Re-Positioning the Twenty-First Century Teacher for the Implementation of Heritage-Based Education

Re-Positioning the Twenty-First Century Teacher for the Implementation of Heritage-Based Education

¹Moyo Mlungisi., ²Hahlani Onismo Stephen

¹United College of Education

²National University of Science Technology

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8100246

Received: 11 October 2024; Accepted: 16 October 2024; Published: 20 November 2024

ABSTRACT

Most African systems of education seem to be struggling to prepare students to be successful workers, creators of employment, and even active citizens. This is attributed to the former colonial educational policies and practices inherited into the system. Thus, our African heritage has become vulnerable and hence the need for a total revamp of classroom pedagogies at all levels. It is prudent to acknowledge that immeasurable knowledge imbedded in our African heritage is an empowerment tool that has to be harnessed for sustainable development. Embracing heritage knowledge systems at all levels will inform viable education policies and practices resulting in the need to re-position the twenty-first century classroom teacher. This theoretical paper focused on teacher education and pedagogy as key components for quality education and fulfillment of Education 5.0. It is inevitable therefore for teacher education curriculum to prepare teachers that are practical-oriented and who will appreciate the background and history of the communities where learners come from. The following questions guided findings and conclusions in this paper. (a) What is the role of the twenty-first century teachers in embracing heritage-based education? (b) How can the twenty-first century teacher embrace on heritage-based education for sustainable development? The paper proposes a teacher education curriculum that exposes trainee teachers to the significant pillars of our heritage as a nation. Pedagogy that harnesses contemporary technologies and heritage-based knowledge systems should be the guiding principles in teaching and learning.

Key terms: heritage-based education, Twenty-first century teacher, implementation and re-position

INTRODUCTION

Literature has confirmed that the classroom environment like any other, brings together learners from different backgrounds who in turn exhibit varied behaviours that have a bearing to teaching and learning. Mahaye (2018) has argued that, what learners learn in their classroom environments when it comes to interactions with those who are different from them, often translates into how well they will manage life in the global market-place. On the other hand, the Progressivists also advocated that schools should not be ivory towers. As such, they should be a carry-over of the learner’s experiences from the home where he or she comes from. It is in this regard that education has been viewed as having a vital role to play in the development of human values and mankind. According to Lefa (2015), education is a priority in the development and advancement of civilization and humanity. It is a medium by which people are prepared to transform themselves and create their own particular civilization and glory. As such, teachers who are notably the key players in education play a pivotal role in bringing harmony to different experiences undergone by learners in the classroom situations. Thus, teachers have been described as the common denominators for all the learners in the classroom.

Chitumba (2013) and Hapanyengwi-Chemhuru and Makuvaza (2014) concur that education must create a conscious among children and adults so that they can be encouraged and enabled to think positively in the reclaiming and reconstruction of their history, cultural heritage, identity and personhood. In this regard, education therefore should inculcate the core values of Ubuntu that make the products from the school system fit in the immediate environment of existence. In this regard therefore it is of paramount importance to acknowledge the role played by our heritage indigenous knowledge systems that inform our daily interactions. Thus, Mavhunga (2006) argues that the school curriculum should embrace the African cultural values that will make learners appreciate that they co-exist with others. Moyo (2022), quotes   Mahatma Ghandi who once said: “The real difficulty is that people have no idea of what education truly is. We assess the value of education in the same manner as we assess the value of land or of shares in the stock-exchange market. We want to provide only such education as would enable the student to earn more. We hardly give any thought to the improvement of character of the educated…^”  Ghandi seemed to suggest that we need to fully embrace our understanding and appreciation of the value and the critical role that is being played by our education system. Thus, to Ghandi, education should be seen as an emancipation tool of human life that is incomparable to any other human activity. In this regard therefore education should embrace knowledge and skills that prepares a learner to fit in his immediate environment and solve his real life problems.

In addition, it is highly critical to appreciate that the nature of our education system defines where one is destined and the manner in which this individual will interact with the significant other. Therefore, for any education to be of value, it is also key to address the key role played by the teachers as implementers of the curriculum. The researcher’s experiences in the field of education thus can confirm that teachers interpret curriculum material, research and improvise, prepare a level ground for practice and monitor effectively the daily activities in the classroom. By so doing, any paradigm shift of emphasis to curriculum thought and practice calls for a quick reaction in addressing teacher competencies and readiness for quality outcomes. It is against this background that this theoretical presentation has developed some concerns regarding the 21^st century teacher in Zimbabwe especially after a realisation for the need to embrace on heritage-based education principles. This paper therefore argues for the repositioning and redefining of the roles of the 21^st century teacher through teacher education so that we realise sustainability in our heritage-based education practices.

Research problem

Research has shown that contemporary African schools and teachers (World Conference on Education for All, 1990; Fuller, 1987; Fuller and Snyder, 1991; Heyneman and Jameson, 1980; Verwimp 1999; Edwards, 1985; Oliveira and Farrell, 1987) are not adequately doing enough to prepare learners for solving Africa’s current and future challenges. This is attributed to the multiple political, social and economic instabilities that continue to haunt the entire continent and thus pausing serious security threats. It is the believe of the researcher that, if Africa had  practical relevant education systems that promote scientific inquiry, some of African contemporary social, political and economic challenges could be mitigated or diluted to insignificant levels. Further, the researcher believes that a relevant education system has to be complimented with a highly competent and skilled workforce that could effectively work towards achieving quality and sustainability. Thus in line with heritagising the education system, the researcher believes that there is a need to have a re-look on the roles of the 21^st century teacher. In addition, given Africa’s multifaceted crisis today it is clear that, formal schooling has insufficiently brought about sustainable development and this should be a contemporary concern. Hence, to bring about sustainable development the relevant question to be considered in this treatise is therefore, where has education or those who provide a human necessity gone wrong? Who is to blame? What can be done to address the problems in our education system? Several reasons can be mentioned to answer education challenges. However, in this study the focus has been to look at the qualities of the 21^st century teacher vis-à-vis the heritage-based education (competencies and teacher effectiveness-even though the researcher is quite aware that quality education is broader than competency and teacher effectiveness and there are multiple-contributors that can be blamed for any effective education system.

Research questions

1. What is the role of the 21^st century teachers in embracing heritage-based education?
2. How can the 21^st century teacher embrace on heritage-based education for sustainable development?

METHODOLOGY

This paper is a theoretical-conceptual paper where focus was on making an analysis of teacher education curriculum and its implications to the 21^st century teacher. The concerns of the paper has been redefining the competencies of this teacher in line with our currently implemented heritage-based education which is inclined to the Education 5.0 philosophy. Literature was gathered from published literature sources complimented by the researcher’s personal discourses on pedagogy, researcher’s general observations and experience in teaching at primary, college and university levels over ten years and in supervising diverse student teachers on teaching practice. As the sole instrument gatherer of data using critical reading discourse and text questioning, the researcher focused on answering key research issues guided by research questions and objectives.

Understanding Heritage-based education

Heritage education is an approach to teaching and learning about history and culture that uses information available from the material culture and the human and built environments as primary instructional resources. As an approach, it provides an awareness on the need to preserve our inheritance as part of our identity. Heritage education therefore entails teaching and learning that is passed from one generation to the next which is highly influenced by the Essentialist philosophy. In order to further conceptualise heritage education, it is vital to understand some of the features envisaged on this concept as prescribed below.    

Heritage education practices need to be contextually relevant to learners’ reality and everyday world views and should inculcate into children a sense of ownership, identity and responsibility for local heritage resources (Saunders, 2007; UNESCO, 2002, 2004 and 2006). As already noted earlier, this sense of ownership and identity is often a pre-requisite for ensuring sustainability of local heritage resources (Chirikure and Pwiti, 2008; Deacon, 2004). Heritage education also needs to be socio-culturally situated, and responsive to the immediate needs and interests of local communities, not just the nation state and commerce (Zazu, 2013). Even the learners’ interest in heritage education is likely to increase if in its orientation the learning processes are centred on issues relevant to their world views.   

Zazu (2013) points out that instead of simply attempting to reconstruct the past, heritage education should involve acknowledging the ways in which interpretations of heritage are context bound and value laden. Accordingly Graham, et al., (2000) heritage education should not be concerned with whether one piece of heritage is historically more “correct” than another; instead it should be respectful of all periods of history as opposed to undue emphasis on one era at the expense of others. Heritage education in post-colonial southern Africa should rather strive for multiple interpretations acknowledging that there are many histories of the same place (Frederikse [1982] 1990; UNESCO, 2010). Zazu (2013) says such education is more enriching.

Heritage education should recognise that heritage is always changing, emergent and adapting to contemporary contexts (Art Council of Mongolia, 2007; Jokiletho, 1999; Zazu 2011). Accordingly, heritage representation should articulate the changes and help learners to celebrate, grieve and appreciate their past, at the same time allowing them to move forward with greater vision. Zazu (2013) pointed out, not all heritage is uniformly desirable. In southern Africa the history of colonisation is a reality which learners need to learn about but most importantly in a way that helps them to appreciate the  good and bad realities tied to their past.

Graham, et al., (2000) and Lowenthal (2005) contend that heritage education needs to be constituted and oriented in a way that enables the learner to understand and appreciate the interconnectedness of natural and cultural heritages. Heritage comes from both “nature” and “culture”. Similarly, Hughes (2009) talks of the danger of treating nature as divorced from culture arguing that doing so often leads to the demise of both. Therefore it is important for heritage educators to work with a broader concept of heritage as denoting both natural and cultural heritages. To achieve this may require that the constitution and orientation of current heritage education be revisited.   

Heritage education should not be only the dictation or prescribing of oral history to children but should be student-centred and imaginative (Hein, 2005; UNESCO, 2002; Zazu, 2013). This entails use of participatory teaching and learning approaches that allow learners to be creative and also question dominant heritage discourses.  Teaching and learning approaches which provides space for learners to critically engage in discussion about real issues of representation, ownership and interpretation of their heritages are needed (Shava and Zazu, 2012). Allowing learners to create their own heritage is important in that it helps them to realise that heritage, whilst historically grounded, is itself a discursive concept with varied meanings and interpretations (Graham, et al., 2000; Head, 2000; Smith, 2006; Zazu, 2011).    

Heritage education should not be perceived as a preserve of the elite and (as often misinterpreted) the domain of scientists and other heritage professionals (Shava and Zazu, 2012). Instead heritage education should be popularised through formal and non-formal practices allowing for increased access of local people to learning opportunities (Makhoba, 2007 and 2009; Mhlungu, 2009). Heritage education should promote participation of local communities as well as underscore the importance of using local sources of knowledge such as oral traditions, myths, and legends.

The value of Heritage-based learning in today’s classroom

Literature by UNESCO (2006 and 2010) and Zazu (2013) has confirmed that heritage education is key in supporting and facilitating sustainable development and management of all forms of resources and their use. Dumbrell, (2012), UNESCO (2006) and Zazu, (2013) concur that in Southern African countries notably South Africa and quite recently in Zimbabwe, the importance of heritage education has been highlighted and confirmed by existing policy frameworks both in education, politics and social spheres. For instance, in Zimbabwe His Excellency the President of the Republic has stressed the need for preserving our heritage through giving recognition to our historical and the Heritage Corridor. Zazu (2013) postulates that the South African National Heritage Resources Act no. 25 of 1999 states that:

To ensure that heritage resources are effectively managed (a) the skills and capacities of persons and communities involved in heritage resources management must be developed; and (b) provision must be made for the ongoing education and training of existing and new heritage resources management workers. (Section 5.2: 16).

Deacon (2004) in his studies concluded that education can generate interest in and appreciation of the interconnectedness of natural and cultural heritage resources which can translate into improved capacity to protect and conserve the same resources by local people. Literature has also perceived the roles of heritage education as revolving within a wide range of activities which include the following:

Developing a sense of ownership, identity and responsibility

Sirayi (2007) and Zazu (2013) in their studies observed that Heritage education is considered critical in developing a sense of ownership, identity and responsibility within communities. According to these authorities, through ongoing education local communities can develop a sense of identity and ownership needed to encourage them to actively participate in the management of local heritage resources. Shava and Zazu (2012) and Zazu (2013) further argued that such a sense of ownership, identity and ultimate responsibility is critical within the context of post-colonial southern Africa, given the region’s contested history of colonialism and persistent marginalisation of local people in the management of heritage resources. Colonialism arguably resulted in local people losing their identity to, and ownership of local heritage resources (Mitchell, 2003; Ndoro, 2005; UNESCO, 2006).

Fostering a deeper understanding and appreciation

Saunder (2007), UNESCO (2010) and Shava and Zazu (2012) concur that Heritage education fosters a deeper understanding and appreciation of the value of heritage resources. Hence heritage education practices taking place within museums and heritage sites, formal and informal settings provide learning experiences that can inspire and encourage the learners to collect, preserve, interpret, celebrate, present and disseminate their heritage. The researcher’s experiences thus can confirm that engaging into field-trips where learners visit museums and heritage sites has become one of the most effective methods in teaching and learning. The relationship between an in-depth understanding and appreciation of one’s heritage and one’s consciousness of the need to protect and use heritage resources wisely is already acknowledged (Deacon, 2004; Makhoba, 2009; Saunders, 2007).

Enhancing social cohesion, access, enjoyment and participation

According to UNESCO (2003) and Shava and Zazu (2012) heritage education has vast potential to promote equal access, and active participation of different ethnic and social groups in the use and enjoyment of heritage resources. To this effect it is seen as playing a crucial role in promoting social cohesion and national unity (Sirayi, 2007). Thus in the context of post-colonial southern Africa, Fairweather (2006) posits that heritage education has the potential to promote respect and tolerance of cultural diversity. In South Africa the National Heritage Resources Act no. 25 of 1999 emphasises the importance of education and awareness by claiming that “a better understanding of cultural heritage by citizens promotes reconciliation, understanding and respect amongst people thereby contributing to a unifying South African identity” (NHRA, 1999, p.16).

Promoting critical thinking and creativity

Heritage education provides valuable opportunities to educate youth and children to be critical, and creative thinkers (UNESCO, 2002). Critical and creative thinking are valuable ingredients for personal and social development. In post-colonial southern Africa countries  where societies are constantly evolving, the need to allow the youth to be creative and reconstruct own heritage is of paramount importance. Deacon (2004) acknowledges that heritage education is concerned with both the past and the present allowing learners to create and celebrate their own heritage. Heritage education if properly constituted can therefore go beyond just the dictation of the past by the older generation to the youth, towards critical engagement of learners and construction of heritage based on their own viewpoints (Hein, 2005; Hooper-Greenhill, 2007).

The 21^st century teacher and Heritage-based education

ICOMOS (2011) posits that educators are responsible for providing maps of a complex, constantly agitated world and, at the same time, for enabling the compass needed to navigate through it. Therefore, educators are responsible not only for efficiently facilitating knowledge construction, but also for teaching students to use this knowledge appropriately in their field (Scharmer and Kaufer 2014). Successful learning relies on successful teaching and for educators, it is their technical, methodological capacity, and their ability to take a flexible yet pragmatic approach based on cultural consciousness and respect for cultural diversity and its meanings that ideally penetrates all their practical work. Scharmer and Kaufer (2014) cement it all by stressing that educators’ creative and critical-analytical capacities should be based on proper education and training, sound judgment, and a sense of understanding the community’s needs.

Penna (2019) further expounds that the traditional education applied in developing countries might not be the best way of teaching cultural awareness. According to Penna, the reality of contemporary societies is that they comprehend a large number of elements of different natures that are co-dependent and connected. In this regard, Scharmer and Kaufer (2014) also confirm that traditional education imparts information on cultural, natural, socioeconomic, and spiritual elements as isolated features that do not interact with one another. Thus, this type of approach reinforces the rupture between men and their cultural reality. Hence there is a need to integrate people with their places and their history is the first aspect that any new educational approach has to address (Penna 2019).

Research by Scharmer and Kaufer (2014) has also confirmed that the contemporary man is continuously losing his spiritual connection with his essence due to successive disruptions with his territory, with his history, and with his own identity. Penna (2019) hence notes that cultural heritage education must be centered on the safeguarding and cultural internalization of new values that can promote the reconnection between past and present.

Involving people in transformative learning that can aid their critical and holistic understanding, letting go of the old paradigm of individualism and changing their mind-set to focus on reaching collective goals, is the focus of this new approach (Penna 2019, Scharmer and Kaufer 2014). This is notably as a systemic inversion, a new way of basing education on awareness, dialogue, and action. Penna (2019) hence has identified the following as critical activities that have to be envisaged by educators in heritage education practices.

Critical pedagogy

The critical pedagogy is a philosophy of education and social movement that combines education with critical theory (Freire, 2003). First described by Paulo Freire in his book ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ (1973), it aims to help people develop consciousness of their role in their societies, being aware of authoritarian tendencies, and develop the ability to take constructive action. According to Penna (2019) critical pedagogy includes relationships between teaching and learning, proposing a continuous process of learning, reflecting, evaluating traditional schooling, and if necessary unlearning, relearning, reconceptualising educational methodologies and their impact on the students’ lives. Within the critical pedagogy framework, awareness therefore is required as a first step for the student to develop the ability to take action against authoritatively shaped education that perpetuates the oppression of those who do not belong to the ruling class. In this regard it is critical to acknowledge that the role of the 21^st century teacher is that of exposing learners to a wide range of experiences that help them develop awareness of freedom, recognize authoritarian tendencies, and connect knowledge to power and develop the ability to take constructive action. Penna (2019) quotes Kincheloe (2008) who expounds that critical pedagogy may help students 

“…reshape their lives, become better scholars and social activists, realise their cognitive potential, re-create democratic spaces in an electronically mediated global world, and build and become members of communities of solidarity that work to create better modes of education and a more peaceful, equitable, and ecologically sustainable world.” (p. 64)

Transformative learning

According to Taylor (2013) the transformative educator is a facilitator of learning, who offers a wide range of learning opportunities that allow individuals to transform themselves. Elias (1997) also observes that transformative learning enhances the expansion of consciousness through the basic transformation of worldview and specific capabilities of ‘being’. Transformative learning is facilitated through processes consciously directed by the individual learner as to how to access and enjoy the symbolic contents of the unconscious underlying assumptions and critical analysis. Taylor (2013) has identified five qualities of transformative learning that are critical to the learner and these are: cultural‐self knowing, relational knowing, critical knowing, visionary and ethical knowing and agency knowing. To Taylor, cultural-self knowing for instance, can assist educators to fully understand students’ worldview, especially values, ideals, emotions, premises, and frames of reference residing in the subconscious. Thus, cultural‐self knowing therefore can be cultivated in the classrooms aiming at connecting students to the collective unconscious, where habits of mind, cultural/individual identity, and social interactions are. In heritage-based education, one of the roles of the 21^st century teacher   hence is that of embracing cultural-self-awareness to the learner. In facilitating this, the teacher has to expose learners to a wide range of cultural knowledge enshrined in their heritage. Learners have to be made to appreciate the heritage wisdom and riches that are found in the communities. In this regard, the 21^st century teacher has to research and be multi-dimensional in his/her approaches to handling issues of cultural-self knowing.

Regarding relational knowing, Taylor (2013) posits that it helps students to understand and appreciate the value of reconnecting with the natural world and with culturally different learners’ and teachers’ ways of knowing, being, and valuing in the world. On the other hand, Taylor confirms that critical knowing as a component of transformative learning is a valuable approach to understand how economic and organizational power has historically structured sociocultural reality especially, class, race, gender, and the conventional scientific worldview. Critical knowing hence is a skill that helps the learner to govern identities and relationships with the natural world and with culturally different others. The teacher in the 21^st century classroom hence has a responsibility of fostering critical knowing amongst the learners so that they value their historical heritage and the roles that they play in the preservation of cultural issues. The 21^st century teacher has to equip the learners with life skills that relate to the complexities of their local and everyday life. In addition, it is the role of the 21^st century teacher to allow students to envision through idealization, imagination, and dialogue with culturally different partners on what a better world this could be. According to Taylor, this could be achieved through visionary and ethical knowing. Therefore, the 21^st century teacher’s role is seemingly that of exposing learners to emerging technologies in our cultural heritage that foster sustainability.   Finally, agency knowing quality is indispensable to help students to realize that contributing to making the world a better place is feasible, desirable, and necessary and that anyone has the capacity and commitment to do so. The teacher therefore in heritage-based education has a role of developing in learners their potentials so that they contribute immensely in the betterment of their lives and the communities where they come from. Qualities of transformative learning here described are notably to be informed by the principles of the critical constructivist paradigm which puts emphasis on child-centred learning. Therefore in heritage-based teaching and learning, the 21^st century teacher’s role becomes that of a facilitator and provider of learning opportunities that promote independent learning. The teacher has to accommodate experiential and experimental learning activities so that learners reconstruct their own knowledge from their heritage. In this regard, pillars of the Education 5.0 become key guiding principles for the 21^st century teacher to execute his/her duties with diligence and effectiveness.

Meaning-centred education

According to Taylor (2013) schooling in the contemporary societies can no longer be dichotomized into a place and time to acquire knowledge (school) and a place and time to apply knowledge (the workplace). Thus, there is too much knowledge expansion that students can no-longer handle. Taylor therefore recommends that meaning-centred education may be a helpful approach for preservation education as it places meaning-making at the centre of the teaching-learning process. Fischer (2000) and Kovbasyuk and Blessinger (2012) concur that meaning-centred education as a constructive process organises our experiences as individuals and the relationship between our inner world and the external world. Gilmour (2006) expounds that this approach seems suitable for cultural heritage studies under the integral holistic approach, as sustainability in preservation relates directly to the meanings that people attribute to cultural assets. In heritage-based education the redefined role of the 21^st century teacher therefore is that of linking learners to the realities of both the inner and the external worlds. Through research and being resourceful, the teacher has to provide meaningful learning experiences that will promote understanding of our emerging heritage knowledge system. In meaning-centred education, the 21^st century teaching should make use of the heritage sites in teaching and learning as these carry with them various symbols that signify our social, economic and political history. Learners hence should be involved into constructive debates and research which will in turn help them make meaning of the importance of our national values and preserves.

Active learning

Lakerveld and Gussen (2009) established that learners should be actively involved in the teaching/learning process. Dewey in his pragmatist philosophy also advised that learners should not be passive recipients of information. Thus, the teaching/learning episode should not treat learners as empty containers where the teacher pours in knowledge. In-fact, the teacher should appreciate that learners bring vast experiences from their home backgrounds. As Dewey puts it right that schools are not ivory towers, instead, they are a continuation of life activities from the home experiences. Therefore, to promote heritage-based learning, the teacher’s role is to facilitate active learning in the classroom. Lakerveld and Gussen (2009) identified several attributes that are very key to contextualise heritage-based education.

Accordingly, one of the 21^st century teacher’s roles should be to provide meaningful contexts for the students. Pellgrino and Hilton (2012) posit that it is in these contexts that students can learn to respect local values and practices. Therefore, educators in heritage education should look for meaningful contexts in which students can experience the relevance and meaning of competencies acquired in a natural way. In addition, the contemporary teachers should adopt multidisciplinary approaches as they expose learners to heritage-based epistemologies. Lakerveld and Gussen (2009) also observe that constructive learning is one of the key elements in active learning. According to these authorities, constructive learning may be conceived as a process of constructing students’ knowledge in interaction with students’ environments, rather than as a process of absorbing pre-arranged knowledge.  The teacher in the 21^st century hence has to equip learners with creative, imaginative and problem solving skills among others, so that they construct their own knowledge in both their social, political and economic environment. Thus, the 21^st century in heritage based education has to foster innovative and industrialised skills in learners which are a pre-requisite to sustainable development.

Last but not least, the 21^st century teacher has to promote discovery and reflective learning principles in the classroom as opposed to receptive learning. This means that not only course content should be made available and accessible but also that the way of acquiring this knowledge or these competences is more than a process of being provided with information. Finally, by nurturing personal learning, learning can be conceived as a process of constructing students’ own personal knowledge and competencies.

Challenges met by the 21^st century teacher in Heritage-based education

Zazu (2013) in his studies established that the narrow constitution of heritage education to focus more on socio-political discourses inherent in the region’s colonial history than on helping learners to appreciate the need to support the protection and conservation of heritage resources is arguably problematic.  Furthermore the limiting of heritage education practices in the region to intergenerational transfer of culture is also being critiqued as it makes heritage education learning not very interesting to 21^st century learners. Nyoni and Nyoni, (2010) and Zazu, (2013) further contend that one of the reasons of why leaners are not keenly interested in heritage education is this presentation of heritage as culture frozen in time and space and the working with a narrow conception of heritage as limited to culture.  Currently the conceptual linkage between culture and nature is weak resulting in learners not realising how not protecting their natural heritage has negative implications on the sustainability of their own much talked about cultures and identities. Therefore whilst heritage education in post-colonial southern Africa region is expected to and should foster lifelong sustainable development, the 21^st century teacher has challenges of comprehending this. As an educationist, I can confirm that present teacher lacks the critical knowledge base that are a prerequisite of the implementation of heritage education. Thus according to Moyo and Moyo (2021), today’s citizens see no value in African philosophy and the role it plays in our education system and hence the need for a re-thought about education for today and tomorrow in the African perspective. As a result, the 21^st century teacher is notably valuing the Eurocentric educational connotations which in turn challenges the effective handling of heritage-based education practices.

According to Nyoni and Nyoni, (2010) contemporary heritage management, and consequently cultural heritage education, involves aspects drawn from various dimensions. Nyoni and Nyoni further postulate that educating people and professionals to manage their cultural heritage requires approaches that must respect a variety of factors, such as the characteristics of the local context, the social values of the society in question, the limitations of available resources, political and economic interests, and the fragilities and potentials of the cultural system. In addition, Zazu (2013) says it is important to understand the significance and relevance that locals attribute to their heritage, as well as the importance of making current heritage useful to their future societies. Regarding the above, my experience as an educationist can confirm that this is not an easy area to manage by the 21^st century teacher. The contemporary societies are notably to be very complex which makes heritage education a highly contested field. The issue of a comprehensive understanding of contexts and characteristics of the historical and cultural values of the locals call for a lot of critical research skills for the 21^st century teacher. Given the diverse social, political and economic environments, I for-see multiply challenges being faced by the teacher in implementing heritage-based education. This often requires flexibility in adapting cultural and natural assets to the needs of contemporary societies, which ensures these assets can survive for longer.

According to Zazu (2013), over the past two hundred years, we have modified our understanding of the concept of heritage by associating it with the “historical,” and have consequently come to understand new aspects and dimensions of cultural heritage: monuments and historical and archaeological sites representative of nations around the world, material and immaterial assets, cultural expressions, and practices linked to the social values of peoples. Zazu (2013) further posits that the change from “historical” to “cultural” and the recently formed concept of cultural landscape, has influenced cultural heritage to encompass everything that is meaningful to humanity, tangible and intangible cultural goods, natural and spiritual, all of which refer to the sense of cultural identity and to what makes man develop a sense of belonging to a particular territory or to a certain society. Nyoni and Nyoni, (2010) and Zazu, (2013) concur that this conceptual evolution has influenced cultural heritage education. Thus, it has resulted in a sharp increase in the number of actors involved in preservation, and consequently the establishment of forums to mediate conflicts between stakeholders. As a result, this is quite demanding to the school curriculum as the 21^st century teacher has to make use of contemporary methodological approaches to cultural heritage education that can foster sociocultural inclusion and help in preserving cultural and natural assets. This multidimensional expansion also demands the development of strategies for comprehensive policies and highlights the need for social awareness and participation.

CONCLUSION

The paper proposes a teacher education curriculum that exposes trainee teachers to the significant pillars of our heritage as a nation. Pedagogy that harnesses contemporary technologies and heritage-based knowledge systems should be the guiding principles in teaching and learning. Thus, the constant adaptation to the new curricula and teaching methodologies of heritage-based education will enable the provision of new, different, and more comprehensive skills than those taught so far. More important than conveying technical and managerial skills, I believe a new understanding of sociocultural learning is needed, including working on the students’ emotional intelligence by helping them to manage emotions, develop empathy, build relationships, and repair the broken relationship between people and their cultural environments. Thus, local people may be able to obtain a more general education on the sustainability of their territory and their heritage, not to become a conservation or restoration expert but rather to be knowledgeable enough to make sound decisions about the preservation of their environment.

REFERENCES

1. Art Council of Mongolia. (2007). Museums Cultural Heritage Education: A hand book. Canada Bredekamp, J. H. (2009). The Cultural Heritage of Democratic South Africa: An overview. Cape Town: Iziko Museums. www.dissanet.com/ifla/pdf/, accessed March 24, 2010.
2. British Museum. (2010).The Wealth of Africa. Great Zimbabwe: Teachers’ notes.
3. Chitumba, W. (2013). ‘University Education for Personhood through Ubuntu Philosophy’. In   International Journal of Asian Social Science, 3(5), 1268-1276.
4. Crawhall, N. (2008). Heritage education for Sustainable Development: Dialogue with indigenous communities in Africa. UNESCO 2009. Cape Town.
5. Deacon, J. (2004). Heritage and African History. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press
6. Dokora, L. (2016, February 12). Clarifying the changes in the new education curriculum in Zimbabwe. The Sunday Mail, p. 2.
7. Dumbrell, K. (2012). Heritage Resources Management 1: Training Module. Grahamstown: Environmental Learning Research Centre, Rhodes University.
8. Elias, D 1997, It is time to change our minds: an introduction to transformative learning, In: Revision, 20 (1), pp 26.
9. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. Boston: Addison Wesley.
10. Fairclough, N. (2002). Critical Discourse Analysis as a social practice. In M. Toolan (Ed). Critical Discourse Analysis. Critical Concepts in Linguistics. London: Routledge.
11. Fairweather, I. (2006). Heritage, Identity and Youth in Post-colonial Namibia. Journal of Southern African Studies, 32(4).
12. Fontein, J. (2006). The Silence of Great Zimbabwe: Contested Landscapes and Power of Heritage. New York: Left Coast Press.
13. Frederikse, J. [1982] (1990). None but Ourselves. Harare: Oral Traditional Association of Zimbabwe with Anvil press.
14. Freire, P (36.ª ed. 2003; 1.ª ed. 1970) 2003, Pedagogy of the oppressed, Rio de Janeiro, Paz e Terra.
15. Gilmour, T 2006, Sustaining heritage: giving the past a future, Sydney, Sydney University Press.
16. Giroux, H 2010 Lessons from Paulo Freire, Chronicle of Higher Education, 27, October 2010, Retrieved on 5 March 2017 from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Lessons-From-Paulo-Freire/124910
17. Graham, G., Ashworth, G. J. & Tunbridge, J.E. (2000). Geography of Heritage. Power, Culture and Economy. London: Arnold.
18. Hamilton, L. (2011). Case studies in educational research, British Educational Research Association online resource.
19. Available online at http://www.bera.ac.uk/files/2011/06/case_studies_in_educational_research.pdf,
20. accessed April 10, 2012.
21. Hapanyengwi-Chemhuru, O. and Makuvaza, N. (2014). ‘unhu: In Search of an Indigenous   Philosophy for the Zimbabwean Education System’. In Journal of Indigenous Social Development, 3(1), 1-15.
22. Head, L. (2000). Cultural Landscapes and Environmental Change. MA: Oxford Press.
23. Hein, G. E. (2005). The Role of Museums in Society: Education and Social Action. Seminar paper Jyvaskyla, Finland, 9 November 2005.
24. Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2007). Museum and Education. Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance. London, New York: Routledge.
25. Hughes, J. D. (2009). An Environmental History of the World. Humankind’s changing role in the community of life. London: Routledge.
26. Hunter. K. (1988). Heritage Education in the Social Studies. Eric Digest. http://cool.conservationus.org/bytopic/misc/heritedu.html. Accessed September 7, 2011.
27. International Council on Monuments and Sites – ICOMOS 1993, Guidelines for education and training in conservation of monuments, ensembles and sites, Retrieved 5 March 2013.
28. International Council on Monuments and Sites – ICOMOS 2008, Quebec declaration on the preservation of the spirit of the place, Retrieved from: http://www.international.icomos.org/quebec 2008.
29. International Council on Monuments and Sites – ICOMOS 2011, The Paris declaration on heritage as a driver of development, Retrieved from http://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts.
30. Janks, H. (1997). Critical discourse analysis as a research tool. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 18(3), 329-342.
31. Jickling, B. (1992). Why I don’t want my children to be educated for sustainable development, Southern African Journal of Environmental Education, 23(4), 5-8.
32. Jickling, B. (2006). The Decade of Education for Sustainable Development: A useful platform? Or an annoying distraction? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 22(1), 99-104.
33. Jokiletho, J. (1999). History of Architectural Conservation. Butterworth: Heinemann.
34. Katsamudanga, S. (2004). The Dilemma of preserving intangible heritage in Zimbabwe. Paris: UNESCO.
35. Kelly, C. & Ni’laore, C. (2005). Representing multiple Irish heritage(s): a case study of the Ulster-American Folk Park. Irish Geography, 38(1), 72-83.
36. Kincheloe, J 2008, Critical pedagogy primer, 2nd edition. English, New York, Peter Lang.
37. Kros, C. (2003). History vs Heritage: The end of the Noble Tradition? Historia, 48(1), 326-336.
38. Lakerved, J & Gussen, I (Eds) 2009, Acquedut: acquiring key competencies through heritage education, Bilzen, Germany, Lies Kerkhofs.
39. Leeuw-Roord, J. (2004). Heritage and History Education at Schools, Hague Forum (2004) Heritage and Education: A European Perspective. The Hague.
40. Lefa, B. (2015) The African Philosophy of Ubuntu in South African Education; Cape Peninsuala University
41. Lowenthal, D. (2005). Natural and Cultural Heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 11(1), 81-92.
42. Lupele. J. and Lotz-Sisitka, H. (2012). Learning Today for Tomorrow: Education for Sustainable Development Learning Processes in sub-Saharan Africa. Howick: SADC REEP.
43. Mahaye, N.E. (2018) The Philosophy of Ubuntu in Education: International Journal: Academia. Ed.
44. Makhoba, K. L. (2007). Educating the SA Black community on Heritage: Is there a need? Conference paper, 2007.
45. Makhoba, K. L. (2009). Is the scope of Heritage wide enough in the National Curriculum Statements (NCS)? Journal of South African Heritage Resources Agency, 1, 80-85.
46. Manyanga, M. (2000). Tourism and cultural heritage controversy of key tourist destinations in Zimbabwe, in Expression of Cultural identity and Meaning in Tourism. Harare: University of Zimbabwe.
47. Mavhunga, P.J. (2006). Africanising the School Curriculum: A Case for Zimbabwe’. In   Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research, 18 (3), 440-456.
48. Mazonde, N. I. (1994). Culture and Education in the development of Africa. http:www.unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/IDEP.html, accessed September 18, 2010.
49. McKernan, J. (2008). Curriculum and Imagination: Process theory, pedagogy and action research. London: Routledge.
50. Mhlungu, Z. F. (2009). Heritage as portrayed in the national curriculum statement of Education. Journal of South African Heritage Resources Agency, 1, 3-25.
51. Mitchell, P. (2003). The Archaeology of southern Africa. Cambridge: University Press.
52. Moyo, L. and Moyo, M. (2021) Rethinking Education Today and Tomorrow-Zimbabwe Journal of Teacher Education: Volume 16, Issue 1 July 2021
53. Moyo, M. (2022) The Dynamics of African Indigenous Knowledge Systems: A Sustainable Alternative for Livelihoods in Southern Africa: Embedding Sustainability and Ubuntu Philosophy in the learning of Learners with Disruptive Behaviors (2022)- (Book-chapter 9)-ISSN 2576.358X (print) ISSN 2576.3598 (online)
54. Munjeri, D. (2004). Tangible and intangible heritage: From difference to convergence. In Museum International, 58(1–2), Oxford: Blackwell.
55. National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) (1999). Cape Town: Government of Republic of South Africa.
56. Ndoro, W. (2005).Your Monuments Our Shrine. The preservation of Great Zimbabwe. Department of Archaeology and Ancient History. Sweden, Uppsala University.
57. Nemerai, J. (1995). Adopt a Site Programme. Community involvement in conservation, preservation and management of heritage sites: case study of Majiri ruins. Archaeological heritage education and interpretation course hand-out. Great Zimbabwe monument.
58. Niglio, O 2014, Inheritance and Identity of Cultural Heritage, Advances in Literary Study, 2-1, pp 1-4, Retrieved from http://www.scirp.org/journal/als, on 20 January 2014.
59. Nyoni, T. & Nyoni, M. (2010). The ‘culture hut’ concept: A case of Danda and Chimedza schools in Zaka district. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 12 (1), 146-157.
60. Obanya, P. (2005). Culture-in-Education and Education-in-Culture. Paper presented at the 5^th Conference of Ministers of Culture, Nairobi, and African Union.
61. Penna, K.N. (2019) Cultural heritage as an educational base for the traditional pillars of Sustainable Development, Murdoch University, Australia
62. Saunders, C. (2007). The Transformation of Heritage in the New South Africa. In H. Stolten (Ed.) History Making and Present Day Politics: The Meaning of Collective Memory in South Africa. Stockholm: Nordiska Afrika Instituted
63. Scharmer, O and Kaufer, K 2014, Leading from the emerging future: from ego-system to eco-system economies, San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler
64. Shava, S. & Zazu, C. (2012). Heritage Education Practices in South Africa. Training Module, Grahams town: Rhodes University, Environmental Learning Research Centre.
65. Smith, L. (2006). Uses of Heritage. London, Routledge.
66. Shor, I. 1992, Empowering education: critical teaching for social change, Chicago, US, University of Chicago Press.
67. Taylor, P 2013, Transformative research for meaning-centred professional development, Routledge Publishing. In Kovbasyuk, O. And Blessinger, P. (Eds), Meaning-centred education: international perspectives and explorations in higher education, New York, Routledge.  .
68. Tilbury, D. (2011). Education for Sustainable development: An expert review of processes and learning. Paris: UNESCO.
69. UNESCO. (2002). World Heritage in Young Hands. To know, cherish and act (An educational resource kit for teachers). Paris: UNESCO.
70. UNESCO. (2003). International Convention for the safeguarding of Intangible Cultural heritage. Paris: UNESCO.
71. UNESCO. (2004 Sche). United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014. Draft International Implementation me. Paris. UNESCO.
72. UNESCO. (2006). Cultural Heritage and Local Development, A guide for African Local Governments. Paris: CRA Terre ENSAG/Convention France-UNESCO.
73. UNESCO. (2010). Incorporating Education for Sustainable Development into World Heritage Education: perspectives, principles and values. Bangkok: UNESCO.
74. Zazu, C. (2011). Heritage – A Conceptually Evolving and Dissonant Phenomenon: Implications for
75. Heritage Management and Education Practices in Post-Colonial Southern Africa. Southern African Journal of Environmental Education, 28.
76. Zazu, C. (2013). Representation and use of indigenous heritage constructs: Implications for the quality and relevance of heritage education in post-colonial southern Africa. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Grahams town: Rhodes University, Education Department.