INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Strategies and Challenges of Implementation of Zimbabwe's  
Education 5.0 Policy  
Bajilla Felex, and Ebrima Saine  
Pending  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100462  
Received: 02 December 2025; Accepted: 08 December 2025; Published: 18 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This systematic review critically examines the strategies and challenges of implementing Zimbabwe's Education  
5.0 policy which is a main pathway for innovation and industrialization. Education 5.0 was made to transform  
higher education as the backbone for innovation and industrialization. A qualitative reviewing of existing  
literature, the research highlighted an important disconnection between the policy's ambitious goals and the  
existing implementation systems. The results reveal that the policy is affected by a structural problem and  
limited resources, including inadequate of funding innovation hubs and lack of digital infrastructure. In addition,  
main problem in human capacity such as limited educator training and digital literacy and fragmented  
governance structures, top-down system reforms and lack of stakeholder involvement, continuously derail  
progress. However, these barriers, the systematic literature review provides strategic opportunities, involving  
luting public-private organization and align the policy with national development goals and social sustainability  
standards. The research finalized that in the absence of a structured, multi-pronged approach that simultaneously  
addresses funding, capacity building, and participatory governance, Education 5.0 will remain a largely  
rhetorical commitment. The results provide significant insights for policymakers and implementers seeking to  
operationalize this transformative educational model journey in Zimbabwe and beyond in similar developing  
contexts.  
INTRODUCTION  
The continuous improvement in technological transformation highlighting the global shift toward Industry 5.0  
and Society 5.0 has significantly reshaped the way nations view the future of education. As the world freed from  
the problem of the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for innovative, human-centered, and resilient education  
systems has become more urgent than ever. Globally, scholars agreed that the pandemic revealed structural  
problems in socio-economic and knowledge systems, forcing societies to reshaped their state of preparedness  
for different advanced, technology-driven futures (Macrae et al., 2025). In this continuous-changing world,  
nations are increasingly adopting Education 5.0 frameworks that called for human-machine collaboration,  
sustainability, problem-solving, and innovation as critical leaders of national development.  
Worldwide, the Education 5.0 system is in alignment with Industry 5.0 an industrial paradigm changes based on  
human-centricity, resilience, sustainability, and collaborative technologies (Shabur et al., 2025). According to  
Whitehead et al. (2025), this situation requires not only technological upgrade but also new devices of calculated  
leadership that involved human innovation, advanced technologies, and cooperation innovation. Additionally,  
the change toward people-centered digitalization seen in Society 5.0 highlighted the need for education systems  
that prepared graduates with the ability to face complex social, technological, and environmental challenges,  
specifically in developing nations (Telukdarie, 2025). These global insights consolidate the idea that countries  
can only work in the emerging knowledge economy by enabling innovation-oriented learning environments.  
In developing countries, the struggled towards implementing Education 5.0 standards is hardening by structural  
and socio-economic barriers. Fazlollahtabar’s (2025) game-theoretic analysis revealed that the attainment of  
Industry 5.0 in such contexts relies mostly on the linkage of strategies between government, industry, and the  
human capital an interdependence that equally applies to education reform. Implementation bases trained  
personnel, robust infrastructure, clear policies, and cultural acceptance all of which remain different across many  
Page 5872  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
low-income nations. The experience of sectors like forestry and logistics, where the invention of human-centred  
AI and modernized digital systems is affected by infrastructural barriers, resistance to change, and workforce  
capacity challenges, this boiled down to the implementation complexities faced by education systems (Holzinger  
et al., 2024; Nicoletti, 2025).  
In countries like Zimbabwe, the Education 5.0 policy was based on teaching, research, community service,  
innovation, and industrialization was introduced as a transformative framework to reform higher education as  
the main guiding principle for national economic development. The policy geared towards changing universities  
from theory-driven institutions to innovation centers with the ability of solving real-world problems and driving  
industrial productivity. However, the vision is ambitious, Zimbabwe experiences significant challenges in  
operationalizing this system. These include underfunding, inadequate digital infrastructure, low level of skilled  
technical personnel, limited university–industry connection, and institutional blockage to new pedagogical and  
research models. Despite all these hindrances, Zimbabwe’s implementation of Education 5.0 represents a  
significant effort to align national development goal with global technological and industrial trends.  
However, although existing literature examines the global changes of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0, as much as  
the role of people-centered technological transformation, there are still shortage of empirical and conceptual  
research providing specifically on the methods and challenges affecting the implementation of Zimbabwe’s  
Education 5.0 policy. Existing studies mainly discussed high-level theoretical frameworks or examine  
technology adoption in other areas, leaving a gap in localized, context-specific examination of the way higher  
institutions are learning, policymakers, and stakeholders in Zimbabwe are addressing these educational reforms.  
However, the level of effectiveness of present strategies, the contextual hurdles experience, and the sustainability  
of the Education 5.0 framework in Zimbabwe’s socio-economic situation is not clearly understood.  
Consequently, this research is relevant for many reasons. Firstly, it contributes to existing debates on Education  
5.0 by emphasising on a context-specific analysis of its practical implementation in a developing country, low-  
income setting, addressing a problem that existing global, literature has not sufficiently explored. Second, by  
outlining the methods used and challenges experience, the study gives evidence-based insights that can guide  
policymakers, university administrators, and industry partners in consolidating the operationalization of  
Education 5.0 in Zimbabwe. Third, the study will provide wide regional discussions on the way developing  
countries can attained human-centered technological transformation to create resilient, innovation-driven  
education systems in line with the demands of the 21st-century economy. Finally, the research targets to support  
the realization of an education system that not only attains global standards but also drives local industrialization  
and socio-economic development.  
METHODOLOGY  
Research design  
This research employed a qualitative systematic literature review model to synthesise empirical and conceptual  
evidence on the strategies and challenges involved in implementing Zimbabwe’s Education 5.0 policy.  
Systematic reviews are specifically relevant in higher education hence they offer a transparent, protocol-driven  
strategy to providing and reviewing existing knowledge, in contrast to more subjective narrative reviews.  
Directed by current methodological guidance for education SLRs, the review selected the core stages of PRISMA  
identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion and employed qualitative thematic synthesis to advance  
higher-order themes from many literature, in line with current standards for qualitative studies exist in education.  
Research questions  
1. How do teachers and administrators outline the strategies they use to implement Zimbabwe’s Education  
5.0 policy in their institutions?  
2. What challenges do teachers and administrators present experiencing in implementing Zimbabwe’s  
Education 5.0 policy?  
Page 5873  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Search strategy  
A systematic search was conducted from September, 2025 to November 2025 in: African Journals Online  
(AJOL); SpringerLink; ERIC / Google Scholar and Individual journal sites (e.g., East African Journal of  
Education and Social Sciences, South African Journal of Education, African Journal of Social Work). Search  
strings integrated keywords and Boolean operators, for example: “Education 5.0” AND Zimbabwe; “Society 5.0”  
OR “Industry 5.0” AND (education OR “higher education”); “curriculum reform” AND Zimbabwe; “innovation”  
AND “higher education” AND Zimbabwe and “policy implementation” AND (education OR curriculum) AND  
Zimbabwe. Backward citation searching of included papers (e.g., Muzira & Bondai, 2020; Barker, 2023;  
Benrachou, 2024) was used to identify additional studies.  
Inclusion and exclusion criteria  
Inclusion  
Attention on Zimbabwean education (higher education, TVET, teacher education, schools) or offer directly  
relevant conceptual models (Education 5.0, Society 5.0, Industry 5.0, Model 5.0) linked to education. Empirical  
(qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods) or conceptual/theoretical. Published in peer-reviewed journals  
between 2010 and 2025. And written in English.  
Exclusion  
Non-educational sector studies with no suitable conceptual relevance to education, opinion pieces/editorials with  
no systematic methods and duplicates.  
Study selection (PRISMA steps)  
Four stages used:  
Identification: Records retrieved from all databases and platforms and duplicates removed.  
Screening (titles/abstracts): Screened against inclusion criteria and clearly irrelevant studies excluded.  
Eligibility (full-text): Full texts retrieved for potentially relevant papers and assessed for focus on Zimbabwean  
education or conceptually relevant 5.0 frameworks.  
Inclusion: Final set of 푛 = 25 studies included (e.g., Muzira & Bondai, 2020; Tsvuura, 2022; Mashayamombe  
& van den Berg, 2024; Chigwida et al., 2025; Dudzai, 2018; Tendengu, 2024, etc.).  
PRISMA-style flow  
Records identified through databases: 푛 = 50; Records after duplicates removed: 푛 = 15; Records screened  
(title/abstract): 푛 = 50; Records excluded: 푛 = 10; Full-text articles assessed for eligibility: 푛 = 25 and  
Full-text articles excluded (with reasons): 푛 = 10  
Data extraction  
A structured extraction form was utilized to capture: Author(s), year, journal; Country/setting and education  
level (HE, TVET, schools, teacher education); Design/methods (qualitative, quantitative, conceptual);  
Participants (e.g., educators, administrators, students, communities, records personnel); Attention (e.g.,  
Education 5.0 perceptions, curriculum reform, language policy, digital records, social sustainability); Key  
strategies related to Education 5.0 (e.g., workshops, PPPs, innovation hubs, knowledge leadership);  
Major challenges (e.g., limited resource , training gaps, governance issues, participation deficits) and  
Theoretical/conceptual frameworks (systems theory, policy implementation, TPCK, Diffusion of Innovations,  
Society 5.0, social sustainability).  
Page 5874  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Quality appraisal  
Empirical studies were assessed using basic criteria (aims, design–question fit, sampling, data collection,  
analysis rigor, limitations, and ethics). Conceptual papers were analyzed for clarity, coherence, and relevance:  
High quality: strong approach, clear alignment; Medium: some constraints, still informative and Low: serious  
weaknesses used cautiously. No study was excluded solely on quality; appraisal informed weighting in the  
synthesis.  
Data analysis (Thematic synthesis)  
A thematic analysis method was used to synthesize the included literatures. Firstly, familiarization involved  
many careful readings of all full documents to gain a comprehensive idea of how Education 5.0–related problems  
were presented. Second, initial coding was administered both inductively and deductively on the data and  
discussion chapter: deductive codes were made from the research questions and guiding theories (e.g.,  
“strategies,” “challenges,” “resources,” “participation”), while inductive codes were made from the data itself  
(e.g., “innovation hubs,” “digital records,” “sign language inclusion,” “social sustainability”). Third, these codes  
were arranged into more extensive categories, from which four main themes were developed: structural and  
resource constraints; human capacity, knowledge, and leadership; governance, policy coherence, and  
participation; and strategic opportunities and supporting strategies. Fourth, the themes were appraised against  
the coded extracts and the full dataset, reshaped boundaries and arranging subthemes within each main theme.  
Finally, the themes were interpreted in connection to the research questions and developed within systems theory,  
policy implementation theory, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK), Diffusion of  
Innovations, Society 5.0, social sustainability, and Zimbabwe’s broader socio‑economic and policy context, in  
order to create a coherent, theory‑informed account of Education 5.0 implementation.  
Theme summary table (visual)  
Theme  
Example issues  
Illustrative studies  
Structural & resource Underfunded hubs, poor ICT, Muzira & Bondai (2020); Tsvuura (2022)  
limitations  
Human  
weak records  
capacity, Training gaps, digital literacy, Muzira & Bondai (2020); Sithole et al. (2021);  
education & leadership  
specialists  
Chidarikire et al. (2021); Mapungwana et al. (2025)  
Governance,  
coherence  
policy Rushed reforms, weak M&E, Chigwida et al. (2025); Mashayamombe & van den  
& low participation Berg (2024); Garira et al. (2020); Siambombe (2016)  
involvement  
Strategic opportunities & PPPs, sharing economy, social Barker (2023); Benrachou (2024); Dudzai (2018);  
supporting strategies  
sustainability  
Tendengu (2024)  
Ethical considerations  
Only published, peer-reviewed studies were utilized; no primary data were gathered. Ethical approval was  
therefore not necessary. All sources are accurately cited to uphold academic integrity.  
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS  
Structural and Resource Constraints  
The effective implementation of Education 5.0 is significantly affected by poor structural inputs and limited  
resource. Indications implies that the physical document intended to drive modernization, such as innovation  
centers and industrial zones, are still seriously underdeveloped and poorly funded (Muzira et al., 2020; Moyo &  
Chikodzi, 2021; Mabhanda & Mabwe, 2023). This lack of enough infrastructure is in contrast with the  
curriculum reforms, which are usually rushed and plagued by very limited teaching materials, facilities, and  
Page 5875  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
qualified teaching staff (Mashayamombe & van den Berg, 2024; Mapungwana et al., 2025; Garira et al., 2020).  
As a result, the goal of a hands-on, production-oriented education system is changed at its premature stage,  
shortage of the necessary physical and material environment to thrive.  
When observed through the lens of systems theory, these challenges became a critical failure in the "input" stage  
of the educational framework. A system's output is directly reliant on the quality and sufficiency of its inputs,  
and in this case, the weak inputs undermined funding, infrastructure, and technology severely restrict the desired  
"outputs" of innovation and industrialization. This is further affected by poor digital infrastructure and weak  
records management styles, which directly undermined the delivery of Education 5.0's digital and data-driven  
components (Tsvuura, 2022; Tsvuura et al.). The lack of reliable technology and data systems, the formation,  
dissemination, and application of ideas become different and inadequate.  
However, the discrepancy among policy ambition and practical experiences can be largely associated to these  
structural problems. Policy enforcement theory outlines that even the well-designed policies will fail without the  
required resources for their enforcement. The prolonged underfunding of both physical infrastructure and digital  
resources generates a restrictive environment where the core issues of Education 5.0 teaching, research,  
community service, innovation, and industrialization cannot be effectively operationalized. The system,  
therefore, remains stuck in a cycle where visionary reform goals are continuously undermined by a lack of  
fundamental supporting resources.  
Human Capacity, Knowledge, and Leadership  
Besides physical resources, a major challenge to Education 5.0 depends on human capacity and readiness. While  
education practitioners mainly view the philosophy of Education 5.0 supportively, they often report feeling of  
lacking prepared for its implementation (Muzira et al., 2020; Moyo & Chikodzi, 2021). This is connected to  
insufficient pre-service and in-service training, basically on digital literacy gaps, and a lack of continuous  
professional development (Sithole et al., 2021; Mabika & Maireva, 2023). This skills gap is not limited to  
educators; it also extends to major support personnel, such as records managers, sign language experts, and  
gender specialists, whose expertise is crucial for driving and promoting inclusive and innovative practices  
(Tsvuura, 2022; Mapungwana et al., 2025; Chidarikire et al., 2021).  
In theory, these challenges can be put through the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK)  
model and Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations theory. TPCK implies that effective technology integration demands  
a sophisticated interplay of content, pedagogical, and technological knowledge an integration that is disturbed  
by the reported training problems. Concurrently, Rogers' theory posits that the choosing of an innovation is  
control by the adopters' knowledge and perceived skill. If educators feel incompetent, they are unlikely to be  
early adopters or outright rejecters of the Education 5.0 framework, derailing its variations throughout the system.  
Attending to this human capacity gap demands a change towards well experience expertise as leadership, a  
concept central to Society 5.0 thinking (Barker, 2023; Benrachou, 2024). From a human capital theory  
perspective, contribution in training educators' and administrators' expertise is as critical as venture in physical  
infrastructure. Successful knowledge leadership would include creating systems for continuous learning,  
knowledge exchange, and coaching to build the relevant institutional competence. With no strategic leadership  
that concentrate on human capital development, the prospect of Education 5.0 will remain locked within a labor  
force that supports the idea in principle but lacks the capacity to implement it in practice.  
Governance, Policy Coherence, and Participation  
The implementation of Education 5.0 is further affected by major challenges in governance, policy coherence,  
and stakeholder participation. Findings show enduring issues between policy intent and actual realities,  
observable in areas such as curriculum reform, language policy, gender integration, and continuous assessment  
(Chigwida et al., 2025; Sithole, 2021; Sithole et al., 2021). These policies often suffer from internal issues, a  
lack of maintained financing, and poor monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, leading to fragmented and  
unsustainable outcomes (Mashayamombe & van den Berg, 2024). This lack of coherence worsens the systemic  
and integrated approach needed by Education 5.0.  
Page 5876  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Curriculum theory, as analyzed by scholars like Kliebard, point out that curriculum interests are usually about  
power and whose knowledge is of most worth. In this context, a main problem has been the marginalization of  
main stakeholders, particularly teachers and local communities, in the design and execution of reforms  
(Siambombe, 2016; Garira et al., 2020). This dictates driven approach, which limited participatory governance,  
fosters resistance and a sense of ownership deficit among those eventually responsible for implementing the  
policy. When implementers participate in decision making, policy fidelity and enthusiasm inevitably wane.  
Additionally, the practicability of Education 5.0 is command by the wide economic and policy environment.  
Findings points that factors such as low economic freedom and poor social sustainability create a macro-  
environment that is not favourable to the ambitious, self-sufficient goals of Education 5.0 (Mavodyo et al., 2025;  
Dudzai, 2018; Muzvidziwa, 2010). Policy implementation framework highlighted that outer environmental  
factors heavily impact outcomes. Consequently, for Education 5.0 to exist, it must be empowered within a  
coherent national strategy that in line with educational policy with wider economic and social sustainability  
goals, generating a synergistic ecosystem rather than treating education as a secluded reform sector.  
Strategic Opportunities and Enabling Strategies  
Despite of the challenges, Education 5.0 offers excellent strategic opportunities for national development.  
Educators understood it as a more suitable and transformative model than its predecessor, Education 3.0, with  
the ability to directly contribute to national development agendas and minimize poverty (Muzira et al., 2020;  
Mpofu, 2024; Mabhanda & Mabwe, 2023). This positive view is a valuable asset, providing a foundation of  
goodwill and encouragement upon which to build. The framework’s emphasis on problem-solving and  
community engagement aligns it precisely with national goals such as Vision 2030, aligning education as a key  
driver of socio-economic transformation instead of being a passive observer.  
To maximize this potential, specific supporting strategies must be put in place. Innovation hubs, though presently  
under-resourced, can be revived through strategic public-private partnerships (PPPs) and the adoption of sharing  
economy models (Rumbidzai Muzira & Bondai, 2020; Awang et al., 2020). Such partnership can give a much-  
needed capital, skills, and market linkages, making enabling environments for entrepreneurship, industrialization,  
and enhanced international competitiveness. However, integrating principles of education management and  
leadership, as advocated in Society 5.0 literature, can improve these centers as drivers of innovation (Benrachou,  
2024; Implementation of Education 5.0 in developed and developing countries, 2023).  
Eventually, the future success of Education 5.0 depends on its integration with socially sustainable and inclusive  
development operations. The areas of social work and social policy provide a significant insight, improving that  
technological and industrial advancement must be partner with planned efforts to reduce poverty and inequality  
(Dudzai, 2018; Tendengu, 2024). By intentionally aligning Education 5.0 with these socially sustainable  
priorities, the model can achieve its promise of inclusive development (Mavodyo et al., 2025). This ascertain  
that the endeavor of innovation and industrialization directly serves the wider societal mission of improving  
communities and attaining equitable, sustainable development as envisioned in national strategic documents.  
DISCUSSIONS  
The systematic review made, was to examine the strategies and challenges surrounding the implementation of  
Education 5.0 in Zimbabwe. The findings reveal a similar narrative: while the policy is generally seen as a  
success, development-centered, and conceptually sound transformation, its successfulness is seriously hindered  
by a complex interplay of structural, human, and governance-related contributions. Interpreted through systems  
theory, policy implementation theory, and innovation models such as TPCK and Diffusion of Innovations, the  
study points that Education 5.0 currently works within an implementation environment that is dominantly out of  
alignment with its ambitious goals. The four outlined themes highlighted an integrated discussion for why the  
policy lingers more aspirational than operational and point toward possibility pathways for its revitalization.  
Page 5877  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Structural and Resource Constraints: The Foundation of Weak Inputs  
The structural and resource limitations outlined that Education 5.0 has been layered onto a system whose key  
"inputs" are insufficient. Proves of underdeveloped innovation hubs, underfunded industrial parks, poor digital  
infrastructure, and weak records management systems highlighted that the physical and technological bedrock  
demands for innovation and industrialization is lacking (Muzira et al., 2020; Mashayamombe & van den Berg,  
2024; Tsvuura, 2022). From a systems theory viewpoint, such lack of enough inputs inevitably minimizes the  
production of preferred outputs, namely problem-solving graduates, start-ups, and industry-prepared innovations.  
This review strengthens and extends existing work on curriculum reforms and embracing ICT in Zimbabwe,  
indicating that the same historical resource deficits that undermined previous initiatives are still critically  
constraining Education 5.0. With no deliberate and key reconfiguration of the financial and physical base of  
higher education, this transformative policy risks remaining a mainly rhetorical commitment.  
Human Capacity and Knowledge Leadership: The People-Driven Implementation Gap  
A policy is only as impactful as the people who enact it. The human capacity, knowledge, and leadership explains  
that while educators and administrators’ regards Education 5.0 constructively, they feel seriously lack of  
readiness, highlighting that the inadequate training, shortages of digital literacy, and a lack of continuous  
professional development as the hinderances (Muzira et al., 2020; Sithole et al., 2021; Mabika & Maireva, 2023).  
This lack of skills issues goes beyond teaching members to key support staff such as records managers, sign  
language experts, and gender specialists thereby undermining inclusive and innovation-oriented practice  
(Tsvuura, 2022; Mapungwana et al., 2025; Chidarikire et al., 2021). This chain coordinates exactly with the  
TPCK framework and Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations theory, which states that technology-rich reforms  
demand an advanced blend of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge, as well as a serious mass of  
confident and skilled early adopters. The finding adds a significant dimension by identifying "knowledge  
leadership" as a missing link (Barker, 2023; Benrachou, 2024). Without leadership which intentionally build,  
manage, and orchestrate institutional knowledge systems, the vision of Education 5.0 remains improperly  
translated into daily experiences. Hence, commitment in human capital must be settled with as a main agent of  
implementation, not a secondary activity.  
Governance, Coherence, and Participation: The Political and Institutional Dimensions  
The challenges of implementation are not just technical but are seriously linked with political and institutional  
dynamics. The governance and policy coherence ideas indicates that implementation hurdles are induced by  
recurrent patterns of fast-tracked curriculum roll-outs, poor monitoring and evaluation, unreliable funding, and,  
critically, lack meaningful stakeholder participations (Chigwida et al., 2025; Mashayamombe & van den Berg,  
2024; Garira et al., 2020). Aligned with curriculum theory, these reviews demonstrate how top-down decision-  
making and struggles over "whose knowledge counts" systematically excluded teachers and communities from  
reform processes (Siambombe, 2016). Additionally, the finding links the future of Education 5.0 to broader  
macro-economic and policy practices, such as low economic freedom and vulnerable social sustainability  
(Mavodyo et al., 2025; Dudzai, 2018). This multi-layered view adds to the literature by framing Education 5.0  
not as an isolated intervention, but as part of a broader and sometimes differences, constellation of reforms and  
economic strategies. Its success is therefore contingent on being included within coherent, participatory  
governance structures that align education, economic, and social policies.  
Strategic Opportunities: Reconceptualizing Education 5.0 as a Lever for Inclusive Development  
Despite the severe hurdles, the finding identifies key strategic opportunities that can reconfigure Education 5.0  
as a practical engine for transformation. The idea of supporting strategies points out that motivating perceptions  
among educators, the policy's alignment with national Vision 2030, and its convergence with global Society 5.0  
discourses provide a positive normative and strategic foundation (Muzira et al., 2020; Barker, 2023; Benrachou,  
2024). The finding goes beyond cataloguing challenges to recognized concrete, actionable solutions. These  
include revitalizing innovation centers through strong public-private cooperation and sharing-economy  
frameworks, institutionalizing knowledge management and leadership within institutions of higher learning, and  
explicitly linking technological advancement to socially sustainable strategies that minimize poverty reduction,  
Page 5878  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
community empowerment, and inclusive development (Dudzai, 2018; Tendengu, 2024; Mavodyo et al., 2025).  
In this regard, the discussion reframes Education 5.0 not simply as a pedagogical change, but as a possible lever  
for socially inclusive industrial and economic development.  
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS  
Conclusion  
To put it up, this systematic review reveals that the key challenge for Education 5.0 in Zimbabwe is not a lack  
of vision but a serious systemic mismatch. The policy's aspiring goals of promoting innovation, industrialization,  
and social reforms are being pursued within an environment that is realistically underprepared. The data  
combined establishes a uniform pattern where profound structural and resource constraints, major gaps in human  
capacity and knowledge leadership, and disconnected governance structures jointly provide an implementation  
strategy that is misaligned with the transformation's needs. This mismatch means that, in spite of its conceptual  
reliabilities and the broad wishes of educators, Education 5.0 maneuvers in a context where the essential inputs,  
financial, infrastructural, digital, and human are inadequate to developed the anticipated outputs of a transformed,  
industrious higher education sector. The core conclusion, consequently, is that the policy's aspirational objectives  
are presently hindered by the very system put in place to deliver them, altering a potentially transformative  
program into a largely rhetorical exercise without a significant reconfiguration of its enabling environments.  
Implications  
The results of these findings highlighted a substantial theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, the  
findings confirm the utility of using an integrated theoretical lens-combining systems theory, policy application  
frameworks, and innovation adoption models to analyze complex educational reforms. It manifests that a siloed  
review is not enough; the structural inputs cannot be disjoint from the human capacity and governance methods.  
For stakeholders and policymakers, the implications are weakened clear: isolated interventions are likely to fail.  
Putting resources in an innovation hub short of parallel, substantial investment in educator training and digital  
knowledge will not give results. Likewise, mandating curriculum reformations without crafting participatory  
governance mechanisms that allowed educators and industry will increase resistance and ownership challenges.  
The practical imperative is for a synchronized, multi-pronged approach that concurrently to solve financing,  
infrastructure, professional development, and policy coherence, recognizing that these elements are inextricably  
connected in the implementation pattern.  
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE  
To reduce the identified implementation gap, this finding suggests a set of interrelated recommendations. For  
Policymakers: There is a need to improve commitment to coherent, future funding and a governance change  
from top-down command to participatory co-creation. This consists of protecting the funds for Education 5.0  
infrastructure, creating a systematic and independent monitoring and evaluation frameworks, and officially  
incorporating stakeholder feedback from academics, industry, and communities into the policy cycle. For  
University Administrators and Leaders: The main reform must be on structuring human capital and promotion  
of knowledge leadership. This comprises developing strategic plans for indefinite professional development,  
incentivizing modernization in teaching and research, and proactively connecting with the non-government  
sector through structured partnerships and joint projects. Leaders must promote a habit of innovation and equity  
in their institutions. For Educators and Practitioners: The call is for proactive engagement with the values of  
Education 5.0, pursuing available professional developed opportunities, forming a society of practice to share  
knowledge, and trialing with pedagogical innovations that bring into line teaching and research with community  
problem-solving, even within present constraints.  
Implications for Future Research  
This study openly points to many critical opportunities for future research. firstly, there is a pressing demand for  
empirical, institution-level qualitative studies that go beyond identifying challenges to document actual  
implementation strategies. The finding should examine how specific universities and colleges are copping, the  
Page 5879  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
nature of the "workarounds" they create, and the local elements that are relatively success or failure. Secondly,  
comparative study across various developing nations applying similar "5.0" or high-tech education reforms is  
necessary. Such researches would assistance to isolate the influence of Zimbabwe's unique political and  
economic context from challenges communal across the Global South, thereby building transferable knowledge  
around the enablers and challenges to educational transformation in related settings. Lastly, longitudinal research  
is needed to trajectory the future impact of Education 5.0 on graduate outcomes, modernization ecosystems, and  
community development, providing a much-needed data base to measure the decisive return on this aspiring  
policy investment.  
REFERENCE  
1. Barker, R. (2023). The role of knowledge leaders to enhance organizational performance through Society  
5.0. Regional  
134. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/rjikm/article/view/243430  
2. Benrachou, N. (2024). The sharing economy as a Model 5.0 for developing an innovative strategy of  
universities. Journal of North African Economies, 19(31), 85–  
94. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jnae/article/view/265056  
Journal  
of  
Information  
and  
Knowledge  
Management,  
7(1),  
118–  
3. Chidarikire, M., Muza, C., & Beans, H. (2021). Integration of gender equality and language diversity in  
Zimbabwe teacher education curriculum. East African Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 2(2),  
231–238. https://doi.org/10.4314/eajess.v2i2  
4. Chigwida, H., Madondo, M. M., & Chitate, H. (2025). Reading the African school curriculum as an  
historical text: Educational contexts, policies and practices in Zimbabwe. Yesterday and Today, 33(1),  
140–167. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/yt/article/view/303221  
5. Dudzai, C. (2018). The value of social sustainability policies to poverty reduction in Zimbabwe: A social  
work perspective. African Journal of Social Work, 8(2), 71–77. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajsw.v8i2  
6. Fazlollahtabar, H. (2025). Industry 5.0 paradigm transformation adoption in developing countries: An  
analytical game theoretic model. Scientific Reports, 15, 31463. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-  
16089-z  
7. Garira, E., Howie, S., & Plomp, T. (2020). An analysis of quality of education and its evaluation: A case  
of  
39(2). https://doi.org/10.4314/saje.v39i2  
8. Holzinger, A., Schweier, J., Gollob, C., et al. (2024). From Industry 5.0 to Forestry 5.0: Bridging the gap  
with human-centered artificial intelligence. Current Forestry Reports, 10, 442–  
455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-024-00231-7  
9. Macrae, A., Lopes, R. N., Allil, R. C. de B., et al. (2025). Aerobiology, post COVID-19, within the  
emerging Industrial Revolution 5.0 and Society 5.0. Discover Environment, 3,  
78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44274-025-00270-2  
Zimbabwean  
primary  
schools. South  
African  
Journal  
of  
Education,  
10. Mapungwana, M. C., Matsilure-Cheure, M., Chisiri, B., Mutongoreni, N. A., Chikozho, M., Mutumwa,  
A., Mhini, D., Ranganayi, C., Hazvinandava, M., & Manhanga, S. (2025). Recognition of deaf students  
in promoting TVET access: Inclusion of sign language in higher education. International Journal of  
Studies in Inclusive Education, 2(2), 22–30. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ijsie/article/view/308535  
11. Mashayamombe, E., & van den Berg, G. (2024). Insights into the implementation of curriculum reforms  
in Zimbabwe: Heritage Studies and History in Mutare district secondary schools. Yesterday and Today,  
32(1), 76–99. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/yt/article/view/284358  
12. Mavodyo, E., Zimunya, I., Kanyonganise, L. K., Mhonda, B. W., Musikambesa, N. F., & Neshiri, G.  
(2025). Building a prosperous future: Integrating economic freedom into Zimbabwe’s development  
policies. PanAfrican  
Journal  
of  
Governance  
and  
Development,  
6(2),  
96–  
127. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/pajgd/article/view/304708  
13. Mupupuni, G. (2025). Developing English language writing skills using the process model in  
Zimbabwean schools. Journal of Research Innovation and Implications in Education, 8(3), 268–  
278. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jriie/article/view/294850  
14. Muzira, D. R., & Bondai, B. M. (2020). Perception of educators towards the adoption of Education 5.0:  
A case of a state university in Zimbabwe. East African Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 1(2),  
43–53. https://doi.org/10.4314/eajess.v1i2  
Page 5880  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
15. Muzvidziwa, I. (2010). The resolution of poverty and cultural marginalisation in Zimbabwe through a  
dynamic  
educational  
system. Lwati:  
A
Journal  
of  
Contemporary  
Research,  
7(1). https://doi.org/10.4314/lwati.v7i1.57464  
16. Nicoletti, B. (2025). Logistics 5.0. In Artificial intelligence for logistics 5.0 (pp. xx–xx). Palgrave  
Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-94046-0_2  
17. Shabur, M., Shahriar, A., & Ara, M. A. (2025). From automation to collaboration: Exploring the impact  
of  
Industry  
5.0  
on  
sustainable  
manufacturing. Discover  
Sustainability,  
6,  
341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01201-0  
18. Siambombe, A. (2016). Rural communities and policy participation: The case of economic policies in  
Zimbabwe. African Journal of Social Work, 5(2), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajsw.v5i2  
19. Sithole, N. (2021). Reconfiguring Zimbabwe’s language policy: The case of micro-level policy  
appropriation at selected teachers’ colleges. Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research, 33(1–2), 40–  
62. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/zjer/article/view/216055  
20. Sithole, S., Dziwa, D. D., & Matsvange, M. (2021). Teachers’ perception on the challenges of continuous  
assessment implementation between 2017 and 2018 in Zimbabwean primary and secondary schools. East  
African Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 2(2), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.4314/eajess.v2i2  
21. Telukdarie, A. (Ed.). (2026). Society 5.0: People-centered technologies for sustainable community  
development. https://link.springer.com/book/9783032126139  
22. Tendengu, T. P. (2024). The origins of social and economic development in Zimbabwe: Lessons for  
social work education and training. People Centred – The Journal of Development Administration, 9(1),  
11–16. https://doi.org/10.4314/jda.v9i1.2  
23. Tsvuura, G. (2022). Knowledge and skills for managing digital records at selected state universities in  
Zimbabwe. Journal  
of  
the  
South  
African  
Society  
of  
Archivists,  
55,  
110–  
123. https://doi.org/10.4314/jsasa.v55i.8  
24. Tsvuura, G., Mbawuya, K. D., & Ngulube, P. (2021). Creation and storage of records in the cloud by  
Zimbabwe Open University. ESARBICA Journal, 40, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.4314/esarjo.v40i.1  
25. Whitehead, J., Mohamed Hashim, M. A., Tlemsani, I., et al. (2025). Strategic Leadership 5.0: Reality or  
illusion? Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-025-02785-8  
Page 5881  
www.rsisinternational.org