Abstract:The

Purpose: The purpose of this paper was to examine the adoption complexities amidst the abrupt emergent shift to technological innovations in education, caused by Covid-19 that led to fundamental transformations (like shock to human life, shattered businesses, feelings of uncertainty, school closures, reduced human contact, adoption of online learning among others). Specifically, this greatly frustrated the education sector more than ever before. The transformation was intended to mitigate the impact of Covid-19 pandemic, but also, as a means to transition into the 4 th Industrial Revolution. Design/ Methodology/Approach: A cross sectional qualitative approach was used to collect data purposively selected from primary, secondary, nursing, seminary and higher education institutions that were to undo the varying learning challenges amidst lockdown brought by the government to flatten the infection curve and reduce total fatalities from the contagious pandemic. Thematic, content and narrative analyses were adopted to make sense out of the generated data. Findings: The study revealed that different institutions had been affected in different ways ranging from minimal differentiated teaching, quality observance, skills possession and mastery, competency-based approaches, differentiated approaches, diminished team learning, costly internet connections, questionable infrastructure and students' inability to comprehend content delivered through technology assisted instruction. Originality/Value: The paper suggests that amidst these challenges, education institutions transitioned into stable blended learning environment. Therefore, it is about time that all education institutions revamped existing curricula to incorporate How to cite this paper: Kaguhangire-

The paper confronts the most controversial debate regarding the “Critical and Creative Thinking” divide, often termed as ‘strange bedfellows’ in academia. The divide is manifested in the way academics often bristle at the suggestion that exists between ‘critical and creative thinking perceptions.  We argue that creativity without critical judgment would be fanciful, impractical and ridiculous, with the potential to run other people’s ideas ‘amok’, while critical thinkers would get short shrift if only they were reduced to just critiquing.  Hence, it is necessary to have both on the team, those who can create novel ideas and others to critique others’ creations.   While we acknowledge the distinction of the concepts, their roles are complementary and necessary to create a balance that must co-exist and shine in the scholarly arena.  We conclude that the phrases often used in academia, such as; ‘devil’s advocates’, ‘opponents’ or ‘critical reviewers’ of doctoral candidates or in peer reviews has apparently been taken literally.  We recommend that the superficial misconception of ‘greater’ or ‘superior’, is an unnecessary cognitive dissonance that must be resolved to promote co-existence for greater results.

The paper focused on both the positive as well as negative factors that influenced academics' enthusiasm to engage in research and scholarly endeavors. A qualitative strategy was chosen, and review summaries were used to support it in three higher education institutions (HEIs). In-depth interviews, observation, and document analysis were done. Factors responsible for academics' research enthusiasm, included; international, national, institutional and personal factors. Majorly, national and institutional factors such as; distorted benchmarking, the "triad and multi-faceted" academics roles and workload rationalization. Personal factors that negatively influenced academic enthusiasm included; procrastination, perfectionism and self-pity, while, positive influencers included; intellectual curiosity, drive for career growth, inquiry acumen and self-fulfillment, which inevitably attracts a dual reward arrangement, leading to two sides of the coin. While those who had published were recognized and/or promoted, the ones who had not go demoralized, a feeling of humiliation, emotional resignation, and sometimes, complete refusal to even try, as they considered themselves losers. Hence, aside from the institutional factors that affected every academic, self-determination and intellectual curiosity were majorly responsible for academics' research enthusiasm. Therefore, in order to enhance every academic' research enthusiasm, institutions should establish mentorship programs in research and scholarly writing, set up rotational leadership rules in research clusters to give each member a chance to be the "first author," and launch more series of journals as viable avenues for academics to publish.

No abstract