EDUCATION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF CULTURAL DEFOLIATION:
A MULTI-VOICE REPORT
Joseph Ki-Zerbo, Cheikh Hamidou Kane, Jo-Ann Archibald, Edouard Lizop and Majid Rahnema
Five
voices are heard in this presentation. They come from very different parts of
the world, Although they have all been ‘schooled’, they seem to share similar
views on the ways the new imported educational systems are now focused on transforming
their users into becoming ‘developed’ versions of an uprooted homo oeconomicus.
Ki-Zerbo
was the first to use the terms ‘insular’ and ‘culturally defoliant’ to describe
the imported colonial school. For him, this institution could also be compared
to a sacred wood where only a few initiated people would enter to perform
esoteric rites beyond ordinary people.
JOSEPH
KI-ZERBO is a well-known educator and historian from Burkina Faso. His book Histoire de l’Afrique Noire, published
by Hatier in 1978, is already a classic. He was a major contributor to the
UNESCO-sponsored General History of
Africa (7 vols), and director of the first volume, Methodology and African Prehistory. He was also a member of the
Executive Board of UNESCO in the late l970s.
CHEIKH
HAMIDOU KANE is from Senegal. He is an economist by profession and a former
Planning Minister. However, it is through his penetrating autobiographical
novel, L’Aventure ambiguè, that he
established himself as a great African writer.
JO-ANN
ARCHIBALD is the director of the First Nation House of Learning at the
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. Her research interests
include First Nations’ education curricula, higher education and story-telling.
EDOUARD
LIZOP, who died in 1995, was an educator of great imagination and integrity. He
was the principal founder of the Schools for Collective Promotion (Ecoles de
Promotion Collective), an initiative launched in Africa in the 1950s, which
aimed at finding a creative alternative to the imported model of schooling.
Like the Gandhian Nal Taleem, it was warmly welcomed by the first generation of
African educators, but nipped in the bud by the bureaucrats within the
ministries of education.
MAJID
RAHNEMA was Minister for Science and Higher Education in Iran from 1967 to
1971. He is the co-author, with Edgar Faure, of the UNESCO Commission Report Learning to Be (Fayard/UNESCO, Paris,
1972), and was a member of the Executive Board of UNESCO from 1974 to 1978.
Modern Education and the Creation of Discontinuities Primitive education was a process by which continuity was maintained between parents and children ... Modern education includes a heavy emphasis upon the function of education to create discontinuities — to turn the child of the peasant into a clerk, of the farmer into a lawyer, of the Italian immigrant into an American, of the illiterate into the literate. — Margaret Mead, from ‘Our Education
Emphases in Primitive Perspective’, in Education
and the Cultural Process, reprinted from the American Journal of Sociology, XLVIII, May 1943, p. 9. |
[School]
is a temple of knowledge accessible only to the neophytes, and those who enter
there are to accomplish a sort of interplanetary voyage: they encounter a
strange decoration, scenery composed of travel agency leaflets.... Here, it is
a beech tree in its autumn sumptuousness, which contrasts cruelly with the
shaggy and easy-going baobab tree that one stares at distractedly through the
window. There, it is a cow from Brittany sitting enthroned on a wall,
apparently the first to wonder at its presence there.
It
is also a school for uprooting ... a dangerous cyst, a tumor which might only
too often prove to be cancerous... [It is socially uprooting, for] once you are
selected [to be part of it], you are considered by your own parents as a sort
of raw material destined to come out of the process as a very clean-looking and
well-esteemed clerk. And the mentality of the pupil himself changes
similarly...
[The
modern school tends to rob the student of his historic memory. There, one is
trained to lose one’s personality, no longer being able to recognize one’s
father or mother or home.] As children are cut off from their historic roots,
entire populations risk losing their personality... One learns the dictionary
by heart, perhaps to read Tacitus in the original text, but one becomes unable
to speak naturally to one’s own mother... [They become] ‘cultural proletarians,
victims of zombification’, to use
Depestre’s words. The ‘zombi’, in
Haitian Creole, is a person whose soul and spirit have been stolen from him,
leaving him just his body and his labour power. In Africa, too, we know of
‘soul eaters’ [mangeurs d’ames]. This
process of depersonalization is such that many an African academic whose mind
has been moulded by the training country’s camp out amongst their own people as
agents of technical assistance... For one Senghor, how many millions of obscure
zombies! For one Césaire, how many a zombi who will never write or, even
less, live the experience of the Cahiers
d’un retour au pays natal…1
[On another plane, the imported school leads to an economic dead-end and a social powder keg.] One wonders whether school does not create more problems than it solves. It is the origin of this general exodus which is common to all underdeveloped countries, particularly in Africa... The student with a primary school certificate goes to the little town, the one with a high-school diploma to the capital, the graduate and the postgraduate to rich countries. Rural zones which have paid for the expenses of education thus end up by being punctured, with their vitality, their capacity to progress and even to survive pumped out of them. Living in the cities, they are nothing but wrecks. They become like uprooted trees which cannot be replanted elsewhere. They are literally cut off, carried on a river that often has no port.
Finally,
school tends to be increasingly anti-democratic. Perceived as a source of
upward social mobility, it is desired by everyone, but it actually serves
people who are already ‘educated’, thus becoming the preserve of a small
minority.2
CHEIKH HAMIDOU KANE
The New School: The Cannon and the
Magnet
A
hundred years ago our grandfather, along with all the inhabitants of this
countryside, was awakened one morning by an uproar arising from the river. He
took his gun and, followed by all the elite of the region, he flung himself
upon the newcomers. His heart was intrepid, and to him the value of liberty was
greater than the value of life. Our grandfather, and the elite of the country
with him, was defeated. Why? How? Only the newcomers know. We must ask them: we must go to learn from
them the art of conquering without being in the right. Furthermore, the
conflict has not yet ceased. The foreign school is the new form of the war
which those who have come here are waging…3
[But]
the country of the Diallobé was not the only one which had been awakened by a
great clamour early one day. The entire black continent had its moment of
clamour.
Strange
dawn! The morning of the Occident in black Africa was spangled over with
smiles, with cannon shots, with shining glass beads. Those who had no history
were encountering those who carried the world on their shoulders. It was a
morning of accouchement: the known
world was enriching itself by a birth that took place in mire and blood.
From
shock, the one side made no resistance. They were a people without a past,
therefore without memory. The men who were landing on their shores were white,
and mad. Nothing like them had ever been known. The deed was accomplished
before the people were even conscious of what had happened.
Some
among the Africans, such as the Diallobé, brandished their shields, pointed
their lances, and aimed their guns. They were allowed to come close, then the
cannon were fired. The vanquished did not understand...
Others
wanted to parley. They were given a choice: friendship or war. Very sensibly,
they chose friendship. They had no experience at all.
The
result was the same, nevertheless, everywhere.
Those
who had shown fight and those who had surrendered, those who had come to terms
and those who were obstinate — they all found themselves, when the day came,
checked by census, divided up, classified, labelled, conscripted, administered.
For
the newcomers did not know only how to fight. They were strange people. If they
knew how to kill with effectiveness, they also knew how to cure, with the same
art. Where they had brought disorder, they established a new order. They
destroyed and they constructed. On the black continent it began to be
understood that their true power lay not in the cannons of the first morning,
but rather in what followed the cannons.
Thus,
behind the gunboats, the clear gaze of the Most Royal Lady of the Diallobé had
seen the new school.
The
new school shares at the same time the characteristics of cannon and magnet.
From the cannon it draws its efficacy as an arm of combat. Better than the
cannon, it makes conquest permanent. The cannon compels the body, the school
bewitches the soul. Where the cannon has made a pit of ashes and of death, in
the sticky mold of which men would not have rebounded from the ruins, the new
school establishes peace. The morning of rebirth will be a morning of
benediction through the appeasing virtue of the new school.
From
the magnet, the school takes its radiating force. It is bound up with a new
order, as a magnetic stone is bound up with a field. The upheaval of the life
of man within this new order is similar to the overturn of certain physical
laws in a magnetic field. Men are seen to be composing themselves, conquered,
along the lines of invisible and imperious forces. Disorder is organized,
rebellion is appeased, the mornings of resentment resound with songs of a
universal thanksgiving.
Only
such an upheaval in the natural order can explain how, without either of them
wanting it, the new man and the new school come together just the same. For
neither of them wants the other. The man does not want the school because in
order that he may live — that is, be free, feed and clothe himself — it imposes
upon him the necessity of sitting henceforth, for the required period, upon its
benches. No more does the school want the man because in order to survive —
that is, extend itself and take roots where its necessity has landed it — it is
obliged to take account of him…4
It
is certain that nothing pervades our lives with such clamour as the needs of
which their school permits the satisfaction. We have nothing left — thanks to
them — and it is thus that they hold us. He who wants to live, who wants to
remain himself must compromise…5
The
chief [of the Diallobé] remained silent for a moment. ‘If I told them to go to
the new school,’ he said at last, ‘they would go en masse. They would learn all the ways of joining wood to wood
which we do not know. But, learning, they would also forget. Would what they
learn be worth as much as what they would forget? I should like to ask you: can
one learn this without forgetting that, and is what one learns worth what
one forgets?’…6
‘The
school in which I would place our children [concluded the Most Royal Lady] will
kill in them what today we love and rightly conserve with care. Perhaps the
very memory of us will die in them, When they return from school, there may be
those who will not recognize us. What I am proposing is that we should agree to
die in our children’s hearts and that the foreigners who have defeated us
should fill the place, wholly, which we shall have left free.’7
JO-ANN ARCHIBALD
The Effects of Schooling on the First
Nations of America8
During
the 1900s, First Nations leaders throughout British Columbia voiced their
concerns about the negative effects of education upon their children, families
and communities. Children were returning home as strangers to their cultural
ways, and critical of the family and community way of life. The late George
Manuel condemned the residential schools for devastating the family unit and
denigrating the students’ culture:
Our values were as confused and warped
as our skills. The priest had taught us to respect them by whipping us until we
did what we were told. Now we would not move unless we were threatened with a
whip. We came home to relatives who had never struck a child in their lives.
These people, our mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles and grandparents,
failed to represent themselves as a threat, when that was the only thing we had
been taught to understand. Worse than that, they spoke an uncivilized and
savage language and were filled with superstitions. After a year learning to
see and hear only what the priests and brothers wanted you to see and hear,
even the people we loved came to look ugly.9
|
School as a Factor of Division and Disintegration European
school, which was perhaps a factor of national union and unification in
Europe, appears to be a factor of national division in Third World countries.
Its role is to separate and to select. While it was a means of social
integration in Europe, it has proved to be here a means of disintegration.
While this same school had participated in the creation of a identity and of national consciousness, here it
leads to the imitation of the
identity and of the national consciousness of other peoples. — Jean-Pierre Lepri: Quelle Ecole pour Ia Guinée-Bissau?, mimeographed
report for UNESCO, June 1985, p. 63 (translated by Majid Rahnema).
Jean-Pierre Lepri was a UNESCO consultant in Guinea-Bissau in the 1980s. In
close collaboration with his Guinean counterparts, he developed an intimate
knowledge of the country’s educational questions, which were reflected in his
reports to the government and to UNESCO. Most of them remained in the drawers
of their respective archives. See, in particular, his highly illuminating
book: Education et Nationalité en
Guinée-Bissau: Contribution a l’étude de l’endogenéite de I’éducation, Se Former+, Lyon, 1989. |
EDOUARD LIZOP
Schools as Instruments of Humiliation
The
people of Africa are endowed with a grace of communication and participation
that our younger generations seek, sometimes with anguish, sometimes with
happiness, sometimes bordering on the grotesque... One can finish a long and
brilliant university training without ever having been provoked to dance, to
sing, to paint or to talk... As soon as a school is opened, it creates around
itself a zone of cultural depression, as it were. Ask an African school teacher
what the cultural resources of his village are. He will answer: the school —
and nothing else... Maybe the missionary, but often because he, too, is
imported. But the market, the palaver tree, the dance, the song, the language
of the tam-tam, the tales and the proverbs, the historical and legendary
stories, the potter, the blacksmith, the weaver are not for him sources of
culture. School acts as an instrument of humiliation. It establishes its empire
upon the destruction of whatever it is not, whereas its mission should be to
reveal to everyone all the riches and gifts they represent...
A
missionary was no longer wanted by a village. Bishop Zoa of Yaoundé was
entrusted with a mission of reconciliation. He explained to the population
that, by opening his school, the missionary was only inspired by a spirit of
devotion to the population. An old man intervened: ‘It is not a service that
the Father has rendered to us. On the contrary, he has done us the greatest
wrong. Because, when there was no school here, we could go to our plantations
with our children: now they cannot come, and they have nothing to do.’
This
anecdote impressed the Lord Bishop of Yaoundé to such an extent that, long
after the old man had spoken to him, he said to me: ‘Imagine if the old man had
been able to talk like that to a Minister of Education... Something wonderful
might perhaps have happened.’10
MAJID RAHNEMA
The Excluding Processes of the School
System’11
The school system, introduced by colonialism in countries under their rule, was soon co-opted by the emerging nation-states. It became one of the most important vehicles of development strategy, being presented to the excluded as the answer to all the problems of their ‘underdevelopment’, the redeeming genie which could henceforth save their children from misery and shame.
In
reality, schools served other purposes. They acted as a rather efficient
channel for sieving out, into the Power Establishment, their most ambitious
customers. They sometimes did serve as a cultural medium for some exceptionally
bright individuals who succeeded in taking advantage of the learning resources
for liberating ends. Yet, as a whole, they fostered unprecedented processes of
exclusion against the poor and the powerless, despite their claims to serve as
a new instrument of democratization.
These
excluding processes operated at a number of levels. In relation to the society
at large, they destroyed all previously established systems of cultural
reference. As the only recognized providers of education, they systematically
discredited all previously established mechanisms that different cultures had
created throughout their histories for fostering knowledge and culture. The old
days described by Julius Nyerere, when ‘every adult was a teacher’, were over.
Now, only those certified by the school system, according to its self-devised
criteria, had the right to teach; and only those whose abilities were
recognized by the latter could be admitted to learn.
Education
thus became a scarcity. And the same system which had created this scarcity was
asked to deal with it. The management and the further production of this
scarcity reinforced the new economistic perception of reality, entailing a
broad range of new exclusions. Literacy campaigns often turned out to be
campaigns against the non-literate,
rather than helping the oral populations to educate themselves and learn as
they had always done. For, on the one hand, the adoption of one or two official
languages at the national level — either that of the former colonial ruler, or
that of the larger dominant ethnic group — excluded all the vernacular and
spoken languages that had hitherto served as the main instruments of learning.
On the other hand, the absence or the scarcity of any useful printed material
in such languages (these often being reduced to propaganda publications by the
authorities) further marginalized the non-literate and the unschooled. On the
whole, such campaigns ended up creating new classes of social drop-outs.
As
to the imported ‘modern’ schools, they acted as yet another instrument of
exclusion by allowing only a small minority of their clients to acquire social
recognition. Besides their own army of drop-outs (2-10 per thousand students in
the case of Guinea-Bissau), all adults, peasants, women, working people of all
ages, and all other learners who, for some reason, could not afford to spend
long periods of their life at school, were equally excluded.
Another aspect of the schools’ excluding and divisive action has been extensively analysed: the separation of students from their parents and their cultural milieu. The instilling in them, in homeopathic doses, of new alienating values, attitudes and goals, drives them gradually to reject or even despise their own cultural and personal identity. They acquire a false sense of superiority, which turns them away from manual work, from real life and from all unschooled people, whom they tend to perceive as ignorant and underdeveloped.
Thus,
a ‘cultural gap’ develops fast between the newly schooled ‘elites’ and the rest
of the population, a phenomenon that has been largely responsible for the
well-publicized rural exodus. The most ‘successful’ students abandon their
village folk and leave, often for good, first for the big cities, later for
foreign lands, fostering the process known as the ‘brain drain’. As a result,
the poor and the excluded pay the cost of an educational system that not only
deprives them of any possibility of educating themselves but also severs them
forever from some of the most potentially valuable elements of their community,
from people who could have acted as their best teachers and friends in all
matters concerning their liberation. As to the ‘uprooted’, they are set adrift,
in many cases without ever being able to find new roots for themselves.
As
such, the newly reformed ‘national’ school followed, in terms of its societal
goals, the same as those assigned to the old colonial school. According to
Albert Moumouni,12 one Brevie, then governor general of France in
French Africa, had summed up these goals as follows:
Political and economic interests have imposed a two-fold task on our work in education. On the one hand, we must train indigenous cadres to become our auxiliaries in every area and assure ourselves of a meticulously chosen elite. We must also educate the masses to bring them closer to us and transform their way of life. From the political standpoint we must make known our intention of bringing people to the French way of life; from the economic viewpoint we must train the producers and consumers of to-morrow.
This
consistency of the producer/consumer approach to education, conceived as an
instrumental commodity, is seen in all the ‘educational strategies’ inspired by
the development discourse. In such a context, one can better understand the
statement of a former US ambassador and president of the American University of
Cairo, when explaining his idea of what constituted an educational ‘success’.
In his memoirs,’13 he mentions that he regards one of his AUC
students as ‘a great success because he ended up practically owning the Coca
Cola concession in Khartoum’.
NOTES
1.
The last part of this
paragraph is translated from Ki-Zerbo’s article, ‘L’Education permanente et
l’Afrique’, in Orientations (Essais
et recherches en education), no. 43, July 1972, p. 16.
2.
Excerpts translated in
the last three paragraphs are taken from a speech Ki-Zerbo made in Paris on 5
December 1969, as the secretary general of CAMES (Conseil Afticain et Malgache
de l’Enseignement Supérieur, Upper Volta — now Burkina Faso).
3.
Excerpts from Cheikh
Hamidou Kane, Ambiguous Adventure, trans.
Katherine Woods, Heinemann, London, 1972, p. 37. The ‘collage’ that makes up
this presentation has been taken from parts of the book where Cheikh Hamidou
Kane talks about the traditional and the new school.
4.
Ibid., pp. 49-50.
5.
Ibid., p. 10.
6.
Ibid., p. 34.
7.
Ibid., p. 46.
8.
Extracted from a
mimeographed paper entitled, ‘Educational Perspectives, Challenges of First
Nations Education in the Year 2000’, delivered at the Faculty of Education,
Simon Fraser University, Vancouver.
9.
George Manuel and
Michael Posluns, The Fourth World: An
Indian Reality, Collier-Macmillan, Toronto, 1974, p. 65.
10.
Extracted from Edouard
Lizop, Chroniques, CODIAM (Comité
pour le Développement des Investissemersts Intellectuels en Afrique et a
Madagascar), Paris, 1973, pp.49-50, 21.
11.
Excerpts from a lecture
at Stanford University (16 April 1985), entitled: ‘Education as Participation
or Exclusion?’ The full text of the lecture was published in Spanish in El Gallo, Mexico, 25 August 1985.
12.
Albert Moumouni, Education in Africa, trans. Phyllis
Nauts, Praeger, New York; André Deutsch, London, 1968.
13.
John Badeau, The Middle East Remembered, The Middle
East Institute, Washington DC, 1983.