Critical Analysis of Problems Encountered in Incorporating Indigenous Knowledge in Science Teaching by Primary School Teachers 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
In Zimbabwe the need to incorporate indigenous knowledge in science education to reflect local cultural settings cannot be overemphasized. Current policies on science are situated in Western cultural definitions, thus marginalizing indigenous knowledge, which is misconceived as irrational and illogical. This study used qualitative research methods. Ten teachers were purposively selected and interviewed to gain their insights into problems faced in incorporating indigenous knowledge into science teaching. The study found that the problems were attitudinal, institutional, and systemic. Teachers were found to be conservative “gatekeepers” who exhibited negative attitudes toward indigenous science and supported maintaining the teaching of Western science. The study suggests reforming and transforming science curriculum, policymaking, and teacher education to promote cross-cultural science in Zimbabwean primary schools.
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 | 0.014 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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