Microsoft Word - b8400 FullIssue.docx
Journal of Education, 2021
Issue 84, http://journals.ukzn.ac.za/index.php/joe doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i84a10
Online ISSN 2520-9868 Print ISSN 0259-479X
Community-based learning in higher education: A portal
for knowledge production in the time of COVID-19
Nompumelelo Thabethe
Community Development, School of Built Environment and Development Studies, University of KwaZulu-
Natal, Durban, South Africa
Thabethe@ukzn.ac.za
https://orcid.org/ 0000-0003-1327-7503
Sarasvathie Reddy
Higher Education Studies, School of Education, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Reddys15@ukzn.ac.za
https://orcid.org/ 0000-0001-9344-7431
(Received: 15 March 2021; accepted: 31 August 2021)
Abstract
At the onset of COVID-19 in 2020, the world-renowned writer and political activist, Arundhati Roy, signalled
that the pandemic is “a portal, a gateway between one world and the next . . . [and] we can choose to walk
through it.” Roy’s views highlight how we can imagine our world anew through reflection in the time of
COVID-19. In this article, we examine the epistemological experiences of students enrolled in a course in
community-based learning (CBL) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal and consider how CBL during COVID-
19 serves as a portal for understanding knowledge that is produced at the nexus between the university and the
community. We deemed the Community of Inquiry framework to be a suitable theoretical lens based on its
appreciation of the nexus between social (community), teaching (classroom), and cognitive (critical thinking)
elements in an online educational experience. Our findings indicate that COVID-19 provides an opportunity for
CBL to serve as a portal for understanding how the students’ epistemological experiences during the pandemic
influenced knowledge production. This is beneficial since university education most often places at the
periphery knowledge that students from the surrounding communities bring to the classroom. It is our
contention that students bring epistemic value to the university that is not affirmed during the knowledge
production process. We conclude that CBL can indeed serve as the gateway for knowledge production between
universities and communities during and beyond COVID-19.
Keywords: community-based learning, community engagement, COVID-19, knowledge production,
community of inquiry, online pedagogy
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 187
Introduction
When the first case of COVID-19 was discovered in South Africa on March 5, 2020, the
government imposed a 21-day national shutdown that commenced on March 26. COVID-19
continues to wreak havoc globally and in this country by affecting all spheres of social life
and disrupting face-to-face teaching and learning in higher education (Le Grange, 2020). At
the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN)
quickly transitioned to emergency remote teaching and learning (ERTL) and accompanied
this with capacity building sessions to prepare both staff and students for virtual classes. For
Hodges et al. (2020), ERTL denotes the type of learning instruction delivered in times of
crisis to ensure the quick transition to a new modality of teaching and learning. In this case, it
was in response to “the collapse of campus-based teaching” (Walwyn, 2020, p. 20). Such
measures were instrumental in salvaging the 2020 academic year by ensuring that the
curriculum was completed, albeit later than usual, and ending semester two in February 2021.
COVID-19 has exposed and deepened structural inequalities that exist in institutions of
higher learning such as gender, race, and class, inequalities, to name a few that result in
mental illness (Naidoo & Cartwright, 2020). Such inequalities disproportionately affect
African students from previously disadvantaged communities since they often lack access to
laptops, internet connectivity, and study spaces (Nyambuya et al., 2021). COVID-19
exacerbates existing inequalities in higher education, thereby marginalising students from
poor communities even further. A survey of 30,383 students from 62 countries revealed that
the negative impact of COVID-19 on less privileged students is a global phenomenon that is
not restricted to developing countries (Aristovnik et al., 2020). In light of this reality, we
argue that while the level of student responsiveness through ERTL is commendable, it is
inadequately incommensurate to these systemic challenges especially in relation to the
process of knowledge production.
In this article, we examine the epistemological experiences of third-year students who
enrolled in a course in community-based learning (CBL) in the context of community
engagement at UKZN during COVID-19 in 2020. The findings interrogate the epistemic
value that students from poor communities (non-traditional students) brought to university
spaces in the time of COVID-19 that is under discussion. We begin by foregrounding the
socio-cultural environment of community engagement in South African Higher Education
Institutions (SAHEIs) and then present the qualitative research design and methodology that
we adopted to produce the data. We go on to provide an explanation of Garrison et al.’s
(2000) Community of Inquiry (CoI) that we used as our theoretical framework. It fosters a
collaborative-constructivist process premised on the three overlapping tenets of cognitive
presence, social presence, and teaching presence. We were able to draw on these elements to
make sense of the knowledge that is produced at the intersection between the community and
the university. We go on to discuss the study location and the structure of the CBL course.
Although the impact of COVID-19 on SAHEIs is devastating, the key findings foreground
the relevance of the CBL module in times of crisis. We conclude with pedagogical
188 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
perspectives on setting an agenda that embeds CBL as a portal for knowledge production in
the time of COVID-19 and beyond.
The socio-cultural context of community engagement
While the terms community engagement and service-learning are often used interchangeably
(Bender, 2008), service learning is generally applicable to the acquisition of professional
degrees in, for example, teaching and nursing, where practicing student teachers or nurses
provide a service to a community while learning during the process of doing so (Preece et al.,
2011). This is deemed appropriate as an entry point for community engagement (Lazarus et
al., 2008). The application of the term engagement rather than service “opens up possibilities
for a more collaborative process between universities and their communities” (Preece et al.,
2011, p. 718).
SAHEIs evolve within a specific socio-cultural context that is informed and shaped by
national and global realities. In line with the pre-1994 apartheid ideology, higher education
institutions were divided “in terms of politics, culture, language, programme mix, research
output, postgraduate enrolments, staff, and student profiles” (Council on Higher Education
(CHE), 2015, p. 58). This had a negative impact on teaching and learning, as shown in the
White Paper on the Transformation of Higher Education (Department of Education (DOE),
1997). This is consistent with the Soudien Report that observes the impact of racial
discrimination on teaching and learning in higher education (DOE, 2008). To foster equity,
institutional policies embrace, inter alia, academic support and development in research,
teaching, and learning for the benefit of non-traditional students (CHE, 2015) i.e., those who
belong to the cohort that was previously underrepresented in higher education (Davis, 2010).
Despite developments to accommodate them, institutional cultures in SAHEIs are
transforming at a slow pace (CHE, 2016). This is clearly articulated in a five-year
longitudinal study that sought to analyse black students’ experiences of SAHEIs as a way of
assessing the implementation of the Soudien Report. This study sampled participants from
eight South African universities who still feel unwelcome in SAHEIs since they are subjected
to institutional racism (Swartzet al., 2018). Dominant narratives in the literature locate what
is wrong at the level of the individual student while overlooking pervasive institutional
cultures that are slow to transform (Higgs, 2012). Part of the challenge is that transforming
institutional cultures is “less successful at the individual and intellectual level, [it] needs to be
tackled primarily at the level of culture and practice” (CHE, 2015, p. 73). Unless nuanced
descriptions of the students’ lived experiences are validated, they will continue to bring with
them relevant knowledge and cultural experiences that are not valued in SAHEIs as Nieto
(2015) has reminded us. These are pertinent epistemic issues that need to be urgently
addressed by SAHEIs. Epistemology based on the Greek word, episteme, for truthful
knowledge (Mouton, 2001), is the branch of philosophy that is concerned with how
knowledge is acquired (Bengtsen, 2018). While there are different types of epistemology, we
were interested in the socio-political dimensions of knowledge that are concerned with social
epistemology (Siegel, 2004) to ascertain how individuals gain knowledge through interaction
with one another (Kusch, 2011). Apple’s (2000) perspective on epistemology is concerned
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 189
not only with the nature of knowledge, but also with the sociocultural context in which
knowledge is produced. Similarly, in this article we acknowledge that students’ lived
experiences influence what they know since knowledge does not “exist in a social and
personal vacuum” (Boud & Miller, 1996, p. 18). Rather, it “is continuously derived from and
tested out in the experiences of the learner” (p. 27). Epistemology and learning, in being
interrelated, have implications for how educators develop conducive learning environments
(Kember, 2001) and this points to the importance of our study given its focus on students’
epistemological experiences in the time of COVID-19.
Following Preece (2016), we conceptualise community engagement as a counter-hegemonic
tool aimed at mediating power through dialogue and listening. While community engagement
has always been about “social justice, civic engagement and community development,” it was
originally intended to expose development practitioners from affluent communities to
underprivileged communities of the “Other” (Goulet, 2014, p. 14). This is slowly changing to
ensure that SAHEIs are socially responsible in their localities (Maistry & Ramdhani, 2010).
This is illustrated in a review of 16 community engagement units in SAHE that showcases
university responses to COVID-19 in 2020. The review report SAHECEF—2020 in Review:
Rethinking Community Engagement amidst COVID-19 Pandemic, is the initiative of the
South African Higher Education Community Engagement Forum (SAHECEF).
Notwithstanding university-based community engagement units that have been severely
affected by budget cuts, universities are socially responsible in their communities through
service and acts of kindness such as providing food, masks, and other essentials. At a recent
university wide seminar on community engagement, UKZN reported on some activities
offered by the Department of Occupational Therapy and the Centre for Creative Arts. The
former was involved in screening, treatment, and health promotion in schools, while the latter
presented virtually two major community events during the lockdowns (SAHECEF, 2020).
Further, final year medical students from the School of Medicine instituted a community-
centred response to COVID-19 awareness campaigns in partnership with the Human Sciences
Research Council (UKZN, 2020c). Other Schools across UKZN participated in community
engagement activities that can be viewed via the institution’s website. The point that we are
raising here is that while the level of responsiveness is significant in emergencies and crises,
the main question we ask is related to how CBL can serve as a portal for knowledge
production during COVID-19 and beyond.
Research design and theoretical framing
This was a qualitative study located in the interpretivist paradigm. We sought to understand
the students’ epistemological experiences during the CBL module with a view to determining
the epistemic value that non-traditional students brought to university spaces in the time of
COVID-19. The study participants were the first cohort of CBL students to complete the
module under the lockdown regulations in 2020. A purposively chosen sample of 10 CBL
students together with their academic coordinator were interviewed telephonically in order to
190 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
adhere to the national and UKZN COVID-19 guidelines.
1
We also reviewed a course outline.
Garrison et al.’s (2000) CoI with its three tenets (cognitive, social, and teaching presence)
was used as the framework through which the data was generated.
Cognitive presence
There is a strong link between the Col’s cognitive presence and critical thinking, “the
ultimate goal of higher education” (Garrison et al., 2010, p. 6). In making sense of cognitive
presence within a reflective process, Garrison and Arbaugh (2007) operationalised it through
what they called the Practical Inquiry framework, based on John Dewey’s (1938) seminal
work on reflective thinking (experience, reflection, conceptualisation, and experimentation).
Dewey believed that a worthwhile educational experience should be based on reflective
inquiry that leads to critical thinking. The ability to think critically, according to the Col
framework, does not happen in a vacuum. Rather, it is interdependent on the interaction of all
three elements (cognitive, social, and teaching presence) (Garrison et al., 2010). This
resonates with Dewey’s conception of critical thinking; for him, a concrete experience is
required to trigger critical reflection for the generation of new knowledge. The ultimate goal
of cognitive presence is to develop the ability to connect ideas and apply new knowledge
(Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007). This level of thinking is central to the CBL module under study.
Social presence
Proponents of the Col framework recognise that social presence is also central in establishing
a community of inquiry. However, Garrison et al. (2010) critiqued studies that over-
emphasised the social presence to the exclusion of the teaching and cognitive elements.
Rather, they encouraged a multi-dimensional perspective that appreciates the
interconnectedness of the social (community), teaching (classroom) and cognitive (critical
thinking). Social cohesion and open communication are key dimensions in building a
community of inquiry within social presence. There is an association between social and
academic teaching that promotes comprehension of knowledge produced at the nexus
between the classroom and the community (Garrison, 2009). This observation is critical in
assisting us to understand the relevance of the knowledge that was produced by the
participants of the study while undertaking the CBL module.
Teaching presence
While the social presence and course content interactions among learners are essential in
virtual learning, such interactions by themselves cannot provide students with effective online
learning. Hence, three dimensions are crucial in facilitating teaching presence in technology-
mediated education, i.e., design, facilitation, and direction (Garrison et al., 2010) that are
necessary “for the purpose of realising personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile
learning outcomes” (Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007, p. 163). Three additional components are
1 The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the UKZN’s Humanities and Social Sciences Ethics
Committee (ethical clearance number: HSSREC/00003079/2021).
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 191
critical in the attainment of this learning outcome: 1) instructional design and organisation; 2)
facilitating discourse; and 3) direct instruction (Anderson et al., 2001). Studies conducted in
the COVID-19 era on ERTL validated the importance of teaching presence for successful
online learning (Aristovnik et al., 2020).
A strong link exists between cognitive, social, and teaching elements. This is clearly
articulated in a study that was conducted by Shea and Bidjerano (2009) to investigate the
causal relationships among these three dimensions. These study findings viewed social
presence as a mediating factor between teaching and cognitive presence. Moreover, for these
scholars, “teaching and social presence represent the processes needed to create paths to
epistemic engagement” (p. 551). We deemed the Col framework suitable for our study based
on its appreciation of the intersection between and among social (community), teaching
(classroom) and cognitive (critical thinking) elements while considering the dynamics of an
online educational experience. In addition, it acknowledges the importance of setting the
climate, selecting appropriate content, and supporting emerging discourses for knowledge
generation. We, therefore, argue that all three of these constructs are essential to a CBL
course design for learning in times of crisis and beyond.
Study location and structure of the CBL course
The study was conducted in the Department of Community Development in the School of
Built Environment and Development Studies at UKZN’s Howard College campus. UKZN
was an appropriate setting for the understanding of students’ epistemological experiences
because of the institutional changes that have taken place here in the broader context of
transformation in SAHEIs. A growing number of students at UKZN hail from previously
disadvantaged backgrounds. In a survey with a sample of 456 respondents, Sabi et al. (2020)
reported that 53.1% of the students at UKZN are vulnerable to food insecurity, 44%
experienced moderate levels of vulnerability while 9.2% were highly vulnerable. It is against
this backdrop that UKZN’s internal policies tackle issues of access, equity, development, and
academic excellence for the benefit of students from previously excluded communities. For
instance, the university instituted a Food Security Programme in 2012 to address food
insecurity among students from low-income households. UKZN is also leading the
institutionalisation of isiZulu and shifting it to the centre of intellectual inquiry in SAHE
(Khumalo, 2016). Ndimande-Hlongwa et al. (2010) asserted that students enrolled in isiZulu
courses at UKZN are well-equipped to engage with the communities they serve in the
university’s locality. This forms the basis of the design and implementation of the current
CBL curriculum that we discuss below.
The core modules in the three-year Bachelor of Community and Development Studies
(BCDS) degree foster multi-disciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches since they are
offered through 10 core modules and 11 electives from cognate disciplines in UKZN’s
College of Humanities (UKZN, 2020b), i.e., anthropology, psychology, social work, political
science, tourism, criminology and forensic studies, international relations, gender studies,
philosophy, practical theology, sociology, social policy, etc.). Compulsory core modules
192 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
include: 1) Introduction to Community Development; 2) Institutions in Community
Development; 3) Development Theories; 4) Local Economic Development; 5) Project
Planning; 6) Community Profiling; 7) Local Government and Community Development; 8)
CBL; 9) Contemporary Issues in Community Development; 10) Population and Community
Development.
The community engagement unit in the Department of Community Development at UKZN
has undergone many phases of transformation following the university’s merger that took
place in 2004 when the former University of Durban Westville merged with the then
University of Natal, resulting in a shift in management structures (O’Brien, 2012). CBL is a
year-long course offered to final year students who already have a sound understanding of
development theories, concepts, and approaches. The course provides them with
opportunities for the application of learning, thereby acting as a capstone that brings all the
learning together. Through experiential learning, students gain hands-on experience in a
community setting. This inculcates a culture of reflection and critical thinking as they learn in
both the classroom and the community. CBL merges theory and practice and nurtures
students to become critical, competent, empathetic, and ethical. The course is coordinated
with the assistance of staff from non-profit organisations and government departments who
act as student hosts (UKZN, 2020a).
The CBL module in 2020 had a total of 42 registered students. The course outline involved
weekly community engagement activities and classroom-based learning. The teaching
methodology was organised in a manner that promoted collaborative and individual learning
through 1) Placement sites: students worked in teams of three to five members over a period
of six weeks (with eight hours per week in their placement sites). They are accountable to an
organisational mentor (supervisor) who guides learning. An agreement is signed between the
Department of Community Development’s CBL coordinator and managers of placement sites
to ensure mutual understanding; 2) Personal learning journals: journaling as a teaching
methodology gives students an opportunity to reflect critically on their practical experience;
3) classroom-based learning: a 90-minute session is arranged once a week to enable critical
reflection and learning. In addition, problem areas are identified and addressed to equip
students to meet the demands of their placements; and 4) Reflective writing and oral
presentations: students are expected to reflect in writing and prepare for oral presentations.
The national shutdown and subsequent lockdowns in March 2020 disrupted the course
delivery and this led to the discontinuation of all face-to-face learning and community
engagement activities. ERTL was instituted between April and August 2020 as an emergency
plan and students were encouraged to identify suitable placement sites in their home
communities. This was a deviation from the norm since the Department of Community
Development is responsible for the placement of students, small group allocations, and the
disbursement of travel funds. When President Cyril Ramaphosa shifted the country to alert
level 2 on 10 August 2020, students were able to return to campus for university-led
placements in small groups. Students spent five days in their host organisations (between
8h00 and 16h00 each day) as opposed to spending an eight-hour day a week for six weeks.
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 193
These efforts ensured the continuation of the academic programme despite the challenges
presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Discussion of the findings
The community context in which students operate (social presence)
The findings revealed that participants from low-income households are hard-hit by the
COVID-19 pandemic since they struggle to study from home because of the constraints of
poor connectivity, and study space as well as data shortages. Two of the ten participants were
unable to participate in CBL activities. One cited the lack of funds for travelling in a rural
community, while the other maintained that no development agencies exist in a remote rural
part of Ulundi, a small town located approximately 232km north of Durban. Eight of the ten
interview participants live in poverty-stricken rural communities with high rates of
unemployment. Participant 2, for example, maintained that “all households are affected by
unemployment in my community. People depend on social grants for daily survival.” All ten
participants reported that working from home was not conducive to learning. The participants
were expected to attend to CBL in development agencies located in their localities during a
strict lockdown phase (April to August 2020). Although eight of the ten participants managed
to perform under pressure, with varying degrees of success, it was established that none of
them enjoyed the experience. When we probed further, we learned that two of them took a
tough decision to stay with friends for the duration of the CBL placement in the inner city of
Durban. Some students found it upsetting to risk their lives at the height of COVID-19. All
participants indicated that the placements that were undertaken in the second phase
(September to November 2020) were the preferred option since the Department of
Community Development was involved in planning. As Participant 4 lamented,
“Unfortunately, the first placement happened when everyone in the country was still trying to
make sense of COVID-19. We were all overwhelmed by fear.”
Participant 7, echoing similar sentiments, said,
It was not a perfect time. Some of us were not in a good place mentally, financially,
and emotionally. Our families and communities were affected by this COVID-19
thing. Amidst all that, you visit a local organisation that was not active in the
community due to COVID-19 regulations. Days were spent listening to oral
presentations [but] there were no communities to work with.
These assertions suggest that there was not much happening in community-based
organisations during this period (April to August 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic invoked
restrictions on social distancing and limited face-to-face contact. Community gatherings were
prohibited, and the participants were not exposed to community workshop facilitation
because of social distancing protocols.
Participant 2 is one of the four students who mentioned the advantages of working with
development agencies rooted in their local values, traditions, and cultures. Yet, like the rest of
194 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
her peers, she prefers university-led placements. Having been in a school in Verulam where
her mother works as a teacher, she found several development programmes intended for
pupils from low-income homes relevant. Still, she was among those who assured us that her
main interest was to be placed in a university-led learning site. When asked to comment on
the reasons, she explained, “The work was tedious. It was boring to be stuck in a school type
of work environment even though I found their development programmes relevant.”
Participant 9 explained,
I felt that University-led placements are reputable and reliable. Hosts in those
organisations respect us as students because they value the university. Working in
local development agencies is not valued where I come from. I also liked the fact that
we worked in groups. Walking into the first placement alone, without the support of
your peers and academic staff, was a daunting task.
Participant 10 built on Participant 9’s observations in saying,
We tend to be ashamed to go and visit our local organisations because of the nature of
being a university student. Community members expect university students to
contribute to the upliftment of their communities once they are done with their
studies. To be seen in donor-funded community organisations, instead of working in
corporate South Africa, is not what many students aspire to.
Participant 7 also touched on similar sentiments in stating, “Universities approach community
engagement activities from the point of privilege. When you are poor, all you need is
completing your studies and getting a job to assist your family.”
In our attempt to make sense of these narratives, we sought to gather the perceptions of the
academic CBL coordinator. He was aware of the students’ experiences since this was brought
to his attention during the course delivery in 2020.
He said,
It cannot be denied that the devastation in 2020 was unprecedented, and everyone was
affected. While the situation of students who lacked travel funds is understandable,
the case of those who spent the entire period (April to August 2020) without any
practical involvement is concerning.
He continued,
Our students are not part and parcel of their home communities. The prevailing
mentality is that when you have made it, you should distance yourself from your
community that is still finding it hard to make ends meet and this needs to change.
These observations reiterate Participants 9’s and 10’s assertions cited earlier. Similar
sentiments were shared when one of the participants mentioned that community engagement
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 195
is attractive to people of a particular class. The student’s epistemological experience is that
people in her community prioritise assisting their families and neighbourhoods and going
beyond those parameters is associated with privilege.
The participants’ social presence was also characterised by pain and suffering because of
pandemic-related deaths. Among the ten participants who were interviewed, five cases of
members of the family who succumbed to COVID-19 were reported. While dealing with loss,
pain, and suffering in their personal lives, the participants had to deal with the untimely
passing of one of the academic CBL coordinators on August 8, 2020.
2
Moreover, some
participants experienced further loss during their placements in community organisations.
The loss that made provincial headlines was that of the founder member of the Emseni
Community Project, a Christian-based organisation in Durban. The organisation works in
partnership with eThekwini Municipality and the provincial Departments of Education,
Health and Social Development. Their main purpose is to provide development in schools
and communities through their HIV and AIDS programmes as well as food security
programmes and access initiatives to the basic education sector.
The social presence of the participants demonstrates that COVID-19 impacted learning and
the social ills witnessed in placement sites are not isolated issues but are consistent with their
lived experiences. As participant 2 insisted, “All households are affected by unemployment in
my community.” Moreover, two participants had to stay with friends in order to access
education. These findings demonstrate that the epistemologies that the participants
promulgate are born out of their identities and contexts. Thus, their social presence reveals
that while the university has a growing number of non-traditional students from previously
disadvantaged communities, the knowledge that is produced lacks relevance and alignment
with their epistemological experiences. As Goulet (2014) observed, traditionally, universities
were home mainly to students from privileged backgrounds who were placed for community
engagement activities, not in their privileged communities, but in communities of the Other.
In such environments, poor communities were not regarded as co-creators of knowledge but
as anthropological subjects. This influenced the kind of knowledge that was produced.
COVID-19 blurred the boundaries between the university and the community since students
were studying from home. While the participants concur that both theory and practice are
essential for knowledge production, there is currently a mismatch between the two since the
university’s teaching presence is unable to integrate the students’ epistemological experiences
for the advancement of knowledge. Thus, students bring epistemic value to the university that
is not affirmed in knowledge production. This reiterates Apple’s (2000) perspectives on
epistemology relating to the sociocultural context in which knowledge is produced. In cases
of students who could not participate in CBL because of socio-economic challenges, the
findings portray how social inequalities are reproduced in education, making ERTL in such
learning environments a non-starter. Understanding the interface between the university and
the contexts in which students operate becomes critical for the facilitation of learning.
2 As authors of this article, we can attest to the magnitude of grief and sadness that overwhelmed us as a result of
this sudden passing of our colleague who was also our friend. The impact of his untimely passing shook the entire
UKZN’s College of Humanities as it was evident in the tributes shared during his virtual memorial service held on
August 28, 2020.
196 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
We turn, now, to the theme of teaching presence.
Students’ perspectives on merging theory and practice (teaching presence)
It was established that the participants valued ERTL more after returning to campus in
September 2020. Like all courses offered in the 2020 academic year at UKZN’s College of
Humanities, the teaching presence of CBL was instituted fully online. However, placements
of students necessitated physical presence in host organisations throughout the year. Among
the host organisations was the Virtual State, a brainchild of the provincial government office
situated in Pietermaritzburg. It functions primarily to promote participatory youth
development in various communities. Students who were placed in this programme were
eager and excited to have been afforded the opportunity since the government had arranged
five-day accommodation for them during the week of placement. Some of the students were
placed at the Gugu Dlamini Foundation in Durban. This organisation tackles gender-based
violence and HIV and AIDS awareness to address discrimination in the community. It is
named after Gugu Dlamini who was stoned to death after publicly declaring her HIV-positive
status on December 6, 1998. Other students were placed in various offices of the Department
of Social Development, and at Sheilla House, a shelter for abused women in Durban. As
indicated earlier, the Emseni Community Project was also one of the placement sites.
Consequently, weekly online lectures served to facilitate learning and identify problem areas
for the attention of the academic coordinator. As indicated under the course description, there
is no room for teaching new theories in the CBL course since it acts as a capstone that brings
together the learning from preceding modules. The course offers students an opportunity to
merge theory and practice in a community environment. To facilitate reflection on their
practical experiences, students are asked: What surprised you? What dilemmas did that raise
for you? What confirmed what you already knew? What could you or your peers have done
differently? What are the most important things you realised from this experience? What
were your previous assumptions? Has this changed your ideas about community development
issues in general? If so, in what way? Similar questions informed the interview guide while
encouraging students to consider the realities of learning in the time of COVID-19. All ten
participants indicated that remote learning worked better in the latter part of the second
semester following the return to university residences. Participant 9 stated, “We quickly had
access to data, reliable internet connectivity, study space, library, travel funds, and we could
work in peer groups with the support of our lecturers.” While reflecting on what worked and
what did not during ERTL, Participant 6 indicated that “the university should ensure that
ERTL works optimally on off-campus platforms.” In addition, Participant 8 proposed that
“the university should switch 10GB (day) and 20GB (evening) data provision to ensure that
students do not run out of data in the middle of virtual classes. There is high demand for data
usage during the day.” Participant 3 is among those who found the Virtual Private Network
(VPN) beneficial in reducing data costs. She is happy to have it installed on her computer.
It also emerged that some students performed better during ERTL in the time of COVID-19,
while others struggled with stress when working in isolation. Eight of the ten students
emphasised the importance of working in groups for peer support. They also highlighted the
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 197
significance of the role played by the academic coordinator. There was also a general sense
among the participants that the course is significant in advancing their knowledge. Central to
this observation was the recognition of the underlying principles in community development
that prioritise and foreground collective learning and social justice education.
Reiterating the value of a group methodology, the academic coordinator maintained that
“African people’s way of life is communal. They are always about helping the next person.
They embrace and take care of one another.” He added,
I benefitted immensely from the online instruction since Moodle
3
keeps all relevant
student records, including attendance. This afforded me an opportunity to follow-up
on students who were not active in online classes.
It was further revealed that host organisations were visited during the second semester. He
had to bring on board another academic to assist with the assessment of students. This freed
him and created room to facilitate learning in the classroom and follow-up sessions with
students in development agencies. While the participants had survived a trying time during
the first semester, they were all appreciative of the supportive and conducive learning
environment that the academic leader created during the second semester. This corroborates
the Col framework’s assertion that while the social presence and course content interactions
among learners are essential in virtual learning, such interactions by themselves cannot
provide students with an effective online learning experience. This re-affirms the consensus
that teaching presence is a significant determinant of student satisfaction, perceived learning,
and sense of community (Garrison & Arbaugh, 2007). This was clearly demonstrated in the
delivery of CBL since students’ frustrations during the first semester were based largely on
the lack of a supportive learning environment. During the second semester, the participants
were united through the common purpose of achieving the course objectives. This is
consistent with Garrison’s (2009) argument that the technology-mediated teaching presence
in the community of inquiry is not centred around student identities (personal identity).
Rather, the priority for most students is shared social identity (i.e., the purpose of the course),
which is what unites students and gives them a sense of common purpose. This is consistent
with the findings and is perceived as a major gap in remote learning since the participants
were discussing communities as members of the Other. The narratives show that while eight
of the ten participants come from poverty-stricken rural communities, they still view their
communities as Other. It can be deduced that online learning does not create sufficient room
for students to reflect critically on their epistemological experiences. As shown earlier,
students’ lived experiences are characterised by data shortages and poor connectivity, and
this acts as a barrier to critical thinking. The transmission of knowledge is neither neutral nor
apolitical. Rather, it is embedded in a socio-cultural context characterised by the structural
inequalities that organise society (Apple, 2000). In that way, we acknowledge that students’
lived experiences influence what they know since knowledge does not “exist in a social and
personal vacuum” (Boud & Miller, 1996, p. 18). This understanding is critical to the CBL
course since what students learn in the community influences their critical thinking skills
3 Moodle is an e-learning platform for teaching and learning.
198 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
(cognitive presence), thereby compelling them to question taken-for-granted assumptions in
the classroom (Garrison et al. 2000). These observations are central to learning and, hence,
become our point of departure in understanding the students’ epistemological experiences.
This reiterates the interconnectedness of the three tenets (social, cognitive, and teaching
presence) as a recurring theme in the CoI framework as we go on to show in the next section.
On becoming a community of inquiry (cognitive presence)
Our findings indicate that students who demonstrated a strong social presence were equally
strong in cognitive presence. This was evident when Participant 10 was asked to reflect on his
previous assumptions and on how the CBL had influenced his thinking. In his view,
The claim that unemployment only affects mainly graduates from the Humanities and
Social Sciences is unfounded. We must accept the structural nature of youth
unemployment in South Africa. There are many unemployed graduates with
qualifications in engineering and BCom who are sitting at home doing nothing. In the
past, education led to success and opportunities, but not anymore.
Participant 7, who pointed out the differences between the knowledge produced between the
two knowledge spaces, i.e., university and community, was strong in cognitive presence
during the interviews. She said, “Universities approach community engagement activities
from the point of privilege. When you are poor, all you need is completing your studies and
getting a job to assist your family.” In such contexts, the participants were questioning the
dominant narratives after reflecting on their practical experiences (cognitive presence).
It is our contention that university education has not yet developed concepts to frame poverty
for African students who are subjected to it. Consequently, knowledge produced at the nexus
between the university and the community is often not explored and is therefore less
understood. This illustrates that students’ lived experiences that influence and reconcile
divergent epistemological experiences put them in different places in the knowledge spaces in
the university and community. The study participants recognised that university education
does not always value what they know, resulting in the slow pace of institutional and
curriculum transformation that has been on the agenda for the past two decades. The
opportunity to engage in CBL, we argue, triggers critical thinking to generate knowledge that
contributes to our understanding of the students’ epistemological experiences. It should also
be acknowledged that the content of the course (teaching presence) that promotes critical
thinking, influences cognitive presence.
Conclusion and recommendations
In this article, we interrogated students’ epistemological experiences in CBL in the context of
community engagement that was undertaken in the COVID-19 period in 2020. We adopted
Garrison et al.’s (2000) Col framework as a theoretical and an analytical tool to examine the
students’ epistemological experiences. Drawing on Dewey’s understanding of the community
of inquiry, Garrison et al. (2000) developed a community of inquiry framework that is
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 199
relevant for understanding technology-mediated learning and was thus deemed appropriate to
underpin this study that focused on ERTL of a CBL module at UKZN. We structured the
discussion of the findings around the themes that were informed by the three tenets of the Col
framework (social, teaching, and cognitive presence). CBL in the context of community
engagement presents the notion of two worlds, the university and the community, as two
powerful knowledge spaces that are in dialectic tension. The students’ epistemological
experiences were born out of their lived experiences. They are characterised by an ongoing
struggle to balance the tensions and contradictions between the university and the
community, thereby illustrating a disconnect between the current university system and their
epistemological experiences during the CBL. Ultimately, it was conceded that both
universities and communities can play a vital role in advancing the objectives of community
engagement. Based on the findings presented above, we affirm that a CoI approach to CBL is
one of the tools that can be used to foster a shift in knowledge produced in South African
HEIs. CoI facilitates an understanding of the CBL course as a portal since its three elements
enable researchers to make connections between the community, the university, and the
curriculum in a technology-mediated learning space. We maintain that for the portal between
the university and the community to be seamless, CBL curricula during COVID-19 and
beyond should be used as a platform for knowledge production. If the theory and practice of
CBL in community engagement is applied constructively as a pedagogical tool, it will create
opportunities for learning and transform teaching practices and methodologies. We argue
further that CBL can become a sociocultural antidote to existing inequalities in higher
education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, it is recommended that academics in
community engagement embrace the CBL methodology as a valuable pedagogical tool. This
will, in turn, contribute to the theoretical framing of community engagement that is still a
work-in-progress. We note that further research is needed to advance the understanding of
community engagement in the time of COVID-19, with a special focus on how the pandemic
is affecting students and the kind of knowledge that this period in history engenders.
Although there is now a fair amount of research on the impact of COVID-19 on higher
education, there is a paucity of research on how COVID-19 is affecting community
engagement initiatives in universities, particularly in academic programmes like the CBL
module. Understanding the knowledge that is produced at the nexus between the university
and the community requires the SAHE to invest in research that advances the understanding
of this field.
References
Anderson, T., Liam, R., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence
in a computer conferencing context. Journal of the Asynchronous Learning Network,
5(2), 1–17.
Apple, M. W. (2000). Official knowledge. Routledge.
200 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
Aristovnik, A., Keržič, D., Ravšelj, D., Tomaževič, N., & Umek, L. (2020). Impacts of the
COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: A global perspective.
Sustainability, 12(20), 1–34.
Bender, C. J. G (2008). Exploring conceptual models for community engagement at higher
education institutions in South Africa. Perspectives in Education, 26(1), 81–95.
Bengtsen, S. S. (2018). Supercomplexity and the university: Ronald Barnett and the social
philosophy of higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 72(1), 65–74.
Boud, D., & Miller, N. (1996). Synthesising traditions and identifying themes in learning
from experience. In D. Boud & N. Miller (Eds.), Working with experience: Animating
learning (pp. 14–26). Routledge.
Council on Higher Education (CHE). (2016). South African higher education reviewed: Two
decades of democracy. CHE.
Council on Higher Education (CHE). (2015). Content analysis of the baseline institutional
submissions for Phase 1 of the Quality Enhancement Project. CHE.
Davis, J. (2010). The first-generation student experience: Who are they, their characteristics,
and strategies for improving persistence and success. Stylus Publishing.
Department of Education (DOE). (1997). Education White Paper 3: A programme for the
transformation of Higher Education. DOE.
Department of Education (DOE). (2008). Report of the ministerial committee on
transformation and social cohesion and the elimination of discrimination in public
higher education institutions. DOE.
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (vol. 12). PhilPapers.
Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of inquiry in online learning. In P. Rogers, G. Berg, J.
Boettcher, C. Howard, L. Justice & K. Schenk (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Distance
Learning, 2nd ed. (pp. 352–355). IGI Global. http://doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-198-
8.ch052
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based
environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher
Education, 2(2/3), 1–19.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of
inquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1/2), 5–9.
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 201
Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework:
Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–
172.
Goulet, G. M. (2014). The assessment of transformational potential of students in placement
modules in United Kingdom universities: Academic staff perspectives [Doctoral
dissertation, University of Glasgow]. Digital Theses database.
http://theses.gla.ac.uk/5707/
Higgs, P. (2012). African philosophy and the decolonisation of education in Africa: Some
critical reflections. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(2), 37–55.
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between
emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27, 1–12.
Kember, D. (2001). Beliefs about knowledge and the process of teaching and learning as a
factor in adjusting to study in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 26 (2),
205–221.
Khumalo, L. (2016). Disrupting language hegemony: Intellectualising African languages. In
M. A. Samuel, R. Dhunpath & N. Amin (Eds.). Disrupting higher education
curriculum: Undoing cognitive damage (pp. 247–264). Sense Publishers.
Kusch, M. (2011). Social epistemology. In S. Bernecker & D. Pritchard (Eds.). The
Routledge companion to epistemology (pp. 873–884). Routledge.
Lazarus, J., Erasmus, M., Hendricks, D., Nduna, J., & Slamat, J. (2008). Embedding
community engagement in South African higher education. Education, Citizenship
and Social Justice, 3(1), 57–83.
Le Grange, L. (2020). Could the Covid-19 pandemic accelerate the uberfication of the
university? South African Journal of Higher Education, 34(4), 1‒10.
Maistry, S. M., & Ramdhani, J. (2010). Managing tensions in a service-learning programme:
Some reflections. South African Journal of Higher Education, 24(4), 555–567.
Mouton, J. (2001). How to succeed in your master’s and doctoral studies: A South African
guide and resource book (3rd ed.). Van Schaik.
Naidoo, P., & Cartwright, D. (2020). Where to from here? Contemplating the impact of
COVID-19 on South African students and student counseling services in higher
education. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 1–15.
Ndimande-Hlongwa, N., Balfour, R. J., Mkhize, N., & Engelbrecht, C. (2010). Progress and
challenges for language policy implementation at the University of KwaZulu-
Natal. Language Learning Journal, 38(3), 347–357.
202 Journal of Education, No. 84, 2021
Nieto, S. (2015). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities (10th
ed.). Teachers College Press.
Nyambuya, V. P., Nyamaruze, P., & Dube, M. (2021). Rethinking education in the age of
‘social distancing’: A qualitative inquiry on University of KwaZulu-Natal students’
responses to online learning in the context of COVID-19. Journal of African
Education, 2(1), 107–126.
O’Brien, F. (2012). Constructing service learning in South Africa: Discourses of engagement.
In J. Preece, P. G. Ntseane, O. M. Modise & M. Osborne (Eds.), Community
engagement in African universities: Perspectives, prospects and challenges (pp. 197–
214). NIACE.
Preece, J. (2016). Mediating power through a pedagogy of dialogue and listening in
community engagement. In M. A. Samuel, R. Dhunpath & N. Amin (Eds.),
Disrupting higher education curriculum: Undoing cognitive damage (pp. 153–174).
Sense Publishers.
Preece, J., Croome, D., Ntene, M., &Ngozwana, N. (2011). Nurturing lifelong learning in
communities through the National University of Lesotho: Prospects and challenges.
International Journal of Lifelong Education, 30(6), 713–732.
Sabi, S. C., Kolanisi, U., Siwela, M., & Naidoo, D. (2020). Students’ vulnerability and
perceptions of food insecurity at the university of KwaZulu-Natal. South African
Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 33(4), 144–151.
South African Higher Education Community Engagement Forum (SAHECEF) (2020). 2020
in Review Rethinking Community Engagement (COVID-19) Pandemic. SAHECEF.
Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster
‘epistemic engagement’ and ‘cognitive presence’ in online education. Computers &
Education, 52(3), 543–553.
Siegel, H. (2005). Truth, thinking, testimony and trust: Alvin Goldman on epistemology and
education. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 71(2), 345–366.
Swartz, S., Mahali, A., Moletsane, R., Arogundade, E., Khalema, N. E., Cooper, A., &
Groenewald, C. (2018). Studying while black: Race, education and emancipation in
South African universities. Human Sciences Research Council Press.
UKZN (2020a). Department of Community: Development CBL course outline. Durban:
UKZN.
UKZN (2020b). UKZN College of Humanities Handbook. Durban: UKZN.
Thabethe & Reddy: Community-based learning in higher education 203
UKZN (2020c). UKZNdaba. Medical Students Respond to COVID-19.
https://chs.ukzn.ac.za/news/medical-students-respond-to-covid-19/ 31 July 2020.
Walwyn, D. R. (2020). Teaching on the edge of chaos: Report on 'The future of universities
in a post-COVID-19 world'. South African Journal of Science, 116(7–8), 1–2.