ways? Clear answers would/should fundamentally shape our choice of economic ideology and/or policies. Arbitrarily advocating for "equality" without defining the term, in view of strategic objectives, does not make sense.
Even gender equality has certain implications which require careful thought e.g. how do we ensure that working parents are not sacrificing their kids values, wholesome development and future prospects by leaving them in the care of semi-literate, un-vetted guardians - in order to achieve present-day economic goals? Perhaps we need mandatory daycare and/or nursing centers in - or within walking distance of - all office buildings and at least 6 months maternity leave + 12 months flexi-time / remote work for nursing mothers for example...? which leads to... how does motherhood impact career options and does that affect the practicality of gender equality at vocational level? We need such discussions and debates in academia, media and policy circles.
Other notoriously ambiguous terms in Article 10 include "democracy", "equality", "good governance", "integrity", "transparency" and "accountability". The assumption is that these oft-politicized words can have a universal meaning - which is simply not true.
Article 10 conflates terminologies - which only adds more confusion: Is there / should there be a difference between national values and principles of governance? is the intention to make the two phrases synonymous or is it to restrict national values to the narrow context of governance? Again, it does not look as if adequate holistic thought was put into this laundry-list section.
Crippling ambiguity can be addressed by having a "Constitutional Definitions Chapter" within the Constitution itself (something to consider if we are headed for a referendum), that allocates a reasonably precise or bounded meaning to notoriously ambiguous and/or oft-politicized constitutional terms. Resources are scarce and the idea of waiting for reactive precedence-interpretations to be made by the Supreme Court over the next 3-5 decades is sub-optimal and wasteful, in my opinion.
BOTTOM-UP INDIGENOUS VALUES: -------------------------------------------------- Besides conformity to donor-imposed values, we do need our own indigenous values - purposefully designed to create conditions that guarantee our long-term prosperity and sustainability as a country. Article 10 should be the basis for the "Kenyan Dream".
My thoughts about this include:
a. A multi-dimensional definition of what "achievement" and "success" means in our society: What vocational archetypes should be honored, admired and emulated in our society? My suggestions include:
- Vocations whose activities result in positive, direct and broad-scope societal impact (e.g. Educationists, MSMEs, Small business enablers e.g. investors, Medical practitioners, Farmers, Inventors / Innovators, Wealthy people whose wealth is traceable to fair business practices, and even Politicians / Community leaders who put public interest ahead of their own personal interests when setting policy).
- A culture of aspiring for excellence for its own sake (e.g. life-long learning and self development; striving for maximum potential in chosen fields; vocational self-esteem; non-materialistic sense of worth).
- Can we learn to see (and pride) ourselves as hands-on problem solvers by celebrating and empowering our indigenous innovators and inventors?
- A culture that values home-grown solutions to local and global challenges (e.g. as a vehicle for economic empowerment).
b. Critical Thinking as National value: For example: currently, displays of opulence are automatically interpreted as signals of competence and excellence. Very few people care to question how incredibly vast wealth can be "magically" acquired in such a short time. This allows white-collar criminals to launder their reputation and become dubious "role models" for our children - with damaging long-term consequences. Shouldn't these rags-to-riches overnight miracles be writing world best-sellers or giving business lectures in universities to help eradicate poverty? We all know they can't because the skills they have are best articulated in a confession.
So, beyond feel-good terminologies, a lot of deep thought and economic architecture needs to go into the idea of a National Values System - and this should include design for linkages at strategic, tactical and day-to-day level.
Best regards, Patrick.
Patrick A. M. Maina [Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations]
Indeed Jimmy, and though we are now in a very broad-scope discussion, the reality is that sector policies - e.g. ICT or EDU policies - exist within a wider framework of constitutional values and cultural identity. Homing on the bigger picture can help give clarity to the essential "why" of things. I agree that we suffer from a national identity crisis and it is costing us dearly as it creates opportunities for better organized groups (e.g. multinational corporations) to quietly extract our resources while we bicker among ourselves, as members of little "tribal nations", about whose turn it is to plunder the country. I disagree with your assertion that Kenya will "never" be a nation and here's my reasoning: There are different ways that countries and/or nation-states can form and not all of them are organic. Conquests (via wars or colonization) are historically valid (albeit ethically controversial) methods of artificially creating or consolidating countries. Nation-states can also be artificially created after the artificial countries have been formed, through strategic cultural engineering to introduce a new source of common "cultural" identity over time (the easiest route being a language that is linguistically compatible with preexisting languages). Tanzania is a great example of successful cultural engineering in Africa. Mwalimu Julius Nyerere had the brilliant foresight to strategically position Kiswahili as a unifying language - which pre-emptively solved the problem of tribalism in a country that had over 100 ethnic groups. Tanzania is now enjoying the benefits of being a strategically engineered nation-state (e.g. fairly stable, issues based politics).
From an economic perspective that is relevant to the ICT sector, the pervasiveness of Kiswahili has created scale conditions that have enabled Tanzania's content industry (creative, film and music) to thrive and contribute tangibly to Tanzania's GDP. The quality and creativity of Bongo content is evidently far ahead of Kenya and their industry is increasingly sophisticated with a growing international audience (including non-Kiswahili speakers who just love the taarab-style melody).
In contrast Kenyan content creators have to first decide what language to create in... and because we don't have a unified identity, they have to decide what cultural style to adopt (afro, fusion, hip hop, naija, SA, trap, kapuka, EDM, gospel, lingala, tundututu, kienyeji etc) and consequently, their content lacks a distinctive Kenyan flair that would compete with what we see in Bongo. Language limitations artificially restrict market size and this puts our artists at an economic disadvantage compared to their Tanzanian counterparts. Yet this self-limiting market inefficiency is artificial and caused by obstacles that can be solved at strategic policy level. Kenyans don't seem to realize the immense value of the idea of Kenya as a nation-state (or better yet, East Africa, or United Africa as a nation-state). Size matters in almost all aspects in the modern world (GDP, Natural Resources, Population / Labour) - especially when starting from a position of disadvantage. Identifying as "tribal nations" is a short-sighted recipe for poverty and backwardness. Indeed if our leaders can agree to adopt Mwalimu Nyerere's cultural vision, and shift the political narrative from identity to issues-based, Kenya will accelerate its maturity into a nation state, possibly within a few decades. Thanks again for the great discussion & Brgds,Patrick. [Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations] On Wednesday, April 3, 2019, 10:29:18 AM GMT+3, Jimmy Gitonga <[email protected]> wrote: Thank you Patrick for a thorough response. This is packed with excellent gems that we need to unpack and ground them in a way that relates to technology as a whole and ICT in particular. Let’s start with “national values”. Kenya is a colonial construct that we can at best call a “multi-national state”. Kenya is not a nation and will never be, unless we change the strict meaning of "a nation”. "A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. A nation is distinct from a people, and is more abstract, and more overtly political, than an ethnic group. It is a cultural-political community that has become conscious of its autonomy, unity, and particular interests.” - Wikipedia This is a broader, modern definition that tries to include our present post-colonial territories and not what it meant before the 20th Century. The word “nation” comes from the word “birth” in Latin. A nation springs from people “born” from a particular origin, becoming an ethic group that then occupies a territory and develops a common language, material and immaterial culture and a history. Thus the Luo are a nation, The Maa are a nation, the Mijikenda are a nation. The political and abstract concept of a nation is what we now have in Europe. The important addition here is territory. England is a nation, Deutscheland is a nation, Italia is a nation. Switzerland, with three languages, is a nation. Annexation of land is an important concept since it is the minimum requirement for existence in a resource competitive environment. Once land was lost, a “nation” could disappear. This is a problem that East Africa in particular did not largely suffer from before the coming of the “White Man”. At that time, there was enough land for everyone. So Kenya is a group of nations whose territory was not defined, whether through war or diplomacy, by the people within but from powers without.Kenya is a state that appeared in 1963 since before then it did not have a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. Can we claim to be country in that sense? No. Before 1963, “Kenia” had at least three distinct governance systems. Inland (“bara”) made of “settler" and “natives", each run differently. The Northern Frontier, stretching from Turkana past Galla to Somalia. Pwani, a stretch that was run by the Sultan of Zanzibar. Having never resolved these different histories as a people within the territory of Kenya, we cannot honestly say we form a nation hence the constant, and morally right secession movements. We need to redefine who we are, from our places of origin and then look into what we can share with each other, the other nations within the Kenyan state. This is particularly important when it comes to " Indigenous Innovation”. Our present Kenyan culture is “colonial” because we appropriate from one another without acknowledgement. Look at how we treat the “Maasai Shuka”. Once it became a curio for tourist consumption, and not as dress for a particular people, Kenyans went ahead and now use it “fashionably”. The people we appropriate from, stop innovating and expressing themselves afresh through their material culture since they will continuously lose it. This is the collective pain Kenyans feel when we see the same shuka on European fashion runways but we are powerless once it comes to articulating what is wrong with that picture because we do the same to one another. The same has happened to the Kikoi. We do not acknowledge or even care about its history. But once an “enterprising” European wants to commercialise it, we up in arms but then cannot move to the next level. How do we make the Kikoi a “national” item of material culture that we can proudly wear and innovate around and other non-Kenyans must pay to use? This has not happened to the Somali “Macawiis”, the sarong' like garment worn by the men. Why? Because we do not “feel” we share anything in common yet. This is underlying reason why our “national" archives do not 'update' our Kenyan material culture. We have no permission to co-own what we are left with cultural materials stuck in their historical and ethnic settings. We have this discussion constantly with visual artists all the time. And now that we have the pressure of the “creative economy”, it is pertinent we move beyond conversations. The Khanga or Lesso is the closest we have to Kenyan clothing. We can already see how young fashion designers are reinterpreting it for modern use hence "Indigenous Innovation”. What can we learn from this particular garment and begin to appreciate one another and share responsibly? So we need to look and see one anther as people and not as political and resource contestants. We need to look at what we collectively have and can contribute to the Kenyan cultural kitty. Is it in the marriage ceremony, the similarities in the practices and thus the cultural meaning? How can this be intepretated across Kenya without taking away the particular differences and context? What does a wedding of Kenyans of Indian descent offer our mix? Only then can we will purposely begin to build national values. Best Regards,Jimmy Gitonga Lead, Design and Development at AfroshokLinkedIn: Jimmy Gitonga | Twitter: @Afrowave______________________________________ Web: afroshok.com On 1 Apr 2019, at 5:59 PM, Patrick A. M. Maina <[email protected]> wrote: Wow! Thank you Jimmy, for the deep, thoughtful and candid response. The example you have given goes right to the very the heart of the matter: Our value system, the essential "why" around everything we do, is poorly articulated and inadequate. Article 10. is arguably the most important chapter in the constitution as it governs the interpretation and application of the constitution, as well as, all laws and all policies made in Kenya. Yet it is one of the most vague and poorly thought out chapters in the document. Article 10 defines "national values and principles of governance" as: (a) patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, the rule of law, democracy and participation of the people;(b) human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusiveness, equality, human rights, non-discrimination and protection of the marginalised; (c) good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability; and (d) sustainable development. Even though the terms used in Article 10 sound nice and (perhaps were intended to) conform to donor buzz-phrases, no one really knows exactly what they mean, why they were chosen, why other values were left out and why the ones chosen are good/best for us! Change management practitioners will concur that it is very difficult (if not impossible) to have intrinsic community buy-in, ownership and actualization of "top-down" imposed values - notwithstanding the benefits. National values must be intrinsically held - and must make sense at a personal level - or they will not be practiced voluntarily and consistently, especially when "no one is looking". For example, what does "equality" really mean in Article 10? Is it about equality of opportunity or is it rooting for equality of outcomes or is it a paradoxical mix of both - and in what ways? Clear answers would/should fundamentally shape our choice of economic ideology and/or policies. Arbitrarily advocating for "equality" without defining the term, in view of strategic objectives, does not make sense. Even gender equality has certain implications which require careful thought e.g. how do we ensure that working parents are not sacrificing their kids values, wholesome development and future prospects by leaving them in the care of semi-literate, un-vetted guardians - in order to achieve present-day economic goals? Perhaps we need mandatory daycare and/or nursing centers in - or within walking distance of - all office buildings and at least 6 months maternity leave + 12 months flexi-time / remote work for nursing mothers for example...? which leads to... how does motherhood impact career options and does that affect the practicality of gender equality at vocational level? We need such discussions and debates in academia, media and policy circles. Other notoriously ambiguous terms in Article 10 include "democracy", "equality", "good governance", "integrity", "transparency" and "accountability". The assumption is that these oft-politicized words can have a universal meaning - which is simply not true. Article 10 conflates terminologies - which only adds more confusion: Is there / should there be a difference between national values and principles of governance? is the intention to make the two phrases synonymous or is it to restrict national values to the narrow context of governance? Again, it does not look as if adequate holistic thought was put into this laundry-list section. Crippling ambiguity can be addressed by having a "Constitutional Definitions Chapter" within the Constitution itself (something to consider if we are headed for a referendum), that allocates a reasonably precise or bounded meaning to notoriously ambiguous and/or oft-politicized constitutional terms. Resources are scarce and the idea of waiting for reactive precedence-interpretations to be made by the Supreme Court over the next 3-5 decades is sub-optimal and wasteful, in my opinion. BOTTOM-UP INDIGENOUS VALUES:-------------------------------------------------- Besides conformity to donor-imposed values, we do need our own indigenous values - purposefully designed to create conditions that guarantee our long-term prosperity and sustainability as a country. Article 10 should be the basis for the "Kenyan Dream". My thoughts about this include: a. A multi-dimensional definition of what "achievement" and "success" means in our society: What vocational archetypes should be honored, admired and emulated in our society? My suggestions include: - Vocations whose activities result in positive, direct and broad-scope societal impact (e.g. Educationists, MSMEs, Small business enablers e.g. investors, Medical practitioners, Farmers, Inventors / Innovators, Wealthy people whose wealth is traceable to fair business practices, and even Politicians / Community leaders who put public interest ahead of their own personal interests when setting policy). - A culture of aspiring for excellence for its own sake (e.g. life-long learning and self development; striving for maximum potential in chosen fields; vocational self-esteem; non-materialistic sense of worth). - Can we learn to see (and pride) ourselves as hands-on problem solvers by celebrating and empowering our indigenous innovators and inventors? - A culture that values home-grown solutions to local and global challenges (e.g. as a vehicle for economic empowerment). b. Critical Thinking as National value: For example: currently, displays of opulence are automatically interpreted as signals of competence and excellence. Very few people care to question how incredibly vast wealth can be "magically" acquired in such a short time. This allows white-collar criminals to launder their reputation and become dubious "role models" for our children - with damaging long-term consequences. Shouldn't these rags-to-riches overnight miracles be writing world best-sellers or giving business lectures in universities to help eradicate poverty? We all know they can't because the skills they have are best articulated in a confession. So, beyond feel-good terminologies, a lot of deep thought and economic architecture needs to go into the idea of a National Values System - and this should include design for linkages at strategic, tactical and day-to-day level. Best regards,Patrick. Patrick A. M. Maina [Cross-domain Innovator | Independent Public Policy Analyst - Indigenous Innovations]
Actually Patrick, I agree with you. Kenya can become a nation now that it is a state. And it is true that Julius Nyerere pulled out a feat that created the Tanzania today. Then we need to watch Sheng’ become in the next 50 years, our 'de facto' national language. It will have enough vocabulary, music and visual art to lay the foundations of a distinct culture very much like Kiswahili did at the eastern coast of Africa. There are very many dialects of Kiswahili at the moment. And so for Sheng. Are we ready for Sheng’ fashion? Best Regards, Jimmy Gitonga Web Software Design and Development LinkedIn: Jimmy Gitonga | Twitter: @Afrowave ______________________________________ Web: afroshok.com <http://afroshok.com/>
On 5 Apr 2019, at 2:39 AM, Patrick A. M. Maina <[email protected]> wrote:
I disagree with your assertion that Kenya will "never" be a nation and here's my reasoning: There are different ways that countries and/or nation-states can form and not all of them are organic. Conquests (via wars or colonization) are historically valid (albeit ethically controversial) methods of artificially creating or consolidating countries. Nation-states can also be artificially created after the artificial countries have been formed, through strategic cultural engineering to introduce a new source of common "cultural" identity over time (the easiest route being a language that is linguistically compatible with preexisting languages).
Tanzania is a great example of successful cultural engineering in Africa. Mwalimu Julius Nyerere had the brilliant foresight to strategically position Kiswahili as a unifying language - which pre-emptively solved the problem of tribalism in a country that had over 100 ethnic groups. Tanzania is now enjoying the benefits of being a strategically engineered nation-state (e.g. fairly stable, issues based politics).
Haha I thought about Sheng too. It's a great candidate, but if we look at the bigger prospects of regional integration, Kiswahili captures the cake. It's already standardized, well known and has a great reputation. W Have a great evening. On Friday, April 5, 2019, 4:13:52 PM GMT+3, Jimmy Gitonga <[email protected]> wrote: Actually Patrick, I agree with you. Kenya can become a nation now that it is a state. And it is true that Julius Nyerere pulled out a feat that created the Tanzania today. Then we need to watch Sheng’ become in the next 50 years, our 'de facto' national language. It will have enough vocabulary, music and visual art to lay the foundations of a distinct culture very much like Kiswahili did at the eastern coast of Africa. There are very many dialects of Kiswahili at the moment. And so for Sheng. Are we ready for Sheng’ fashion? Best Regards,Jimmy Gitonga Web Software Design and Development LinkedIn: Jimmy Gitonga | Twitter: @Afrowave______________________________________ Web: afroshok.com On 5 Apr 2019, at 2:39 AM, Patrick A. M. Maina <[email protected]> wrote: I disagree with your assertion that Kenya will "never" be a nation and here's my reasoning: There are different ways that countries and/or nation-states can form and not all of them are organic. Conquests (via wars or colonization) are historically valid (albeit ethically controversial) methods of artificially creating or consolidating countries. Nation-states can also be artificially created after the artificial countries have been formed, through strategic cultural engineering to introduce a new source of common "cultural" identity over time (the easiest route being a language that is linguistically compatible with preexisting languages). Tanzania is a great example of successful cultural engineering in Africa. Mwalimu Julius Nyerere had the brilliant foresight to strategically position Kiswahili as a unifying language - which pre-emptively solved the problem of tribalism in a country that had over 100 ethnic groups. Tanzania is now enjoying the benefits of being a strategically engineered nation-state (e.g. fairly stable, issues based politics).
participants (2)
-
Jimmy Gitonga -
Patrick A. M. Maina