A hybrid curriculum: privileging Indigenous knowledges over western knowledges in the school curriculum in Kenya

The current state of inclusive education in Kenya

Kenya has made considerable steps in the implementation of inclusive education. The Kenya government introduced a new special education policy The Kenya National Special Needs Education Policy Framework (Ministry of Education [MOE], 2009) in response to global initiatives set by the United Nations Environmental and Scientific Organisation (UNESCO) namely Education for All (UNESCO, 1990) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (United Nations [UN], 2000). Initial steps towards an inclusive education were realised with the introduction of free primary education in 2003 (MOE, 2012) which saw many students with disabilities enrol in schools. The free primary education policy (2003) was in line with UNESCO’s Education for All initiative (UNESCO, 1990). Kenya was also adhering to the Millennium Goals (UN, 2000) which advocated for an increase in the provision of basic education. Other international conventions that influenced Kenya’s steps towards establishing an inclusive education include The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989); the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994), and the Dakar Framework for Action (UNESCO, 2000).

Nationally, the Kenya government had produced sessional papers and commissioned reports on education for people with disabilities. These include The Ominde Commission (Republic of Kenya [ROK], 1964) which recommended the integration of children with special needs into regular schools. Another policy was the Report on National Educational Objectives and Policies—Gachathi Report (ROK, 1976) which recommended coordinating the early identification and assessment of children with special needs, collecting data on the number of people with special needs to guide the provision of special education, awareness campaigns on the causes of disabilities as a way of facilitating prevention of disabilities, and integrating special needs learners into schools. Two other national initiatives on inclusion were the Kamunge Report (ROK, 1988) and the Koech Report (ROK, 1999). One of the most important suggestions from the Kamunge Report (ROK, 1988) as far as inclusion was concerned was the recommendation that education for people with special needs should be provided in regular classrooms. The Koech Report (ROK, 1999) recommended suitable curriculum content for early childhood education, special education, tertiary education and vocational education. Although these recommendations were not implemented in totality, their effects influenced the course of inclusive education in Kenya. They marked a change in the viewpoint of the policymakers from integration to inclusion of all students into mainstream schools.

The Children’s Act 2001 (ROK, 2001) provided guidelines on the care and education of children. Although it did not explicitly mention inclusive education, it addressed the rights and protection of children from all forms of injustice and abuse. The Persons with Disabilities Act 2003 (ROK, 2003) prohibited discrimination against people with disabilities in employment and education and specified the provisions for an integrated approach in special education. One of the requirements was that learning institutions must provide reasonable adjustments to students with disabilities with respect to accessibility to the curriculum, school services and school facilities. As a consequence of this Act, the National Council for Persons with Disabilities (ROK, 2003) was established to oversee the participation of people with disabilities in education, employment, sporting, recreation and cultural activities.

Sessional Paper Number 1 2005 (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [MOEST], 2005) went further and addressed the challenges facing students with and without disabilities. These included relevance of education, access, equity, quality, efficiency in management and distribution of resources, cost, gender equity, regional disparities and teacher quality (MOEST, 2005). Sessional Paper Number 1 2005 (MOEST, 2005) also highlighted that there were no clear guidelines and support for the implementation of an inclusive education policy. It raised concerns that special education was grossly underfunded and depended on civil society and non-governmental organisations for financial assistance. It recommended the development of a special needs policy. The article recommended the implementation of a flexible curriculum that would be child-centred and user-friendly for people with special needs, which addressed the barriers to inclusion in schools and the training of teachers in inclusive education practices.

This led to the passing of the National Special Needs Education Policy Framework (MOE, 2009) which was then developed to address the challenges of providing education for children with special needs. Some of the issues that needed to be addressed included access and equity. The National Special Needs Education Policy Framework (MOE, 2009) is the most comprehensive policy document in Kenya so far with regard to special education and inclusion.

The policy is supported by Articles 20 and 27 of The Constitution of Kenya (ROK, 2010) which stipulate that every person has rights and freedoms and prohibits all forms of discrimination. Articles 53 and 54 (ROK, 2010) make provisions for the delivery of free and compulsory basic education and quality services and access for children with disabilities. Regarding reasonable adjustments, Article 54 (ROK, 2010) stipulates that a person with any disability is entitled to access to educational institutions and facilities and reasonable access to all places, public transport and information. The same article also states that people with disabilities are entitled to appropriate means of communication and to access materials and devices to overcome constraints arising from the person’s disability.

Influence of the western way of knowing on the Kenyan education system

The education system in Kenya has been influenced by the western way of knowing and has ignored the cultural values of the Gīkūyū (the people of central Kenya). The language of instruction is English. According to Thiong’o (1986), language is the carrier of people’s history, so not allowing the use of people’s language in schools is contributing to the loss of a people’s history. Another example where the western way has influenced the Kenyan education system is the use of stories and idioms, texts and other classroom resources from the west, yet the Gīkūyū possess a rich history of stories and proverbs that reflect the local context.

At gatherings such as school assembly, students sit in rows instead of sitting in a circle or semi-circle which is the Gīkūyū way of holding gatherings to enable the speakers and the attendees to have face-to-face interaction. The Gīkūyū rely heavily on gestures and facial expressions in speech, so it is important for the audience to see the speakers. The circle and the semi-circle also reduce the power imbalance because the speaker is also part of the circle or semi-circle and is not seated at the front of the group as is done in a western style setting.

The Gīkūyū have relied on cooperative working groups to work on community projects to meet societal needs and care for the young and children with disabilities. Parents and other family members among the Gīkūyū are valued as the main providers of care and education for children with disabilities in the home and the traditional educational settings. Children belonged to the family and clan and their care was the responsibility of everyone. The Gīkūyū philosophy was about sharing and caring for each other and inclusivity (Gathigira, 1933; Kabetu, 1947; Kenyatta, 1965; Maathai, 2006). The current education system disregards these community assets.

In contrast to western ways, the Gīkūyū education system was inclusive of all children and valued the parents as partners in the education of their children which is not the case today. Teachers in the central Kenyan schools claim they are under-resourced because they use western standards to measure resources needed in inclusive education. Resources such as teachers’ aides and assistive devices for students with disabilities as employed in the west may be out of reach for most Kenyan schools.

Another area that the western ways have influenced inclusive education is in segregating students with disabilities in special education schools and units. In the Gīkūyū way of life, children with disabilities were included in all affairs of the group including education. Segregation of students with disabilities was brought about by the western missionaries such as the Salvation Army who established a special education school for the visually impaired. Other religious organisations such as the Presbyterian Church of East Africa followed suit and opened a special school for the deaf.

Song and dance in the current school system relies heavily on western ways. Songs that can be heard in today’s classroom include songs are songs based on the Christian religion (Andang’o, 2009). Due to colonisation, schools hold the notion that Christianity and cultural songs are incompatible with Christianity (Andang’o, 2009).

The research question that guides the rest of the study is whether it is possible to create a hybrid curriculum that not only uses a culturally responsive pedagogy but also selectively borrows ideas from the global North in the care and education of students with disabilities? The next section reviews the conceptual framework and explains the place of Indigenous knowledge in contemporary schooling. This is followed by the methodology used in the study. Then the main themes are listed and expounded in the findings. Then I discuss the limitations of the study and the implications and provide recommendations for further research.

Culturally responsive pedagogy

There are several approaches that fall under the culturally responsive pedagogy umbrella. They include culturally relevant pedagogy developed by Ladson-Billings (1995), culturally responsive pedagogy by Gay (2010) and culturally sustaining pedagogy (Paris & Alim, 2017). While they have a few variations, they have similarities. They approach teaching using cultures, languages and student identities as a strength and do not view cultures, student identities and language spoken at home as barriers to learning. In this article, the term culturally responsible pedagogy will be used.

Research (Hammond, 2014) shows that there are better outcomes in classrooms where teachers draw on students’ backgrounds and where learning is linked to what students already know. Research (Tatum, 2006, 2009; Wood & Jucius, 2013) also points out that to engage students meaningfully in learning it is important for teachers to ensure that classroom teaching and learning materials, assessments, and texts, including textbooks, reflect the students’ backgrounds and lived experiences. Results from other research (Osher & Berg, 2017) shows that the benefits of using culturally responsive pedagogy include better classroom climate and school student cohesion.

The place of Indigenous knowledge in contemporary schooling

Gīkūyū researchers and writers (Kenyatta, 1965; Maathai, 2006; Thiong’o, 1986) blame colonisation and the continuing decoloniality on the loss of Indigenous ways of knowing and in the devaluing of the Gīkūyū education. Other African writers have stated that colonisation has had the same effect on their communities (Asante, 2019; Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2013; Nyerere, 1968). There is a need to reframe inclusive education in Kenya so that it suits the context of the Kenyan people.

The starting point for reframing inclusive education so that it can reflect the ways of the people and provide a balance between Indigenous ways and western education is to start using and teaching Indigenous languages in our schools (Dei, 2000). Thiong’o (1986) points out that it is through language that culture is carried forward. Therefore, schools in Kenya need to be teaching and using Indigenous languages and writing in Indigenous languages. UNESCO (2003) recognises the importance of local languages and states that “language is not only a tool for communication and knowledge but also a fundamental attribute of cultural identity and empowerment, both for the individual and the group” (p. 15). Speaking one’s own language gives the speaker a sense of identity and provides a starting point for knowing the world. Woolman (2001) states that “cultivation of oral and written fluency in local African languages is important in building self-esteem, preserving culture and advancing the literary output and identity of Africa peoples” (p. 41).

Classrooms should be places that value diversity in all forms including students with disability and cultural diversity. This will give students a sense of belonging and may foster higher academic performance (Shizha & Makuvaza, 2017). It is a place where students from different ethnic communities meet and learn skills from each other. Indigenous knowledges could be used to create a sense of identity and self-consciousness (Munyaradzi, 2015). This can be done through the use of local languages (Kenyatta, 1965; Munyaradzi, 2015; Thiong’o, 1986). Rivas-Drake et al. (2014) point out that positive feelings about their ethnic group results are linked to better school outcomes.

Successfully implementing Indigenous knowledges in the school curriculum requires a culturally responsive pedagogy where students from different cultures are valued (Shizha & Makuvaza, 2017). African leaders such as Nyerere (1982) have argued that there is a need for African leaders to rethink the content of the school curriculum to include Indigenous knowledges so that the young generation receives knowledge and wisdom of the society that they can pass on to future generations. Recognition of Indigenous knowledge in the curriculum will “bolster the intellectual interests of the learners as students realise that recognition is given to what they already do, know and say in their environment” (Munyaradzi, 2015, p. 63). Munyaradzi (2015) adds that teaching children traditional games will help children and youth appreciate their culture.

As stated earlier, the Gīkūyū education system did not segregate students with disabilities as has been the case with western education. Children were educated by elders and all children with and without disabilities participated in activities to the best of their ability. A return to this philosophy world ensures that students with disabilities are not segregated.

The Gīkūyū education system taught the children with and without disabilities the ways of the group, the flora and fauna in their community and the medicinal benefits and other uses of each plant (Kenyatta, 1965; Maathai, 2006). An education that is culturally responsive would teach children with and without disabilities the value of Indigenous trees most of which were destroyed by colonialists who introduced trees that have caused problems to the local environment.

As stated earlier, children in the Gīkūyū community, those with and without disabilities belonged to the family and clan and their care was the responsibility of everyone. Currently, support for students with disabilities depends on support from outside the home, yet there is support available in the community.

Unfortunately, inclusive education today is plagued by power imbalances. Parents of children with disabilities have little or no power in deciding where their children attend school and the kind of support they receive. The curriculum the children receive is based on a western framework. Yet, the elders and other community members can play an important role as resources in the education system as is the case in the Gīkūyū culture (Kenyatta, 1965; Maina, 1998).

Researchers (Asante, 2019; Kenyatta, 1965) agree that much of Indigenous knowledges and educational practices survived colonisation. But the current education policies in Kenya do not allow the use of these knowledges in schools.

Theoretical background

This study used postcolonial theory (Ashcroft et al., 1989) to discuss the legacy of colonisation on the Kenyan education system. Postcolonial theory is a suitable tool for explaining the lived experiences of Kenyan people who were colonised and exploring the legacy of colonisation on the Kenyan education system and people’s way of life. In this study, postcolonial theory allowed me to tell the story of the colonial experiences of the Gīkūyū people and to use an Indigenous lens to look at how the care and education of students, including students with disabilities was changed by the colonial experience.

Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework used in this study is culturally responsive pedagogy (Billing, 1995; Brown-Jeffy & Cooper, 2011; Gay, 2010; Maina, 1998). Culturally responsive pedagogy according to Billing (1995)

rests on three criteria or propositions: (a) students must experience academic success; (b) students must develop and/or maintain cultural competence; and (c) students must develop a critical consciousness through which they challenge the current status quo of the social order. (p. 160)

Using a culturally relevant pedagogy allows schools to acknowledge and integrate students’ culture in the classroom (Billings, 1995).

Critical reflection on the education offered to the Gīkūyū child with disabilities is important. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire (1970) advocates for critical reflection on self and on the world because it leads to liberating or problem-posing education. Freire (1970) explains that problem-posing education enables people to critically look at the world in which they live which leads to action. This informed action is what Freire (1970) referred to as praxis, described as “reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it” (p. 36). It is only through informed action, according to Freire, that the oppressed can liberate themselves. Reflecting on the current state of education of students with disabilities in Kenya brings the realisation that changes are necessary so as to incorporate a culturally responsive pedagogy.

Methodology

To find out how teachers were using culturally responsive pedagogy to support students with disabilities in mainstream classrooms, I visited four schools in central Kenya which is predominantly populated by the Gīkūyū people. Two schools were in a rural setting and two were in an urban setting. A case study format was employed.

Participants and sampling

A purposeful sampling of schools and teachers was used to ensure the schools and classes selected had students with disabilities. According to Merriam (2003), purposeful sampling allows the researcher to select a sample that can provide the most information. Four schools were chosen for the study. Eight teachers participated in phase 1 of the study, while five teachers out of the eight interviewed in phase 1 participated in phase 2 of the study. Table 1 provides the demographic information of the teachers.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Teachers in phases 1 and 2.

Teacher	School	Phase	Qualifications	Experience	Age group	Classes taught
Wangūi	Mūkinyei	Phase 1	Bachelor’s degree in Education	10–14 years	35–39	1–8
Wambūi	Mūkinyei	Phases 1 and 2	Certificate of Primary Teacher Education	20–24 years	45–49	1–4
Wangarī	Mūbarīki	Phases 1 and 2	Diploma in Education	10–14 years	40–44	5–8
Wambūgū	Mūbarīki	Phases 1 and 2	Diploma in Education	10–14 years	40–44	1–4 5–8
Wanjirū	Mūtūndū	Phase 1	Bachelor’s degree in Education	5–9 years	35–39	5–8
Wairimū	Mūtūndū	Phases 1 and 2	ATS 3 (Approved Teacher Status 3)	25–29 years	50–54	1–4
Wanjikū	Mūteta	Phases 1 and 2	Bachelor’s degree in Education	5–9 years	30–34	1–4 5–8
Waithīra	Mūteta	Phase 1	Diploma in Education	25–29	50–54	5–8

ATS = Approved Teacher Status.

Data collection tools

Data were collected through interviews in phases 1 and 2. The interviews lasted between 40 and 60 min. In phase 1, I also observed two classes taught by each of the eight teachers. In phase 2, only five of the original cohort of eight participants were interviewed because a number had moved on to other schools. No observations were carried out in phase 2.

When I went back to Kenya from Australia to collect data in 2016, I did not have knowledge of decolonial or Indigenous methodologies. After returning to Australia and having a discussion with my supervisors, they suggested that I explore Indigenous methodologies and reinterview the participants to find out if their responses were different when they were interviewed using different lenses. Phase 2 was a return to the field to interview the teachers using a Gīkūyū framework explained below.

In phase 1, the interviews were conducted following the University of New England guidelines. In phase 2, Gīkūyū discussion protocols were used. Among the Gīkūyū, the question–answer method is not used. A conversational style was employed where the teachers told their stories without much interruption. Teachers begin by explaining who they are, their family and clan and their relationship to the place they work and live. The Gīkūyū have a sacred relationship with the land because they believe it was granted to them by God (Kenyatta, 1965). Land and heritage are an important part of the discussion as it allows the interviewer and the participant to locate their heritage among the Gīkūyū people. The storytelling was conducted in the Gīkūyū language.

Ethical conformity

Ethics approval was obtained from the University of New England, New South Wales, Australia. An information sheet was provided to all participants before the interviews after which they were requested to sign the consent form. Advice was provided to the participants that they could withdraw from the study at any time if they wished to do so.

Data analysis

Themes were identified using thematic analysis. Braun and Clarke (2006) state that a “thematic analysis involves the searching across a data set, be that a number of interviews or focus groups, or a range of texts to find repeated patterns of meaning” (p. 86). The recorded stories were transcribed and translated coded manually. All names of participants in this paper are pseudonyms.

Use of Gīkūyū language

The Gīkūyū language was used on a number of occasions in teaching in classrooms. Teachers used English as the main language of instruction. When Gīkūyū was used, the teachers said that it was a last resort to ensure students understood a concept or word. All names of participants in this article are pseudonyms. A teacher explained to me that she code-switched between English and Gīkūyū to ensure that the students understood the concepts taught in class. She said that some students struggled with English, especially those students with disabilities that involved communication barriers. She stated, “I use the language that they can understand. I use Gīkūyū since it is easier for them to understand” (Wanjiru, age group 35–39, female). Another teacher stated that “I speak in Gīkūyū to make them understand because most of them don’t understand English well. So, I come down to mother tongue” (Wambūi, age group 45–49, female).

The circle

The circle is an important concept in Gīkūyū culture. It is the shape of the Gīkūyū hut, the Gīkūyū basket, many items among the Gīkūyū and their dances involve the circle or the semi-circle formation by the dancers. The Gīkūyū used the circle for meetings and teaching purposes because children could see the speaker’s facial expressions for maximum effect of understanding the speaker. The circle is an important concept in Gīkūyū culture. From my observations of the lessons in the four schools, the teachers and students used the circle on various occasions. In one school, I observed standard one pupils sitting in circles around a large table as they carried out class activities. I observed the circle used in sports and games and on another occasion, I observed the use of the circle at recess while students played games. By contrast, desks in many classrooms were arranged in rows and students stood in rows at school assemblies.

Storytelling, songs, proverbs and riddles

Storytelling is another important aspect of the Gīkūyū culture. It is used as a means of passing on cultural wisdom and moral lessons to the people. Teachers reported that they used proverbs, stories, songs and riddles because these cultural practices were used as a means of passing on cultural wisdom and moral lessons to the people and also explained the local Gīkūyū ways such as the importance of relationships in the Gīkūyū culture. The Gīkūyū believe that relationships are the cord that holds and sustains the community together. Through storytelling, songs, riddles and proverbs, children learned about the diversity of human bodies, the environment, the trees, the animals, the land and sky, and the changing seasons. They learned about calamities such as floods and drought and about solutions that have been applied to community problems. Teachers reported that stories in the classroom are used to teach Gīkūyū values such as being of service to others, honesty, the value of hard work, and the evils of greed. Storytelling, songs, proverbs and riddles among the Gīkūyū practices reflect the peoples’ way of life. Teacher Wanjiku said that many of her students do not understand the Gīkūyū stories, songs, proverbs and riddles because the parents do not use them at home. She explained that many of the songs, proverbs and stories used for various purposes at school are based on the west. The irony is that when a teacher uses a Gīkūyū story or proverb they have to translate them into English as policy dictates that teaching is conducted in the language of instruction which is English. Another teacher stated, “We use Gīkūyū stories and then translate for the students” (Wairimu, age group 50–54, female).

Family relationships

The teachers acknowledged the role of family relationships in the Gīkūyū tradition and said that they used siblings and relatives who are enrolled in the schools to support students with disabilities in the classroom. Among the Gīkūyū, the clan system works as a cooperative and plays an important role in keeping people together. They bind the Gīkūyū together, providing physical, emotional and psychological support. Relationships are therefore an essential part of the care for students with disabilities in the community and in schools. Siblings and extended family in school are asked by the teachers to support those of their siblings who have a disability. Wanjiru explained, “You know disabled children are helped by sisters, brother and family members” (age group 35–39, female).

Cooperative teamwork

The teachers explained that they use cooperative groups in the classrooms. They explained that teamwork is an important Gīkūyū practice in the community as it involves pooling resources to assist each other. Teacher Wambūgū explained that people with and without disabilities in the village all collaborated in community tasks such as building and construction. The men cut the trees and brought the planks for constructing the house, the women worked on the walls and thatch and the young women cut the grass for thatching the huts and brought it to the construction site. People with disabilities contributed in the best way they could, some singing or reciting poetry to motivate those who were carrying out the construction. Teamwork ensured that all people in the society got the help they needed to build dwellings, cultivate farms and, most importantly, care for the children.

Teacher Wambūgū stated that children with disabilities contributed to the community by doing small tasks as apprentices. They did most of these tasks in teams or pairs. For example, girls went to the river to fetch water in teams or pairs, for the Gīkūyū believed that they would be able to help each other lift the water vessels onto their backs. The team also provided companionship and safety. The boys with disabilities went out grazing the sheep, goats and cows in teams of siblings or other children from the clan. Hence learning was carried out in pairs or cooperative groups made up of children with and without disabilities.

The Gīkūyū education system encouraged cooperative learning. Working in pairs or in groups is encouraged and praised and is emphasised in stories, proverbs and songs. The teachers pointed out that individualism is considered selfish, negative and detrimental to the fabric of the community. They said that cooperative learning is not only fun for students but is also interactive, allows discussion and encourages students to think and solve problems together. Teacher Wambūi pointed out that she encourages students in her class, including those with disabilities, to work as a team because working cooperatively forms part of one’s identity of being a mūndū wa nyūmba—a person belonging to the house of Mūmbi (wife of Gīkūyū, the eponymous ancestor of the Gīkūyū people). The origin of the Gīkūyū people is said to be Gīkūyū and his wife, Mūmbi (Kenyatta, 1965).

Teachers said that they used cooperative and peer learning groups, concepts that they had borrowed from their knowledge of Gīkūyū traditional education. Teacher Wambūgū said for class projects children bring different items for a class project. Teacher Wambūgū stated, “You can tell the students to work together. If they are using clay, you ask one to bring clay, the other water and the other to start moulding. They work in a group” (age group, 40–44, male).