Indigenous? What Indigenous Knowledge? Beliefs and Attitudes of Rural Primary School Teachers Towards Indigenous Knowledge in the Science Curriculum in Zimbabwe
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Despite the end of colonialism, Zimbabwean rural school teachers still find themselves trapped in the colonial pedagogic practices that undervalue the importance of rural school children's experiential knowledge in science. This article explores the beliefs and attitudes of rural primary teachers towards incorporating Indigenous knowledge and Indigenous teaching practices in science education. A case study of 10 teachers in a rural school in Zimbabwe was conducted using the observation method which was complimented with a semi-structured interview. Twenty video recordings were carried out while the teachers were conducting science lessons. Classroom interactions and communications were vividly captured and analysed, while interviews were conducted after observations to capture explanatory details that may not have been apparent during video recordings. Inductive data analysis focusing on themes relating to teachers' views and practices yielded rich and informative details. Findings indicate that teachers are reluctant to integrate Indigenous knowledge and teaching techniques as pedagogical tools. The attitudes are a result of systemic and institutional expectations on teachers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it