The Kaleidoscopic perspective on the privatisation of education in Zimbabwe: A neglect of Ubuntu values?

Abstract

This qualitative case study from Zimbabwe drew inspiration from the sharp rise of for-profit, high-cost private schools to explore and discuss the perspectives of the parents, teachers and private school owners on the nexus between the emergence of private secondary schools and the applicability of Ubuntu values. Tapping insights from the Ubuntu values, the generated data from online questionnaires and WhatsApp discussions were employed to discern the phenomenon. The themed findings built from a sample of 20 participants purposively selected show that Zimbabwe’s education system has ricocheted back to the colonial era as evidenced by the resurfacing of a dual education system based on economic lines. Findings show that private schools evolved not just to supplement public schools in providing quality education but also to reinforce the interests of the wealthy and their substitutes, undermining the inclusive vision embodied in SDG 4 and the Ubuntu philosophy. The study implores African countries in similar contexts to turn to Ubuntu values to provide equal educational opportunities to all citizens, regardless of class. This exploratory research provides novel insights into the applicability of Ubuntu philosophy in enhancing parity in the educational landscape.

Keywords

Education privatisation Suistainable Development Goal 4 inequality

Introduction and background

The rapid growth of for-profit, high-cost private schooling in sub-Saharan Africa has been consistently identified as being one of the most important education developments during the last three decades (Bennell, 2022). However, this has raised concerns on the overall significance and desirability of private schooling especially among those living below the poverty datum line in developing countries (Gruijters et al., 2020). Proponents of private school provision contend that, if given a supportive policy environment, the private education is not only huge but also fully accessible to the poor. It then becomes a viable and egalitarian alternative to often poor-quality public schooling in many parts of the continent (Joshi, 2019; Kless, 2018). Nonetheless, critics of private schools, on the other hand, contend that pervasive educational privatisation will fundamentally undermine the attainment of education-related Sustainable Development Goals – especially to those that speak to equality of opportunities to quality education (Baum et al., 2018; Šťastný, 2021). Despite these debates, knowledge gaps persist in understanding how the majority of those who live below the poverty datum line and most vulnerable Zimbabwean scholars at secondary level are affected by the privatisation and commercialisation of education in their communities. These gaps can be attributed to the limitation of previous studies which concentrated on the justification for the parental demand of private education and its impact on educational outcomes (Bray, 2021; Gruijters et al., 2020; Joshi, 2019; Kless, 2018), overlooking issues to do with the effects of the commercialisation of education to the society and to an African student, who is trying to shake the constraints of the ramifications of colonisation. Our study aims to explore and discuss perspectives of parents, teachers and private school owners on the emergence of high-cost private school and the effects on the education system and the African student in Zimbabwe. In its final analysis, this article exposes how the elites had followed the colonial legacy and reconfigured the operations of the high-cost private schools to stratify members of the society and suggest how Sustainable Development Goal 4 may be promoted from the African perspective given that Africans are now building their own education systems. The research question that guided the study was: What is the interconnection between private schools and Ubuntu values? We were guided by the following objective:

1. To explore the perspectives of parents, teachers and private school owners on the reasons for the rise of private schools in Zimbabwe.

2. Describe the nature of the education system created by private schools.

3. Explore the usability of Ubuntu values in the context of private schools.

History of private schools

When the so called Third World educational expansion policies of the 1960s met the financial constraints of the 1970s and 1980s, educational policy makers began to look toward privatisation and cost recovery schemes to finance education in developing countries (Ilon, 1992). Indeed, when Zimbabwe gained political independence in 1980, it has a multi-layered education system that consists of the so-called independent schools, mission schools, government schools and community schools. In Zimbabwe, private schools are independent non-state schools run by private individuals (29% of non-government schools) and businesses (18% of non-government schools) with no government funding (MoPSE, 2015). These schools are largely funded by student fees and follow the national curriculum. Faith-based schools run by religious (church) organisations or institutions are the most popular type of non-state schools in Zimbabwe, accounting for 33% of elementary schools and 44% of secondary schools. These schools are non-profit and are supported by student fees, with subsidies from the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education (MoPSE) paying teacher salaries and certain other operating expenditures (MoPSE, 2015). In this study, private schools refer to schools that operate independent of the government and are dependent on user fees to cover all or part of their operational and development costs. While public education is education that is funded, controlled and administered by the state, private education is managed largely independently of the state, where the schools are owned and/or founded independently of the state (Gruijters et al., 2020).

The establishment of private schools is part of a trend across Africa and beyond (Amnesty International, 2020). Some countries in the world have private schools operating alongside public schools, and this is not confined to primary and secondary schools but extends to universities. Both Bray (2020) and Liu (2019) argue that marketisation and privatisation tendencies under neo-liberalism have transformed education from a public into a private good to a great extent and have been increasingly utilised by parents as part of strategies to assist their children’s educational careers. As such, some private schools start by using church buildings, mosques, cafés, libraries and other public locations, for teaching and learning activities and this is a reflection of community participation in the phenomenon since families provide support and recognise that private schooling is part of daily life (Bray, 2021). Research shows that the sites used as private schools were less convenient in layout and facilities (Amnesty International, 2020), although the existence of private schools was a welcome development because it is partially in sync with and promotes the demands of the 2030 Agenda, especially SDG4.

In light of the abovementioned submissions, it follows then that provision of education in most countries may take the form of being private or public. However, even if a school is created as a private business, it may not operate as such in its entirety. For example, in some cases, governments would partially subsidies private schools by purchasing a fixed number of places for children due to overpopulation in state-funded schools. There is a heated debate over the advantages and disadvantages of each form (Baum et al., 2018; Kless, 2018; Šťastný, 2021). Those who back private education claim that public school systems struggle to meet the demand for high-quality education since most public schools are inadequately financed and the quality of education suffers from too many students and too few teachers per class, insufficient books and teaching supplies, poorly constructed schools, crumbling buildings and ageing infrastructure (Baum et al., 2018; Kless, 2018). However, critics of private schools have raised concerns surrounding the appropriateness of the involvement of the private sector in the provision of education (Anand et al., 2018; Šťastný, 2021). Subsequently, some deemed private schools as being in conflict with the recognition of education as a human right and as such they argue that the state must maintain the responsibility for education.

Possible impact of the privatisation process

From the literature, it is evident that the merits and downsides of the emergence in private education are subject to intense debate in academic and policy circles of which Gruijters et al. (2020) argue that private schools are a valuable and cost-effective instrument to improve learning outcomes in low-income contexts, where public schools often perform poorly. In agreement, Kless (2018) contends that parental demand for private schooling is often attributed to failures in government provision. Private schools also emerged after concerns were raised as to whether states alone would be able to meet the primary school targets under the Millennium Development Goals given the pressure they placed on public finances (Baum, et al., 2018).

The literature presents social competition as the main reason underlying the establishment and support of private schools. As argued by Bray (2021), parents see that educational qualifications are a major way either to improve their socioeconomic status or to maintain their already high status. Thus, in general people perceive education to be a major instrument for social advancement and see it as an investment for the future. However, in previous eras, public schools were able to achieve this goal, but contemporary parents increasingly feel that public schooling is fraught with poor performance and lack of standards demanded by the captains of industries (Baum et al., 2018). Generally, parents of learners prefer private to public schools in pursuit of quality and standards. Public schools are shunned for not providing quality education and the inability to address the unique needs of each student since they have large classes; thus, many of them lack enough qualified teachers to attend to all learners individually (Kless, 2018). Allied with that view, teachers in public schools are generally described as not qualified enough to match those in private schools with worrying gaps in mathematics and science, where students sometimes go without teachers specialising in the subjects for months and must often find alternative ways to learn these subjects by paying for private tuition or risk fail exams as a result (Šťastný, 2021; Zwier et al., 2021).

However, the provision of individualised learning support in some high-cost private schools has been largely placed on its negative implications for the equality of educational opportunities, as better-off families can afford both higher quantities and qualities of private education (Šťastný, 2021). A search through the literature shows that there are three key arguments that are commonly advanced by critics of private schools (Baum et al., 2018; Šťastný, 2021). According to Klees (2018) education should be free for all and as such, private schools are likely to infringe on the child’s right to access free basic education, which is enshrined in various international conventions. Anand et al. (2018) argue that getting the poorest members of society to pay for their own education is highly inequitable. Additionally, Baum et al. (2018) are of the view that the most of those who live below the poverty datum line in their countries cannot afford to send their children to private schools and therefore depending on non-government providers to achieve Millennium Development Goal targets is a flawed proposition. Put together, in terms of choosing between alternatives, there is an emerging evidence-based consensus that private schools are more attractive to parents than public schools and demonstrate some indications of higher efficiency, such as more teacher effort and less absenteeism (Joshi, 2019). At the same time, research and advocacy from a human rights and equity perspective continue to argue that private growth challenges the public sector responsibility to ensure the right to education and highlights findings of stratification (UNESCO, 2017).

In Europe and some parts of Africa, sending children to private schools is said to be an expensive undertaking (Bray, 2021), and only those who can afford are privileged to do so. Evidence from studies indicates that parents from Africa who are affluent and possess high socioeconomic status send their children to high-cost private secondary schools that are adequately resourced because they afford their costs (Esteron, 2021; Zwier et al., 2021). Fees at such schools are prohibitive for those who have low socioeconomic status. Bray (2021) backs that view and submits that prosperous family can invest in more and better tutoring than can middle-income families, who in turn can invest in more and better tutoring than low-income families. Inherently implied is that high-cost private schools are becoming major vehicles for maintaining and exacerbating social inequalities, which thus raises serious concerns in connection with SDG4’s focus on equitable and inclusive quality education.

Similar to other African countries, Zimbabwe promoted equity in education by adhering to the Education for All (EFA) policy to which Zimbabwe is committed and is also enshrined in the country’s constitution (Chimbunde and Kgari-Masondo, 2021). The government of Zimbabwe declared education a basic human right for all its people in line with the United Nations Bill of Human Rights, a value that is established in clause 4 of the amended Education Act of 2020 (Chimbunde and Kgari-Masondo, 2021; Mavhunga, Madondo and Phiri, 2009). Currently, the country respects and upholds the 2030 Education Agenda, which is in tandem with Sustainable Development Goal 4, which in part focuses on equitable and inclusive education to enhance lifelong opportunities for all people (UNESCO, 2017). The aforesaid goal embraces what this study calls equity in education.

Equity in education gained currency in scholarship during the Education for All policy campaign until its failure in 2015. The term equity in education has been used by Esteron (2021) to mean granting educational opportunities to anyone on an equal basis, disregarding nationality, gender, ideological differences or mental and physical disabilities. Within the context of this study, equity in education means fairness in the dissemination of the educational programmes or courses meant to be learnt by students in one country. Receiving the same educational opportunities regardless of the differences in location and/or socioeconomic status is curriculum equity. Therefore, at the country level, equity in education means that all citizens enjoy the same educational facilities, have the same curriculum package, textbooks and equally experienced teachers and then, in the end, are examined using the same examinations. Thus, equality of opportunities in accessing the aggregate of all that we impart to our learners through the experience of the school system in a deliberate design to achieve educational goals builds up to what we term equity in education. However, this position was a farfetched dream in colonial education where education was divided on racial lines. To put this into context, hereunder, we present brief characteristics of colonial education in Zimbabwe.

Colonial education in Zimbabwe

To comprehend the current situation of education systems in general, as well as the emergence of private schools in post-independence Zimbabwe, it is necessary to first examine certain historical precedents from the colonial era. Several studies claim that providing education to Africans in colonial states was a collaborative effort between Christian missionaries and the colonial administration (Bhurekeni, 2020; Chimbi and Jita, 2023). While the two organisations had opposing goals, their ultimate purpose was to increase Western dominance in colonial territories. As Chimbi and Jita (2023) explain explicitly, colonial administrators ensured that Africans became labourers for the expanding colonial economy by providing them with minimal practical education in agriculture, building, carpentry and domestic science, while missionaries were eager to spread literacy, which was instrumental in converting them to Christianity. Prior to independence, the school system was racially biased, with European pupils gaining while black students suffering (Riddell, 1998). According to Kanyongo (2005), Zimbabwe inherited an education system that supported primarily white Zimbabwean pupils because very few black children had access to education before 1980. Those who had access to education found themselves in schools with little funding, limited educational resources and a curriculum distinct from that offered in all-white schools (Riddel 1998). Zimbabwe’s colonial education was consequently viewed as racist, individualistic, competitive, Eurocentric and capitalist-oriented. As a result, colonial education generated social stratification, economic inequality and cultural and intellectual enslavement in Africa (Woolman, 2001). That kind of divisive education system resulted in the emergence of a dual system of education: one for the ruling European class and another for the subjugated Africans (Mavhunga, 2005). In light of this, we submit that in colonial Zimbabwe, social segregation was institutionalised and legislated through education because there existed two separate Departments of Education catering for the two races.

Theoretical framework

To frame our understanding, we gleaned insights from the Ubuntu lens to establish the perspectives of parents, teachers and private school owners on the nexus between private schools and the Ubuntu Values. We take inspiration from Metz's (2016) anti-poverty and social protection model. The model's central tenet is that Ubuntu is a system that offers a social safety net for individuals in a variety of ways, including individual giving, family support, community support and societal support. From this perspective, Ubuntu is a development model in which members of society have a social contract of mutual respect, duty and accountability to one another. In the Zimbabwean society, respect is earned by first showing respect to other members of the community, and empowerment is also gained through assisting others in their endeavours. So, for individuals, companies and churches who own school to earn support in their businesses, they should also be prepared to respect and provide assistance to people in the communities in which they operate. Essentially, Ubuntu refers to a set of principles and practises that black Africans or people of African descent believe make persons true human beings (Mugumbate and Chereni, 2020). Despite its applicability in a variety of contexts, there is one fundamental thread that runs across all ethnic groups: a real individual human being is part of a wider and more significant relational, communal, societal, environmental and spiritual world. According to the literature, Ubuntu is the capacity for being human, in which individuals must prioritise the good of the community over self-interest (Metz, 2011). Ubuntu is synonymous with the term umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu, which translates literally as ‘a person is a person through other people’. Privatisation of education among the marginalised defies the Ubuntu values in the context of this study. This is because the Ubuntu philosophy considers humankind to be an intrinsic component of the community that works to help people in a spirit of service. In its broadest definition, Ubuntu ensures that each member of the community is accountable for and obligated to provide for the well-being of others. Embedded in Ubuntu, are the values of communal responsibility that are being used to sustain life in which sharing natural resources on a principle of equity among and between generations is practiced (Ngubane and Makua, 2021). Sharing hinges on the spirit of cooperativeness that demands equality wherein the marginalised brothers and sisters also enjoy the benefits of those progressing materially and receiving more than others (Broodryk, 2006; Letseka, 2013). Letseka (2013: 339) summarises that ‘Ubuntu implies the capacity in African cultures to express compassion, reciprocity, dignity, harmony, and humanity’. We argue therefore along with Ngubane and Makua (2021) who contend that in African cultures an individual is not complete without the group and the group is not privileged over the individual, hence equity is fundamental to Ubuntu. Seen this way, it is thus a philosophy that recognises egalitarian ways of doing things (Omodan and Makena, 2022). In essence, it believes in equality for all people, regardless of social status, race or gender.

Methodology

By using the Ubuntu lens, the study gleaned the perspectives of parents, teachers and school proprietors on the ramifications high-cost private schools have on the education system and how that affected the student in the society that is reeling from the constraints of colonialisation. The qualitative case study employed open-ended online questionnaires and WhatsApp discussion to continually tease out the effects of the privatisation of education as it was experienced and interpreted by the parents, private school owners and private teachers in the course of their everyday duties (Cropley, 2015). We borrowed from Yin (2015), who sees the primary defining features of a case study as being a multiplicity of perspectives that are rooted in a specific context. One teacher per private secondary school was selected from each of the ten provinces in Zimbabwe which are Bulawayo, Harare, Manicaland, Mashonaland Central, Mashonaland East, Mashonaland West, Masvingo, Matabeleland North, Matabeleland South and Midlands. The 10 teachers were purposively selected on the premise that they were involved in the activities of private secondary schools and were thus rich with information on what the study sought to address. We used cluster sampling to pick the other 10 participants that consisted of 5 parents and 5 private school owners who answered an online questionnaire whose focus was on addressing the research focus. That enabled us to select key participants for examining the variations in the manifestation of secondary private schools. The participants were selected from schools whose teachers participated in the study and were picked based on their involvement in the privatisation of the education and thus had rich information on the issue under purview. Additionally, the sample of 20 participants used in this study was drawn from different provincial towns in Zimbabwe and this allowed representation of perspectives from across the country and that promoted generalisations. For ethical considerations, approval was obtained from the gatekeepers of private schools who were identified by the Department of Education in each of the province. The teachers and school owners were asked for their consent before they participated in the study. They signed online consent forms to indicate their willingness to participate in the study (Yin, 2018). False names were employed to conceal the identities of the study’s 20 participants, and permission was also obtained to record their quotes. A WhatsApp group was formed after participants completed an online consent form. The WhatsApp discussion was used because the COVID-19 travel restrictions could not allow the one-on-one interviews. The purpose of the study and related ethical issues, such as confidentiality and privacy, were discussed religiously before the start of the WhatsApp conversation. The online questionnaires were appropriate as they safeguarded both the participants and the researchers from the COVID-19 risks. The participants voluntarily participated in completing the questionnaires. Data generated from the two instruments were thematically analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) model. First, the data were repeatedly read carefully, and notes were made to identify the basic units for analysis. They were then transcribed and analysed, with emerging patterns being noted and developed into themes. Each theme then became a subtopic for discussion.

Findings and discussions

This section presents, discusses and analyzes data as interpreted by the participants using extant literature and the theoretical framework. The findings hereunder were themed as follows: reasons for the rise of private schools; the nature of the education system created by the private schools; and the usability of Ubuntu in the context of private schools to address the research objectives.

Reasons for the rise of private schools

Teachers’ perspectives

To answer the question that sought the justification for the rise of the high-cost private schools in Zimbabwe, the participants concurred that these schools emerged to meet the high demand of access to quality education because public schools were not coping. Private schools were therefore complimenting public schools in providing quality education for all. Perspectives from participants generated through WhatsApp discussion reveal that high-cost private schools came as an option to public schools that were fraught with challenges that defied quality education. Teacher A remarked that:

‘This school was established about ten years ago because public schools were reeling from insurmountable challenges. It operates alongside the public schools as a business entity and admits all students from all walks of life’.

In confirmation, Teacher J added that:

What the private sector has done is to come up with an alternative to public schools, which in any case are failing to deliver their mandate. The schools charge high fees in foreign currency that most parents cannot afford. Owners of private schools have recolonised the education system and aim to create their society characterised by exclusion and competition.

This suggests that the institutional needs damaged the reputation of the public schools and motivated the private owners to reconfigure their operations by providing exactly what their clients needed but at a cost, thereby sorting the citizens according to their socioeconomic strata. It also emerged from the discussions that individuals who were professionally trained as teacher were also selling their knowledge by conducting private lessons to learners in their private homes. Teacher D remarked that, ‘we have people in every suburb who teach students for a fee privately against the law’. According to such submissions, private schools and private teachers are filling a critical gap that the government cannot fill, and in a way, they are assisting society in that learners will pass through their gates to attain Ubuntu values, which they would not be able to achieve if these private schools did not exist. From the teachers’ views, it was also evident that owning a private school was a business and that the schools operated on a commercial basis.

Private owners’ perspectives

It emerged from private school owners that public schools were failing to provide quality education and hence they stepped in to offer an alternative. Private school owner D had this to say:

We took note of the failure of public schools to provide meaningful education.… Public schools do not have modern infrastructures and the means to expand. We take advantage of that to reconfigure our services to an extent of luring children from the community to our school. We provide excellent services that public schools cannot match.

The findings show that there were emerging institutional needs that public schools could not meet and hence were ill-prepared to produce quality results, like what the private schools did. To support their activities, private school owner B said:

What we offer is for the parents who are serious with the education of their children. It is not expensive because we are offering highly valued knowledge for their children, which is in sync with the demands of the 21^st century. Our teachers are experts, especially in Maths and Sciences, whom we pay handsomely. We are in business to offer the best education available.

It was also evident that teachers in private schools were said to be highly qualified in math and sciences. Good teachers for science subjects were also taken up by the private secondary schools because they were well paid in these schools. Zhakata (2022) confirms that academic powerhouses in Zimbabwe have nightmares to secure teachers after their seasoned tutors are snatched by rich private secondary schools. It was at these private schools where quality education was offered rather than the public schools characterised by poor results. This submits that what was learned was differentiated based on the type of school one attended. The sentiment inherently shows that only parents with high socio-economic status who value and know the benefits of education could send their children to the high-fee private schools in pursuit of quality education. We argue that the change that this kind of business in education somehow divided the society on economic lines. This resonates with Joshi (2019) who claim that in terms of choosing between alternatives, there is emerging evidence-based consensus that private schools are more attractive to parents than public schools and demonstrates some indications of higher efficiency, such as more teacher effort and less absenteeism. However, when de facto choices exist for only the elite of Zimbabwe, the effect of schooling choice is a replica of existing social structures (Ilon, 1992). Private owners also revealed that besides them are other teachers who do private teaching. Private school owner F added, ‘we are registered unlike these teachers who are now selling education to students…. Surprisingly during their times, they were not taught by teachers in their houses’. This indicates that the commercialisation and privatisation of education has extended to individuals who offer lessons to students using rooms in their houses as classrooms.

It also emerged from questionnaires and WhatsApp discussions that the elites had created private schools to perpetuate their interests. Private school owner A said:

We have created the schools for the children from the rich. If you want to see true education, then go to these elite schools. They have what is expected at a school even during this pandemic. They also provide international examinations that make their children competitive globally.

We argue that this research shows that from a human rights and equity perspective, the rise of high-cost private secondary schools challenges the public sector’s responsibility to ensure the right to education, and thus highlights findings of stratification that UNESCO (2017) also supports. This is because some deemed high-cost private schools as conflicting with the recognition of education as a human right which meant that the state should maintain the responsibility for education delivery.

Parents’ perspectives

This study revealed that some rich parents turned to high-cost private schools after noticing the failure of public schools to perform as expected. In support to both teachers and private owners, Parent A pointed out that:

Government-run schools need both human and capital resources to do well. Their class sizes are too big to be manned effectively. The public schools remain overcrowded because of inadequate funding. The private schools are better devils. They are expensive but provide quality education.

The finding shows that the economic status of parents is a factor that drives them regarding the choice of schools. Some of the rich could send their children to the private schools. Parent E remarked that, ‘sending my children to private schools is a sure thing that my child will do well academically and subsequently in the world of work’. This confirms the rise of social and cultural reproduction and inequities in schools powered by either not attending or attending private schools. Taken together, the findings indicate that affluent parents could send their children to these resourced schools and in that way maintain and entrench their status quo. Seen this way, private schools are thus investments that can be seen as part of a wider strategy of intensive parenting meant to enhance the children’s educational success, which later transcends to a bright future. The finding thus affirms that equity in education during the privatisation and commercialisation is in crisis. It supports that social stratification has thickened between the children of the haves and those who do not have in society in general and education in particular. The finding has shown a woeful impact on the already marginalised and dispossessed students, further evidencing that schools in one country are not equal in their ability to provide for and protect their students from exclusion.

Piecing the evidence together, the study argues that the privatisation of education by individuals at their homes and private school owners does not augur well with the tenets of the Ubuntu philosophy. This is because in doing the privatisation of education they are pursuing personal interests at the outlay of the community in which they belong. Their actions are thus against Ubuntu values as explicitly explained by Mbigi and Metz (2011) that Ubuntu is the potential for being human, wherein individuals must value the good of the community above self-interest. Ubuntu embraces that the community is responsible for the education of the young. All members of the community have a role to play in upbringing the youth. It was a finding of this study that public schools were ill-prepared for delivering excellent education. This explains why few privileged members of the society, though anti-Ubuntu, had taken over the education system in Zimbabwe and commercialised the education. Using the limitations of the public schools, some people who owned high-cost private schools had regained momentum in their operations and closed the educational gaps that most state-run schools failed but somehow cemented and perpetuated social stratification in society, particularly against SDG4, which in part impressed inclusivity and equity in education. The enrolment of the learners in high-cost private schools was based on the ability to afford the fees and the associated educational costs. This left the students from low socio-economic status in the periphery of the education landscape, a feature that predicts unequal educational opportunities depicting education in crisis. This disarranges with the Ubuntu values, which argues that participation in fees paying private school is expensive and, as such, those families living below the poverty datum line are often unable to invest in private schooling (Smyth, 2009). Nevertheless, that invited more challenges to develop countries because most students from low socio-economic status families were ditched into the deep pool of exclusion and marginalisation that Ubuntu discourages as it celebrates participation by all in community activities (Chimbunde, 2020). This is because the Ubuntu ideology stresses that problems engulfing society should concern all persons, with individual dissent to pursuing the common good treated as a dereliction of moral duty (Makwara et al., 2023). Ubuntu is about community and the common good. Thus, the high-cost private schools redesigned and reinvented their operations to close the educational gaps that most public schools failed but somehow in the process, cemented and perpetuated social stratification in the society against SDG4 (UNESCO, 2017).

The nature of the education system created by the private schools

Teachers’ perspectives

It emerged out from the perspectives of the participants that there was a dual education system in Zimbabwe, a replica of the colonial era as it showed some exactitudes in terms of its characteristics. Teacher G was of the view that:

We are slowly retracing our way back to the colonial times when the children of the elite attended well-resourced schools while the rest go to poorly funded ones. The only difference here is that these schools are privately funded by our own rich black brothers.

Teacher F added that:

Only rich parents can send their children to the best schools of what is available in the country. Private schools are doing well and have resources at their disposal. Owners of these schools have capitalized on the limitations of public schools and gained control of the education system. They even offer international examinations in addition to local examinations, which are criticised for being of low standards and are fraught with problems of leakages.

This view was an acknowledgement that education is used by those from high socio-economic status to maintain their position in society. It also indicates that foreign knowledge was reverting and finding its way in the Zimbabwean schools using external examination boards.

Private owners’ perspectives

From both the online questionnaires and WhatsApp discussion, it was found that high-cost private schools emerged alongside public schools. Private school owner B confirmed that ‘parents who think we are offering expensive education will regret in the near future when their children occupy the lowest rungs of society’. In acknowledgement of the existence of the dualisation of education in Zimbabwe, Private Owner D remarked:

We have two education systems here…. One for those who aspire to benefit in the end and the other for those who are just going to school as a ritual. Smart parents choose the best schools for their children. That is what we offer.

The sentiments show that a dual system of education reminiscent of the colonial era was thus created where the rich attended high fee-paying private schools while those living below the poverty datum line remained in underperforming public schools.

Parents’ perspectives

On the issue of two education systems running parallel, Parent C said:

Our education system reflects what was the case during the colonial period when Europeans and Africans had separate education system. The only difference with today’s system is that the education system is separated on economic lines unlike the previous one that was based on racial lines. Here you choose where your child will go based on your financial muscles.

Analysis of the parent’s sentiments also indicates that only those learners whose parents had strong financial power were ultimately the winners. Parent D added, ‘You cannot send your child to a school that offers the only local examinations which are not recognisable because their credibility has been tarnished due to reports of cheating and leakages’. This further pointed out that the credentials students get at the end were also driving forces behind parents’ motive to send their children to fee-paying private schools. The finding suggests that students from one country are seen pursing different education systems and possess diverse qualifications at the end, which in turn will grade them differently in society. The favour seems to be tilted towards those who are privileged and possess high socio-economic status. Thus, the few children from the rich class, as was the case during colonialism, attended the prestige schools. This finding was against Ubuntu values because, rather than equalising the playing field, education was now a tool to sift and sort members of the society into different strata.

Drawing from the perspectives of teachers, parents and private owners, the study findings implicate that a dual education system was emerging in postcolonial Zimbabwe based on economic lines. Children from the affluent attend the high-cost private schools, whereas those from the low socio-economic status had no choice. Nonetheless, rather than enhancing equity in education, which is a dream of SDG4, the finding suggests otherwise because only a few from the rich class were able to send their children to these high-cost private schools, thus tempering with equity issues in education. Sending children to private schools constitutes a form of cultural capital that could be later used in life to position oneself on the social strata. SDG4, to recall, is to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all (Esteron, 2021). Education through high-cost private schools does not fit with this goal and the Ubuntu values because such arrangement is far from inclusive or equitable. After all, its provisions depend on the ability of families to finance it. While prosperous families are more able to secure places at such schools than middle-income households, some families are left out altogether.

The usability of Ubuntu in the context of private schools

Parents’ perspectives

The most striking finding to emerge from questionnaires and WhatsApp discussion was that participants called for the use of Ubuntu values to solve today’s problems of exclusion in education. Parent C had this to say:

We seem to have forgotten where we are coming from and going. It is unethical to teach someone for a fee like what these individual teachers are doing. As Africans, we believe in Ubuntu values. We believe people are human beings and therefore are not to be neglected. In isiNdebele, we say ‘Umuntu akalahlwa’, meaning we do not dispose of people because of their status… whether they are poor or not. Now, the commodification of education is anti-Ubuntu. Ubuntu demands that we help each other meet life needs.

Parent A remarked:

We are what we are today because of the community. The community is what it is because of us. Now these private school owners are selfish……. They do not want to share what they have which is against our traditional norms and values. We demand they demonstrate Ubuntu values and charge affordable fees in their schools.

The sentiments by parents reflect that they wanted the private school owners to revisit their African way of doing things where a child belongs to the village and the village raises the child. The parents called for the exercise of generosity, kindness and communalism within their community.

Teachers’ perspectives

To affirm the sentiment of parents, Teacher G corroborated that:

As Africans, we believe that it takes a village to raise a child. It is our responsibility to see to it that all our children are properly educated in equally good schools such as private schools. I call upon everyone to join hands with the government to source resources for use in public schools. It is our social responsibility.

The sentiment shows that everyone had a duty to contribute to the education of every member of the community which tallies with the Ubuntu values.

Taken together and less the sentiments of the private owners on the usability of Ubuntu, the uniqueness of this finding lies in its contribution to finding solutions to the inequalities perpetuated by rise of high-paying private schools in Zimbabwe. The voices of the parents and teachers siphon their knowledge of what is to be done from the Ubuntu philosophy, which agitates for kindness, solidarity, communitarianism and collective participation on matters affecting society. It shows that the responsibility of educating a child is not confined to the biological parents but extends to community members who must help in any way appropriate. The commercialisation of education by the few elites has also been labelled anti-Ubuntu since it excludes rather than includes other students from participation. The employment of Ubuntu is seen as a strategy that addresses diversity and promotes social cohesion, mediating inequalities in the face of challenges. This is confirmed by the used isiNdebele idiom ‘Umuntu akalahlwa’ inferring that a person cannot be thrown away or abandon humanity when things get tough for them (Kgari-Masondo and Chimbunde, 2021). It denounces the disposal of people.

As such, the unique finding emerging from the study is the employment of the Ubuntu approach to introduce inclusivity and equity in schools in the face of the resurgence of high-cost private schools that had commercialised education perpetuating inequalities in societies. High-cost private schools reflect individualism and only perpetuate and reinforce the interest of the few at the expense of the communitarianism that the Ubuntu philosophy celebrates. The works of Kgari-Masondo and Chimbunde (2021) confirm that Ubuntu philosophy is rooted in sharing, cooperation, group cohesion, communalism and communitarianism. Therefore, Ubuntu assumes the supremacy of collective solidarity over individualism by emphasising that ‘I am because we are, we are because I am’ (Makalela, 2016: 191). Related to this study, the findings suggest that members of the community must work as a team to procure resources necessary for public schools to be classified as good schools that match high-cost private schools so that all citizens equally benefit from the education system. Each community member is thus responsible for raising the children in their villages educationally through social responsibility. Owners of high-cost private schools must also participate in the education of the members of the community regardless of their social status if they belong to the community because they are what they are because of what the community is. This lends support to Mbigi who claims that the essence of Ubuntu is that the individual does not and cannot exist alone except corporately and owes his existence to people, including those of past generations and his contemporaries. The same author further submits that the community must therefore make, create or produce the individual; for the individual depends on the corporate group. The Ubuntu strategy indicates that one of its benefits is equality whereby if one person is progressing materially and receiving more than others, the extras will be shared with the underprivileged brothers and sisters (Broodryk, 2006; Letseka, 2013). Thus, sympathy is one attribute cherished in Ubuntu philosophy that is vital and mostly practiced in times of need. Privatisation and commercialisation of education shows no applicability of the Ubuntu tenets because that reflects individualism against Metz’s (2011) proposition that Ubuntu represents social justice in the sense that it embraces social values of inclusion, participation and respect for all members in the community. We extend that and argue Ubuntu philosophy shares a commitment to promoting equality, the balance of economic power and cooperation among people and is a framework for social change that can help address the root causes of inequality and promote values that emphasise humanity and interdependence of people. Thus, what constitutes being humane must be decided by society consistent with the values of solidarity, conformity, compassion, respect and human dignity (Makwara et al., 2023).

Private schools as a business model

Private owners’ perspectives

While the parents and some teachers were demanding for the use of Ubuntu values in the provision of education, private owners were not quite clear on the application of Ubuntu values but see their schools as business models for making money. Private owner E said:

We are into business though we know about Ubuntu values. Running schools need money. We cannot invest for loss. What we charge is commensurate with what we offer as services. If they cannot afford, there is still an option of public schools.

The sentiments demonstrated that private school owners were in business and their capitalists’ values were key to how they operated. This explains that private secondary school is a business model and the Zimbabwean economic crisis which has been in the making since the year 2000 could be a reason why such sentiments were raised. We argue together with the private school owners that embracing Ubuntu ethics is only possible when you have enough food on the table. Giving out the little profit one has out of the business is not as easy as people might think.

Teacher’s perspectives

From the study, it also emerged that some teachers concurred with the private school owners that the schools were business ventures. As remarked by Teacher C that:

Our country’s economic crisis gave impetus to the emergence of these private schools. These owners regard them as their source of income to feed their families. We cannot talk of Ubuntu values when you are facing starvation. You first feed yourself before you check on your neighbour. If you donate …you sometimes face problems from politicians who oppose the idea.

This finding shows that Ubuntu values were very difficult to practice when faced with economic challenges and unfavourable political environment. We agree with the teacher that the country’s economy has collapsed and that alone negates the spirit of giving that the Ubuntu values celebrate. While Ubuntu philosophy agitates for equal access to education and other opportunities that may end discrimination based on factors like socioeconomic backgrounds, it is sometimes not feasible given the characteristic of the modern world. Putting Ubuntu values into practice is a mammoth task given that each person has responsibilities that restricts one to assist as projected by the Ubuntu ethics. Additionally, people have lost confidence in the socio-economic and political system of Zimbabwe and therefore might not think it is their obligation to ensure that everyone flourishes. Those who had attempted to follow the values of Ubuntu by donating to those who live below the poverty datum line have faced criticism and persecution. We argue along Hansen (2011: 249) that donors will easily be ‘accused of pursuing an agenda biased in favour of their own self-interests which is the case in present-day Zimbabwe, where such criticism is expressed through a strong anti-Western vocabulary’.

Conclusion

Basing on the findings and discussion made above, we can conclude that high-cost private schools are double-edged swords: they assist in making sure SDG4 are achieved at one end, while on the other end, they may also reinforce inequalities in societies by undermining the attainment of Education for All. The Ubuntu lens assisted us to understand that the privatisation and marketisation of the education system shows that some individuals do not adhere to an African understanding regarding the provision of education especially based on communitarian values as expressed in Ubuntu. Using the Ubuntu lens, we discern that privatisation of schools inculcates values of inhuman in the proprietors of these schools rather than using and embracing Ubuntu values. The study demonstrated that privatisation and commercialisation of education in Zimbabwe has created an environment favourable for the proliferation of social inequalities, thereby denting the progress thus far made in the achievement of SGD4, especially the part that relates to inclusive education. The study then proffered a novel idea of employing the Ubuntu values as a strategy to level the contested educational terrain based on the premise that every community member has a social responsibility to raise the village child as embedded in the Ubuntu philosophy. Allowing privatisation and marketisation of education to flourish in African countries for the benefit of the few and perpetuating inequalities, shows negligence in the employ of Ubuntu values. Ubuntu must mitigate such individualistic and profit maximisation instincts associated with global capitalism and offer an entirely alternative strategy for increasing equality of opportunities in the education sector. The study reminds us that lest we forget that Africa has a fountain of wisdom in the form of the Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKSs) that must be siphoned for use in the developing countries to address inequalities in education created by socio-economic backgrounds. We therefore argue that a better idea is to enhance the quality of public education by heavily funding these schools so that families see less need to send children to high-cost private schools and thus ensure that education is inclusive and equitable. All key stakeholders are urged to use the Ubuntu values and realise that they have a social responsibility to help the government procure educational materials so that public schools match or surpass the standards of high-cost private schools. While this study has threaded into a contested terrain and provides insights on how private players in education negate SDG4 especially that part to do with inclusive education, further research is needed in a range of contexts to confirm and or disconfirm who is accessing high-cost private schools, particularly given their increased prevalence in Sub-Saharan Africa, and whether high-cost private schools are meeting the needs of an underserved population.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions by the participants and the anonymous reviewers in shaping this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Pfuurai Chimbunde

Data availability statement

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.*

References

Amnesty International (2020) Broken and Unequal: The State of Education in South Africa. London: Amnesty International Ltd.

Anand

Behrman

Dang

, et al. (2018) Inequality of Opportunity in Education Accounting for the Contributions of Sibs, Schools and Sorting across East Africa. Washington, DC: The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 8622.

Baum

Abdul-Hamid

Wesley

(2018) Inequality of educational opportunity: the relationship between access, affordability, and quality of private schools in Lagos, Nigeria. Oxford Review of Education 44(4): 459–475.

Bennell

(2022) Private schooling in sub-Saharan Africa: an egalitarian alternative? International Journal of Educational Development 88: 102533. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102533.

Bhurekeni

(2020) Decolonial Reflections on the Zimbabwean primary and secondary school curriculum reform journey. Educational Research for Social Change 9(2): 101–115. DOI: 10.17159/2221-4070/2020/v9i2a7.

Bray

(2020) Shadow education in Europe: growing prevalence, underlying forces, and policy implications. ECNU Review of Education 4: 442–475. DOI: 10.1177/2096531119890142.

Bray

(2021) Shadow Education in Africa Private Supplementary Tutoring and its Policy Implications. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre (CERC).

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

Broodryk

(2006) Ubuntu Life Coping Skills from Africa. Randburg, SA: Knowres Publishing.

10.

Chimbunde

(2020) The Emergency of Satellite Schools and Access to Education in Zimbabwe: leveraging the Human Rights Agenda. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education 16(1): 323–339.

11.

Chimbunde

Kgari-Masondo

(2021) Curriculum change and teachers' representations of challenges: the case od social studies curriculum in Zimbabwe. Curriculum Perspectives 41: 35–45.

12.

Chimbi

Jita

(2023) Policy reform in a colonial setting: a historical discourse analysis of George Stark’s advocacy for technical-vocational education. E-Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (EHASS) 4(6): 714–725.

13.

Cropley

(2015) Introduction to qualitative research methods. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3095.6888. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285471178

14.

Esteron

MAS

(2021) Equity in online learning amidst pandemic in the Philippines. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences 6(5): 139–152.

15.

Gruijters

Alcott

Rose

(2020) The Effect of Private Schooling on Learning Outcomes in South Asia and East Africa: A Within-Family Approach. Working Paper No. 20/7, REAL Centre. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3686733.

16.

Hansen

(2011) Donors and the crisis in Zimbabwe experiences and lessons learned. In Besada

(ed) Zimbabwe: Picking up the Pieces. New York, NY: Palgrave, 249–268.

17.

Ilon

(1992) School choice in a privatized market: equity implications in Zimbabwe. Journal of Education Finance 17(4): 303–317.

18.

Joshi

(2019) The growth, roles and needs of the private education system: private stakeholder perspectives from Nepal. International Journal of Educational Development 65(4): 57–67.

19.

Kanyongo

(2005) Zimbabwe’s public education system reforms: successes and challenges. International Education Journal 6(1): 65–74.

20.

Kgari-Masondo

Chimbunde

(2021) Progress of an African student during COVID- 19 and beyond in higher education: Re-colonisation of decolonisation? Perspectives in Education 39(1): 323–339. DOI: 10.18820/2519593X/pie.v39.i1.20.

21.

Klees

(2018) Liberia’s experiment with privatising education: a critical analysis of the RCT Study. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 48(3): 471–482.

22.

Letseka

(2013) Educating for Ubuntu/Botho: lessons from Basotho indigenous education. Open Journal of Philosophy 3(2): 337–344.

23.

Liu

(2019) A structural equation modeling analysis of parental factors underlying the demand for private supplementary tutoring in China. ECNU Review of Education 2(1): 7–24. DOI: 10.1177/2096531119840856.

24.

Makalela

(2016) Ubuntu translanguaging: an alternative framework for complex multilingual encounters. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 34(3): 187–196. DOI: 10.2989/16073614.2016.1250350.

25.

Makwara

Dzansi

Chipunza

(2023) Contested notions of Ubuntu as a corporate social responsibility (CSR) theory in Africa: an exploratory literature review. Sustainability 15: 6207. DOI: 10.3390/su15076207.

26.

Mavhunga

(2006) Africanising the school curriculum: a case for Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research 18(3): 440–456.

27.

Metz

(2011) Ubuntu as a moral theory and human rights in South Africa. African Human Rights Journal of Law 11: 532–559.

28.

Metz

(2016) Recent philosophical approaches to social protection: from capability to Ubuntu. Global Social Policy 16(2): 132–150.

29.

MoPSE (2015) Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education Ministerial Statement: Update on the Proposed Curriculum Framework for Primary and Secondary Education. Harare, Zimbabwe: Parliament of Zimbabwe.

30.

Mugumbate

Chereni

(2020) Now, the theory of Ubuntu has its space in social work. African Journal of Social Work 10(1), 5–17.

31.

Ngubane

Makua

(2021) Intersection of Ubuntu pedagogy and social justice: transforming South African higher education. Transformation in Higher Education 6(1): a113. DOI: 10.4102/the.v6i0.113.

32.

Omodan

Makena

(2022) Positioning Ubuntu as a strategy to transform classism in university classrooms. Eureka: Social and Humanities 3(1): 104–111. DOI: 10.21303/2504-5571.2022.002392.

33.

Riddel

(1998) Reforms of educational efficiency and equity in developing countries: an overview. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 28(3): 227–292.

34.

Smyth

(2009) Buying your way into college? private tuition and the transition to higher education in Ireland. Oxford Review of Education 35(1): 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/03054980801981426.

35.

Šťastný

(2021) Shadow education in the context of early tracking: between-track differences in the Czech Republic. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 53(3): 380–398. DOI: 10.1080/03057925.2021.1922271.

36.

UNESCO (2017) Unpacking Sustainable Development Goal 4: Education 2030. Paris: UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000246300.

37.

Woolman

(2001) Educational reconstruction and post-colonial curriculum development: a comparative study of four African countries. International Education Journal 2(5): 27–46.

38.

Yin

(2015) Case Study Research Design And Methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

39.

Zhakata

(2022) Science Teacher Shortages Hit Manicaland. The Manica Post. https://www.pressreader.com/zimbabwe/the-manica-post/20220325/281530819522851

40.

Zwier

Geven

van de Werfhorst

(2021) Social inequality in shadow education: the role of high-stakes testing. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 61(6): 412–440. DOI: 10.1177/0020715220984500.