No abstract

It is common for indigenous knowledge (IK) researchers in South Africa to conduct studies within conventional Western paradigms, especially in the field of IK-science curriculum integration. The scientific paradigm usually takes precedence and research publishing follows the rules of the academy. There is an inherent paradox in this practice. An endeavour that aims to redress Western knowledge hegemony and decolonise the school science curriculum often judges its own value in terms of the very system it critiques. While much useful work has been done in IK-science curriculum integration, and calls are made for appreciating both knowledge systems, it is concerning that the research knowledge is available to academics and generally not to indigenous communities who are usually cocontributors (at least) to the research data. This paper argues for research processes and outcomes that could benefit indigenous communities. We present examples drawn from three science curriculum studies in different areas of South Africa. We briefly describe the research contexts, and the ways that the researchers sought to ensure knowledge was shared in relevant representations with each community. We also discuss some of the dilemmas we encountered and offer suggestions for strengthening knowledge dissemination, appreciation, preservation, as well as reimagining IK for new generations.

What is the connection between student success and their approaches to learning? Do learning approaches develop with university experience? We explored these questions by constructing profiles using a specially developed fixed response instrument and administering this to students at two similar South African universities. Groups consisted of access course applicants, access course students, and first and second year mainstream chemistry students. Successful senior students showed more sophisticated approaches to learning than other groups. Unsuccessful students fell into two different categories: those using a surface approach, and predominantly first generation tertiary students who used deep approaches. We discuss possible reasons for the latter group's lack of success. These findings raise questions for academic development practitioners advocating the use of deep approaches. The instrument was found to be useful for both diagnostic and pedagogic purposes.

It is common for researchers in Indigenous Knowledge (IK) in science education research to draw on aspects of the scientific paradigm from their science training. The consequent research seeks to be objective. This paradigm is not necessarily appropriate for IK research. While there have been calls for IK-aligned methodologies (Chilisa 2012;Keane 2008;Smith 1999) there are few examples of how this may be approached in Southern Africa. Drawing on the centrality of story and relationship in IK, we illustrate how the researcher's life experience shapes the research purpose, design and credibility. In refocusing research into IK, the relationship between research and the researcher needs greater acknowledgement. We present here story examples from three IK-science education studies. Education as Change

Increasing the quality and quantity of published research has become an imperative for many universities in South Africa, but academic staff need more than policy mandates to flourish as writers. In this article the authors aim to inspire academic staff developers and research managers to initiate and support strategies to help academics write more and better, and to take pleasure in writing. Drawing on published literature and our own experiences, we turn a critical eye on writing development strategies used in our own research-intensive institution in Johannesburg, and strategies used in other institutions, mainly, but not only, in South Africa. We weigh up the benefits and drawbacks of five writing strategies: writing courses and workshops; writing groups; writing mentoring and coaching; PhD bootcamps; and writing retreats. We also provide a summary table of the claims made for particular strategies to promote capacity building and productivity, on the one hand, and emotional and social aspects of writing on the other hand. We conclude that by thinking critically and creatively, research managers and academic staff developers can indeed help academics to flourish as writers.