Re-imagining social work education in East Africa

ABSTRACT

To an increasing extent, scholars of social work have called for social work education and practice to be more responsive to local norms, customs and needs. Commonly referred to as indigenization, these scholars argue that social work curricula should incorporate practices, theories and understandings that are developed locally, eschewing the ‘professional imperialism’ that have come to dominate the discipline. This is also the case at universities in East Africa. Over the last decades, research emerging from local knowledge has developed substantially in the region. In this article we ask to what extent this is reflected in the social work curricula at three universities in Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda, including a Norwegian comparative case. The article relies on a review of the curricula, addressing the characteristics of the teaching materials, the nationality and gender of the authors of the teaching materials, and the local relevance of the teaching materials, questioning whether they build on empirical data from a local or African context and to what extent they address issues of local or regional relevance. Our findings reveal that the presence of national or African authors and publications with a local empirical content is still marginal at the three East African universities.

KEYWORDS:

• Indigenization
• social work in East Africa
• curriculum review
• local relevance

Introduction

Social work has been taught at universities in East Africa for decades (Gray et al., 2014; Spitzer, 2019). First introduced as a part of administrative systems and missionary work during the colonial era, professional social work was established in modern training institutions in East Africa in the post-independence era of the 1960s (Spitzer, 2019, p. 570). Nevertheless, as an academic discipline, it still relies heavily on theories and epistemologies developed in the Western hemisphere of the Global North (Spitzer et al., 2014; Twikirize & Spitzer, 2019). As such, social work in East Africa has been characterized by ‘professional imperialism’, a term introduced by James Midgley in 1981 to refer to the seemingly uncritical introduction of Western theories, concepts, models and methods in both education and practice in the Global South (Midgley, 2008).

To an increasing extent, scholars in both the Global South and elsewhere have called for social work education and practice to be more responsive to local norms, customs and needs (e.g. Gray et al., 2014; Osei-Hwedie & Boateng, 2018; Rankopo & Osei-Hwedie, 2011; Spitzer et al., 2014). These scholars have argued that for social work to be effective and transformative, it must be sensitive to local traditional and indigenous knowledges, skills, and customs. Gray et al. (2014) argue that indigenization is an ethical imperative given that values, beliefs, local relevance and responsiveness to context are ethical matters. Indeed, locally developed knowledge is arguably a part of the ethics and values in social work that is required in order for the discipline to meet the complexity in everyday practice, encountered in political and social contexts (Banks, 2021). At the same time, social work in East Africa arguably must include a developmental agenda, one that responds to challenges at the macro level, such as pervasive poverty and vulnerability, a high prevalence of discrimination and human rights violations, the devastating effects of HIV/AIDS and the COVID-19 pandemics, conflicts and climate change. These challenges are only marginally addressed in Western social work theories and models, which are predominantly remedial and focused on individualistic casework (Gray et al., 2014; Spitzer, 2019; Twikirize, 2014; Twikirize & Spitzer 2019). According to some scholars,

[T]here is broad consensus among African scholars that Western social work theories and approaches, informed by the remedial welfare model embedded during colonial times, which followed a residual, service-oriented approach, have proved inappropriate and not relevant to social work in Africa. (Gray et al., 2017, p. 624)

Hence, efforts to decolonialise, ‘Africanize’ or indigenize social work in Africa have been on the agenda for decades (Gray et al., 2014). A recent example from East Africa is the PROSOWO-project,¹ which has played an important role in conducting research and documenting indigenous discourses and models that have the potential to develop and transform social work education and practice (Spitzer et al., 2014; Twikirize & Spitzer, 2019). A relevant question that emerges here is to what extent is this knowledge reflected in social work curricula?

In this article, the overall question we address is to what extent is the social work curricula at three universities in East Africa indigenised? The analysis builds primarily on a review of the teaching materials included in the syllabi of undergraduate programmes in social work at one university in Rwanda, one in Tanzania and one in Uganda, as well as one university in Norway as a comparative case study. We approach each of these curricula as a case study. The review includes predominantly descriptive quantitative data, the purpose of which is to explore both the characteristics and the content of the teaching materials. Since we delimited the review to the social work programme at one university in each of the four countries, our findings cannot be generalized. It can be argued, however, that each case is quite representative of social work education in each country. In the East African cases this is due to the fact that the social work programmes at the three universities—which are respectively the Institute of Social work (ISW) in Tanzania, Makerere University (MAK) in Uganda, and the University of Rwanda (UR) – were the first to be developed in their respective countries and hence serve as models for the other national social work programmes. In Norway, all social work programmes adhere to the same national standard and framework, which implies that, despite minor differences, the social work programme at the University of Agder (UiA) – which is the Norwegian case in this article—is comparable to the other national social work programmes.

In a narrow view, a curriculum denotes the objectives, content and activities that constitute the learning plan of a course or programme. In a broader sense, as suggested by Le Grange (2018), quoting Pinar (2004), a curriculum can be understood as a ‘complicated conversation’ in which scholars are committed to problematizing, challenging and interrogating their own, their peers’ and their students’ understandings. This calls for a critical engagement with present and past hegemonies of knowledge, questioning, in East Africa in particular, epistemic complicity with the colonial past.

Our review of the teaching materials included in the social work syllabi of each country offers an entry point for such an endeavor. That said, we acknowledge that there are limitations to this approach. For instance, a curriculum is not restricted to teaching materials but also incorporates activities such as field placements, student assignments, practical exercises, and so on. Nevertheless, teaching materials reflect and delimit what is regarded as authorized knowledge. Hence, the development of teaching materials is fundamental to curriculum development. Moreover, the limited availability of teaching materials, specifically those of African scholarship, arguably poses an important challenge to the indigenization of social work in Africa (Twikirize, 2014, p. 85).

We start by unpacking the concept of indigenization, particularly the implications of the indigenization of social work curricula. Then, we present our empirical findings, after which we discuss their implications and the challenges to and opportunities for the indigenized professionalization of social work in East Africa.

Indigenization of social work in East Africa

The International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) and the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW) have proposed the following global definition of social work:

Social work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people. Principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility, and respect for diversities are central to social work. Underpinned by theories of social work, social sciences, humanities and indigenous knowledges, social work engages people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing. (IFSW, 2014)

According to this definition, social work, as both a profession and a discipline, should embrace indigenous perspectives and knowledges. Acknowledging the colonial legacy of the discipline,

(…) social work seeks to redress historic Western scientific colonialism and hegemony by listening to and learning from Indigenous peoples around the world. In this way social work knowledges will be co-created and informed by Indigenous peoples, and more appropriately practiced not only in local environments but also internationally. (IFSW, 2014)

Indigenization is a contested term. It is commonly associated with the (re)discovery of cultures and knowledges of either first nations or indigenous peoples in the Western world, or people in countries with a colonial past in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Despite differences in both of these streams of literature, indigenization denotes a break with the colonial past and the process of (re)discovering, celebrating and learning from local and traditional knowledges. As such, it involves a deliberate decentering of the dominance of Western knowledge systems and ways of life, which is part of the decolonising agenda. In Africa, the notion of indigenizing is arguably used synonymously with Africanizing (Gray et al., 2014; Le Grange, 2018). Africanizing relates both to the representation of Africans and to a cultural movement for the renewal of African cultural and conceptual representations. ‘Authentication’ and ‘cultural relevance’ have been proposed as alternative terms (Gray & Coates, 2008; Twikirize, 2014).

Several challenges are connected with indigenization. For instance, what counts as ‘indigenous’? As pointed out by Twikirize (2014), African nation states host multiple indigenous cultures. Can national curricula be truly indigenous in the heterogenic societies of East Africa, or will they simply succumb to the pitfall of methodological nationalism? Moreover, is ‘indigenous’ necessarily good? As further discussed by Twikirize, culture is ‘neither static nor is it always positive’ (Twikirize, 2014, p. 86). Social workers face an ethical dilemma when indigenous norms and practices entail discrimination and human rights violations that contradict the ethical values of social work. What about the standardizing and universalizing forces that come hand in hand with globalization and neoliberalism? In a globalized world, local knowledge is challenged and changed. A distinction can be made between world globalization and global globalization, whereby the first is linked to the dissemination of Western modernization, while the latter refers to the interdependencies of societies across the globe and fits better with the decolonising agenda (Gray et al., 2013). Given the Western origins of social work as an academic discipline, is it, in fact, desirable to rid social work of its Western origin? Osei-Hwedie and Boateng (2018) argue that there has to be some sort of consensus on what social work is, which does not necessarily imply a radical rejection of its Western roots, but rather requires ‘compromises and some level of accommodation’ (Osei-Hwedie & Boateng, 2018, p. 9). According to Gray, Kreitzer and Mupedziswa,

The challenge of indigenization remains how to draw the best from international influences, including professional ethical codes, while developing models of social work education and practice relevant to local and regional contexts and cultures in Africa, especially given on-going and repeated claims that Western social work’s relevance to non-Western contexts is limited. (Gray et al., 2014, p. 110)

Subscribing to this challenge, we understand indigenization not as a replacement of dominant (colonial) knowledge systems but as the intertwining of different knowledge systems so that learners can come to understand, develop and challenge both and thus take part in a ‘complicated conversation’. The indigenization of social work thus implies deliberate attention to exploring and challenging both new and old terrains of knowledge with focus placed on how it can be culturally relevant and responsive to diverse local contexts while simultaneously maintaining the ethical values of social work as an academic discipline.

Against this backdrop, what are the challenges pertaining to the indigenization of social work education in East Africa? Studies conducted in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Rwanda in 2011 (Twikirize et al., 2014) revealed challenges linked to the educators’ lack of formal skills in social work, to the level of research, to the educators’ awareness of the global standards of social work, and to a lack of academic sources that denote indigenous perspectives. African scientific scholarship in the curricula was strikingly limited. Moreover, the study showed that social workers were seldom represented in key decision- and policy-making positions at organizational or national levels. The majority of educated social workers, especially in Uganda and Kenya, were employed in non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the civil sector, and mainly in urban areas. As a result, locally adapted social work services, especially in rural areas, appear to be limited. Since organizational culture and philosophies can be assumed to have an impact on social workers’ orientation, this is likely to have an influence on their innovation. The authors call for the ‘need to strengthen synergistic relationships between training institutions, practitioners and policy-makers in strengthening social work education and practice in the region’ (Twikirize et al., 2014, p. 214). An important part of this is to build the capacity for research and publication at the local level in order to convert practice knowledge and experience into scientific knowledge that can be shared and utilized outside the local context.

Another important finding relates to gender issues. In the East African region, cultural practices that discriminate against girls and women and violate basic human rights (such as bride price, polygamy and female genital mutilation) are prevalent. Despite a consensus among the informants about the significant role of social work in promoting gender equality, there appears to be a gap between education and practice (Twikirize et al., 2014, pp. 211–214). Incorporating gender issues into social work curricula could help stimulate the development of innovative practices capable of addressing such discrimination. At the same time, strengthening the academic capacity amongst female scholars of social work and including publications by female scholars in the curricula is essential. In our empirical review of the social work syllabi, we therefore also address the extent to which female scholars appear in the teaching materials.

Methodological approach

The empirical data in this article were derived from a review of the undergraduate curricula for social work at four universities, three of which are located in East Africa (Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda) and one in Norway. The Norwegian curriculum was included for comparative purposes. Inspired by Spitzer (2019), we argue that this comparative case complements the curricula review with a mzungu-perspective,² offering an opportunity to reflect on social work education in East Africa against the backdrop of a Western case. Despite its many contrasts with the realities in East Africa, Norway is arguably a well-suited case for comparison, as it is a relatively young independent nation on the margins of Europe, with a relatively short history of social work as an academic discipline and a population that does not speak English as their first language.³

We adopted a comparative case study approach, exploring the social work curricula of four universities in different countries with particular emphasis on the teaching materials included in the course syllabi. The review was conducted by the authors of this article, with each author focusing on the most recent syllabus of the social work undergraduate programme at their university of employment. The universities were thus partly selected out of convenience. However, for reasons mentioned earlier, the social work programmes and curricula can be perceived as representative of social work education in their respective countries. Across the four curricula, the teaching materials encompassed books, scientific articles, reports (predominantly published reports, but also a few unpublished ones), legal literature (laws, acts, conventions and declarations), as well as handbooks, manuals and guidelines (Table 1). Disciplines covered range from sociology, psychology, economics, social policy, development studies, law and ethics. As indicated in Table 1, there is a heavy reliance on textbooks in all cases.

Table 1. Number of reviewed publications, sorted by category.

	Rwanda	Tanzania	Uganda	Norway
Books and book chapters	234 (90%)	213 (68%)	463 (72%)	135 (60.5%)
Scientific journal articles	10 (4%)	55 (17%)	42 (6.5%)	34 (15%)
Reports (both published and unpublished)	4 (1.5%)	8 (2.5%)	18 (3%)	5 (2%)
Legal literature (e.g. laws, acts, conventions and declarations)	4 (1.5%)	11 (3.5)	9 (1.5%)	47 (21%)
Handbooks, manuals and guidelines	3 (1%)	19 (6%)	7 (1%)	1 (0.5%)
Other	6 (2%)	9 (3%)	103 (16%)	1 (0.5%)
Total number of publications (N)	261	315	642	223^4

Based upon an initial descriptive analysis of the teaching materials, in which we sorted the materials into five broad categories, we focused on a set of variables that required more attentive engagement with the literature. First, we addressed the language of the texts with the understanding that it served as an indication of the level of indigenization. Here, we also included the year of publication. Second, we turned to the authors of the texts, addressing their gender and nationality. As some of the publications had several authors, we decided to focus on the characteristics of the first author. To establish their gender and nationality we relied on the author information given or did internet searches. Finally, we dug deeper into the content of the teaching materials, questioning whether each publication built on empirical data from a national context and whether it addressed an issue of national or African concern.⁵ To address the first question, we limited the analysis to publications that presented empirical research, omitting texts that addressed generic issues, such as textbooks that introduced theories or methods. Acknowledging that the second question could not be answered in a straightforward manner, our approach was reflective and narrative.

The teaching materials were thus explored with attention to (1) year of publication, (2) what language was used, (3) the nationality and origin of the authors, (4) the gender of the authors, and, when feasible, (5) the context of the empirical data on which the publications relied and (6) whether the publication addressed an issue of national or African concern. While this approach denotes a ‘compare and contrast’ logic (Barlett & Vavrus, 2017), we acknowledge the need for a ‘tracing across’ logic to avoid simply decomposing cases into variables. Indeed, and in line with the notion of a curriculum as a ‘complicated conversation’ (Le Grange, 2018), social work curricula should not be framed as fixed systems but instead as processes involving actual people making decisions in particular places and at particular times. This involves attention to the institutional, social and cultural contexts within which curricula and syllabi are developed. Our comparison and subsequent discussion include such information, yet to a limited extent given the scope of the article. We start by giving a short introduction to the context of social work higher education in the four countries.

Background and context: social work education in Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Norway

The development of modern social welfare and social work in Africa is largely a result of colonialism (Mwansa & Kreitzer, 2012, p. 394). Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda are no exception. Hence, an account of the evolution of the social work profession in these countries must consider their colonial legacy.

In Tanzania, the history of social work dates back to 1947 after the introduction of probation services by the British colonialists (Mabeyo, 2014, p. 126). By nature, the first introduced services were mostly inclined toward protecting the interests of the colonialists. Later, the profession continued to develop and expand throughout the different developmental phases of the country. Remarkable developments occurred after independence (acquired in 1961), including, among other achievements, the establishment of child welfare services, an independent department of social welfare, and social welfare training institutions.

Meanwhile, social work education and training in Tanzania has a relatively short history, one which can be directly linked with the life and history of the Institute of Social Work (ISW), considered to be the mother and founder of social work training in the country (Mabeyo, 2014, p. 125). Professional training in the country officially began in 1974, one year after the legal establishment of the ISW. The first course to be offered was Ordinary Diploma in Social Work. Advanced Diploma and Postgraduate Diploma courses were established in 1977 and 2002, respectively. In November 2005, the Institute was officially accredited by the National Council of Technical Awards (NACTE) and hence granted a mandate to offer competence-based courses leading to nationally recognized awards at the levels of Certificate, Ordinary Diploma, Higher Diploma and Bachelor’s Degree in social work and other fields that were offered by the Institute by that point. Generally, the ISW enjoyed a monopoly over social work training from its inception until the mid-2000s, when the proliferation of universities and other higher learning institutions offering social work training began. By 2010, 12 schools had established social work training courses (Mabeyo, 2014). Currently, courses offered in Tanzania range from Certificate to PhD.

The empirical literature reviewed in this section relates solely to the bachelor’s degree programme in social work offered at the ISW. It is a three-year programme, generalist in nature, divided into six semesters, each of which comprises between five and seven modules. The curriculum is subject to a mandatory review every five years. However, evaluations are also conducted during these years whenever the need arises.

In Uganda, formal social work education at the tertiary level was launched about 70 years ago during the British colonial administration. The first degree programme was administered by Makerere University in 1969, after the country had obtained independence (in 1962). With the liberalization of higher education in the mid-1990s, social work programmes have proliferated, and 19 universities currently offer a social work programme. The curricula are predominantly generalist, preparing social work graduates to work in diverse practice settings. Training at the postgraduate level is still limited, with three relatively new Master of Social Work programmes currently offered. In 2019, the first ever national minimum standards and competency framework for social work education were implemented to guide all bachelor’s degree programmes in the country. In 2020, all programmes offered a three-year honor’s degree, structured around six semesters.

The empirical literature reviewed in this section relates to the undergraduate programme in social work offered at Makerere University. In 2020, this programme was revised to last for four years with the final year dedicated to field work. The curriculum is reviewed and revised after five years and must be submitted for reaccreditation by the National Council for Higher Education. Each semester, students must complete five courses. Field work is a core part of the curriculum, constituting 40% of total credit units. Students must complete 900–1200 hours of supervised field work. The social work programme at Makerere University enrolls an average of 120 students per year. The practice of social work is unregulated, presenting a challenge for practitioners who are not professional social workers. The National Association of Social Workers of Uganda offers a platform for advocacy and continuing professional development.

In Rwanda, social work is a very young profession. It emerged formally in the aftermath of the 1994 genocide, first and foremost to promote the psychosocial well-being of traumatized children (Kalinganire & Rutikanga, 2014, p. 112). As an academic discipline, the first social work programme was introduced in 1999 at the former National University of Rwanda, which was later renamed the University of Rwanda (UR). Later, it was also established at the Byumba Polytechnic Institute (in 2006) and the Catholic University of Rwanda (in 2010) (Kalinganire et al., 2017, p. 320).

The empirical literature reviewed in the section relates to the bachelor’s programme at the UR. This programme started with a curriculum developed in reference to programmes from Uganda, India, the USA, Canada and South Africa. Thereafter, various reforms and/or reviews have taken place to standardize it and to meet International Social Work Education Standards (Kalinganire & Rutikanga, 2014, p. 113). Moreover, as social work staff members have been progressively trained abroad, they have taken advantage of the opportunity to gather relevant information to enrich the social work curriculum. Most of the teaching materials reviewed at the UR have been received as gifts from different partner universities. Of these materials, 55% were published before 2000, and most focus on generalities in social work (theories of social work, methodologies and foundations). Initially designed to last four years, the social work undergraduate programme has, since 2017, been structured as a three-year programme. The instructional modules provide general knowledge and fundamental skills (year 1), professional modules (years 2 and 3) and professional English (years 1 and 2). English is the main language of instruction; however, French and Kinyarwanda are sometimes employed for in-depth explanations and are particularly used in the field. Around 25% of programme credits are allocated to field work.

In Norway, social work education was first introduced in 1950, but it was not until 1978 that it was established as an academic discipline (Dahle, 2012). Social work education is now offered at 11 universities and university colleges. The empirical literature reviewed in this section relates to the three-year bachelor programme, which was established at the University of Agder (UiA) in 1991 (Eide & Trysnes, 2016). The programme follows the national standards for social work education, regulated by the national framework plan for health and social science education. In 2020, a new national guideline for social work education was developed in cooperation with academic staff, different user organizations and social workers (Ministry of Education and Research, 2019). These regulations define a national curriculum to ensure that social work education across the country is standardized and of high academic quality. The new national guidelines give heightened attention to indigenous perspectives and to acknowledging Norway’s responsibilities and previous failures to attend to social justice issues concerning the indigenous Sami peoples.

Findings from the review

In this section, we present the findings from the review, structured into three sections. First, we look at some of the characteristics of the teaching materials (year and language of publications). Second, we examine the authors of the teaching materials, addressing their nationality and gender. Third, we explore the local relevance of the teaching materials, questioning whether they build on empirical data from a local or African context and to what extent they address issues of local or regional relevance.

Characteristics of the teaching materials

The majority of the teaching materials in the East African universities were published more than a decade ago, in contrast to the Norwegian case, where the majority of publications are more recent (Table 2). Despite rather frequent curriculum revisions, the curricula in large part rely on sources that have not been updated with recent empirical or theoretical contributions. Furthermore, since the East African universities have a comparatively short history of scientific research, the research conducted by faculty is only marginally incorporated into the curricula. This likely has an impact on the level of indigenization, as it can be assumed that most of the teaching materials do not rely on local research, a point to which we will return below.

Table 2. Year of publication (%).

	Rwanda (N=261)	Tanzania (N=315)	Uganda (N=642)	Norway (N=223)
Before 1980	9.6%	6.3%	4.4%	4.9%
1980–1989	14.2%	6%	12.9%	2.6%
1990–1999	31.4%	23.8%	30.3%	5.3%
2000–2009	23.8%	42.5%	26.4%	13%
2010–2019	20.7%	20%	26.1%	61%
2020 –	0.4%	1.3%	0.4%	13.2%
	100	100	100	100

Tanzania and Uganda are both multilingual countries, with a plethora of different spoken languages. In Tanzania, Swahili and English are both de facto official languages, while English is the official language in Uganda. In Rwanda, Kinyarwanda is the most widely spoken language and has the status of the official language alongside English, French and Swahili. Due to the colonial past, English is widely spoken in all three countries and is also the formal language of teaching at the three East African universities. This is reflected in the teaching materials, as indicated in Table 3. With the exception of some culture- and/or policy-oriented texts, the teaching materials at the universities in Tanzania and Uganda are predominantly written in English. In Rwanda, there are some exceptions to the predominance of English. In Norway, on the other hand, the language of teaching is Norwegian.⁶ Despite the fact that English is taught as a compulsory subject at schools and most Norwegians read and speak English well, the majority of the teaching materials are either written in Norwegian or translated into Norwegian.

Table 3. Language of publication (incl. translated material) (%).

Rwanda (N=261)			Tanzania (N=315)		Uganda (N=642)		Norway (N=223)
English	French	Kinyarwanda	English	Swahili	English	Other	English	Norwegian^7
96.5%	2.7%	0.8%	99.7%	0.3%	100%	0	6.3%	93.7%

Characteristics of the authors of the teaching materials

One of the reasons for the high prevalence of Norwegian texts in Norwegian university syllabi is that most of these texts were authored by Norwegians (Table 4). The opposite situation prevails at the East African universities, where a minority of the publications have national or African authorship (Table 4). The curriculum of the Tanzanian university includes the greatest number of national authors (19.9%), whereas the curriculum of the University of Rwanda has the lowest number of national authors (4%). Despite being considered one of the most accredited universities in East Africa, Makerere University has a social work curriculum in which only 9.5% of the covered works are authored by Ugandan nationals. One reason for this is that most publications by faculty are journal articles that have not been systematically incorporated into curriculum documents—although, in practice, individual lecturers use them for teaching and reference materials. However, compared to the other East African universities in the sample, the number of authors from other African countries included in the curriculum of Makerere University is higher—and yet constitutes no more than 3.7% of the teaching materials.

Table 4. Nationality of first authors of publications. Share (%) of publications with a named author (N1).

Rwanda (N1=253)		Tanzania (N1=267)		Uganda (N1=587)		Norway (N1=176)
Rwandan	African	Tanzanian	African	Ugandan	African	Norwegian	European
n=10	n=5	n=53	n=4	n=56	n=22	n=159	n=12
4%	2%	19.9%	1.5%	9.5%	3.7%	90.3%	6,8%

An interesting question in this regard is the national origin of the non-African authors. In line with former research (Twikirize et al., 2014), our review revealed that most of the teaching materials used in the social work programmes at the East African universities originate in the Western hemisphere, from the Global North, first and foremost in Europe and North America (Table 5). In fact, in both Rwanda and Uganda, more than 80% of the teaching materials have a first author from North America or Europe. The Tanzanian university has the greatest number of teaching materials authored by African nationals. This is attributable to deliberate efforts within the ISW to ensure the inclusion of available local literature in the curriculum. Findings from a study conducted by Mabeyo(2014) revealed a conspicuous absence of indigenous knowledge in social work training and, as a consequence, efforts have been made to include more publications by African authors and to sensitize staff to the importance of indigenization. In the analysis, we distinguished between British and other European authorship, assuming that the number of British authors would be markedly higher than the number of other European authors given both the British colonial legacy and the fact that social work first emerged in Britain. At the universities in Uganda and Tanzania, this assumption proved to be correct, whereas the number of other European authors was equally as high as the number of British authors in Rwanda.

Table 5. Origin of first authors of publications. Share (%) of publications with a named author (N1).

	Rwanda (N1=253)	Tanzania (N1=267)	Uganda (N1=587)	Norway (N1=176)
North American	59.7%	42.7%	48%	2.8%
British	12.6%	21,0%	23%	1.1%
Other European	12.6%	11,6%	10.1%	96%
African	7.9%	21.4%	13.3%	0%
Asian	1.6%	2,6%	2.9%	0%
Oceanian	4.3%	0,7%	1.9%	0%
Latin-American	1.2%	0%	0.9%	0%
	100	100	100	100

As noted above, there is broad consensus that social work curricula in East Africa must address gender issues (Twikirize et al., 2014). An interesting question, then, is to what extent female authors are represented in the curricula. An underlying assumption is that the representation of female scholars in the curricula would promote an increased orientation toward gender perspectives while simultaneously providing role models for students. The gender of the first author of the included publications is presented in Table 6. As with language and nationality, opposite trends are observable at universities in East Africa and Norway. In Norway, female authors dominate the curriculum, while male authors dominate the social work curricula at the three East African universities. It should be noted, however, that some publications have authors of both genders.

Table 6. Gender of first authors of publications. Share (%) of publications with a named author (N1).

Rwanda (N1=253)		Tanzania (N1=267)		Uganda (N1=587)		Norway (N1=176)
Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
n=190	n=63	n=209	n=58	n=423	n=164	n=68	n=108
75%	25%	78.3%	21.7%	72%	28%	39%	61%

Local relevance of the teaching materials

In order to address the local relevance of the teaching materials, we explored their content. First, we addressed to what extent the teaching materials rely on empirical data collected from a national or, in the East African cases, a different African context. Table 7 presents the share of such publications. As indicated above, the social work programme in Tanzania has the most publications with national authorship due to diligent efforts to indigenize the curriculum. This is also reflected in the empirical data, with the Tanzanian curriculum relying more heavily on locally collected empirical data than the curricula of the other African cases. In line with the findings above, the Norwegian social work curriculum stands out, as it includes a markedly higher number of publications building on empirical data from the national context.

Table 7. Empirical data from national or different African contexts. Share (%) of total number of publications (N).

Rwanda (N=261)		Tanzania (N=315)		Uganda (N=642)		Norway (N=223)
Rwandan	African	Tanzanian	African	Ugandan	African	Norwegian
n=16	n=12	n=72	n=8	n=74	n=47	n=118
6.1%	4.6%	22.9%	2.5%	11.5%	7.3%	52.9%

Another question of interest is to what extent the teaching materials address issues of national or African concern. As stated above, this question must be approached with discretion. How does one delimit what should be considered a ‘national or African concern’? Indeed, many of the issues addressed in social work teaching materials are of general human or societal concern—for instance, poverty and inequality, community development, social protection, child protection, gender-based violence, disasters and emergencies, conflict, displacement, forced migration and refugees, and HIV/AIDS—and are implicitly also national and African. Therefore, acknowledging the complexity involved in determining whether a publication addresses an issue of national or African concern, we rely on a narrative reflection.

As our data presented above reveal, the social work programmes in East Africa continue to heavily rely on Western scholarship. However, African scholars are increasingly aware of the necessity of contextualizing their social work curricula and synthesizing theories, models and methods developed in the West with local and indigenous knowledge and practices. The pace with which this is occurring differs, however, depending on how long the social work programme has existed. Our curricula review shows that while the number of publications explicitly addressing locally relevant issues is growing in the Tanzanian and Ugandan cases, they remain scarce in the Rwandan case. Nonetheless, taking into account expanding scientific production at universities in Tanzania and Uganda, the rate at which local scholarship is being included in the curricula is surprisingly slow.

On a different note, it is worth mentioning that African scholarship is completely absent in the Norwegian case. Insofar as issues that can be interpreted to be of African concern are present, they relate to social work with marginal groups, such as refugees. Indeed, African philosophies, practices and concepts are completely missing. This is arguably indicative of the overall tendency for scientific knowledge to be transferred ‘from the west to the rest’, and not the other way around (Midgley, 2008).

Implications of the findings

Our review of the teaching materials of the undergraduate social work programmes at four universities—in Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Norway—has revealed that the curricula in the East African cases rely far less on sources developed locally and anchored in local empirical contexts compared to the Norwegian case. The majority of the publications are written in English by male authors from North America or Europe and rely on empirical data mostly collected from outside of Africa. The Norwegian case marks a stark contrast. Based on these observations, it is fair to state that social work in East Africa continues to be characterized by ‘professional imperialism’ (Midgley, 2008) despite increasing research in the region and an increased awareness of the need for indigenization. In the following, we will attend to some of the causes and implications of these findings. However, a few notes of caution are needed.

First, even though locally developed scientific publications in the curricula are limited, this does not imply that the knowledge gained from research is absent. Indeed, the lecturers may well refer to their research when teaching. Second, and as noted above, a curriculum consists not just of textual teaching materials. Fieldwork and practical assignments constitute an important part of the social work curricula and contribute to local adaptation and relevance. Indeed, students also meet social work practitioners and recipients of social work services both in the classroom and during fieldwork. Nevertheless, if practical and experiential knowledge remain undocumented and un-theorized, it will be left out of the corpus of authorized academic knowledge. Therefore, with the objective of the indigenization of social work in mind, our findings are worrying. We will point to some conditions that we believe are prohibitive of the indigenization of social work curricula in East Africa.

First, scientific production at the East African universities, which has evolved substantially over the last decade, is commonly considered unsuitable as teaching material. Academic staff increasingly publish in international journals, adapting both their topical focus and style of writing to an international academic audience. In the global scientific economy, journal articles are ranked higher than textbooks and handbooks despite being less suitable for teaching purposes. At African universities, this poses an additional challenge, as journals are less available. Textbooks are still predominant, as indicated in Table 1. As outlined in the context of the social work programme at the University of Rwanda, much of the available teaching material has been provided to the university as gifts. As a consequence, a large amount of the teaching material is not updated, as indicated in Table 2.

An additional challenge is linked to perceptions among the faculty of what counts as academic knowledge. As pointed out by Twikirize (2014), African scholars are accustomed to embracing academic knowledge developed in the West, and there is an implicit tendency to regard such knowledge as higher quality. Despite increased engagement in local research, as documented, for instance, in the volume edited by Twikirize and Spitzer (2019), publications that cover research on local practices are surprisingly marginal in the social work curricula. Even more seldom are such publications used to develop models or theories that could be utilized in other contexts. Not only does the absence of academic publications by African scholars impoverish local curricula; it also deprives social work curricula in the West of an opportunity to learn from African experiences. In a globalized world, African philosophies (notably Ubuntu) and scholarship would arguably enrich the social work curricula worldwide (Mayaka & Truell, 2021).

An interlinked challenge relates to how the social work programmes are coordinated and developed. As outlined above, the courses and curricula are frequently reviewed and revised. Nevertheless, to strategically and holistically develop the programmes and ensure indigenization, this must be prioritized as a joint effort by the faculty. Our review of the social work programme in Tanzania provides a good example of how an awareness of and a diligent effort to include locally relevant research in the syllabus can have a demonstrable effect. In sum, the challenges of the indigenization of social work curricula pertain both to the priorities of the academic staff, in terms of what kinds of publications they produce and what they regard as relevant and suitable research for teaching, and to the investment priorities of the universities. The underlying and pervasive challenge is obviously also linked to the resources and capacity of East African scholars to conduct research that is locally relevant and suitable to indigenizing the curricula.

The implications of the dearth of locally relevant teaching materials are manifold. First, in order not only to understand, but also challenge and critically engage with indigenous knowledge and practices, there is a need for students of social work to encounter such knowledge during their training. That would enable them to build capacity for ethical reflection. Secondly, as the number of female students and scholars increase at African universities, a renewal of curricula by bringing in more recent research would most likely also contribute to improved gender equality. Finally, indigenization is likely to lead to better social services. In particular, the challenge remains in determining how social workers, aided by theories and models that are effective, adequate and relevant, can address and resolve pressing social issues that citizens in East Africa deal with on an everyday basis. Acknowledging that social work is both cultural and political (Gray, Coates and Yellow Bird 2008), there is an urgent need for students of social work in East Africa and beyond to learn from practices and knowledge that are developed locally, theorized and challenged. Future social workers should be capable of challenging the status quo and playing a role as social agents geared toward the promotion of culture-based interventions. This requires a willingness to enter into a ‘complicated conversation’ (Le Grange, 2018), questioning, challenging and developing new ways of thinking, speaking and writing in order to re-imagine the curricula and reinforce the synergies between the university and local communities. We believe the topics we address in our review may serve as an example of how the indigenization of social work curricula can be evaluated.

Disclosure statement

The authors are employed at the universities where the curricula review were conducted.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Direktoratet for Utviklingssamarbeid.

Notes on contributors

Ann Christin E. Nilsen

Ann Christin E. Nilsen (PhD) is a professor at the Department of Sociology and Social work, University of Agder, Norway

Charles Kalinganire

Charles Kalinganire (MA) is a lecturer at the Department of Social Sciences, University of Rwanda, Rwanda

Zena Mnasi Mabeyo

Zena Mnasi Mabeyo (PhD) is a senior lecturer at the Department of Social Work, Institute of Social Work, Tanzania

William Manyama

William Manyama (PhD) is a lecturer at the Department of Social Work, Institute of Social Work, Tanzania

Eric Awich Ochen

Eric Awich Ochen (PhD) is a senior lecturer in the Department of Social Work and Social Administration, Makerere University, Uganda

Cecilie Revheim

Cecilie Revheim (PhD) is an associate professor at the Department of Sociology and Social work, University of Agder, Norway

Janestic Twikirize

Janestic Twikirize (PhD) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Social Work and Social Administration, Makerere University, Uganda

Notes

1. Professional Social Work in East Africa (PROSOWO) was an academic partnership project implemented by a consortium of five universities from East Africa and a partner university from Austria, with funding from the Austrian Development Cooperation. The project, which lasted broadly from 2012 to 2018, aimed to promote professional social work in East Africa to contribute to social development more effectively through the strengthening of relevant social work education, research, advocacy, and networking and partnerships.

2. Mzungu is a popular Swahili term for ‘White people’ or Europeans. According to Spitzer (2019, p. 568), it is not a racist term but one that denotes distinctiveness on the grounds of skin color and cultural background. A mzungu-perspective, Spitzer claims, is ‘inspired by the endeavor to critically reflect on one’s own Eurocentric bias’.

3. Norway enacted its Constitution in 1814 and gained its independence from Sweden in 1905. The majority of the population is ethnically Norwegian and the official language is Norwegian, with the indigenous Sami peoples comprising a minority population alongside an increasing immigrant population.

4. Norwegian students are also required to read 1,200 pages of self-selected literature for the purpose of writing a thesis and papers on subjects of their own choosing. These works are not included in this presentation.

5. Since the focus of the article is social work in East Africa, we have not explored whether the Norwegian case addresses an issue of European or Scandinavian concern.

6. Norwegian is the first language of approximately 90% of Norwegian citizens and is considered the official majority language. Sami is an official minority language in certain regions of the country. Due to increased immigration, several other minority languages are spoken.

7. Includes three publications in Danish, which is understandable to Norwegians.