Transformation agenda remains at the heart of debates in South African higher education (Badat & Sayed 2014; Blignaut 2020; Leibowitz & Bozalek 2016; Maistry 2021). Subsequently, there is a call for transformative pedagogies that are culturally responsive and cognisant of social justice issues in higher education (Blignaut & Koopman 2020). In the meantime, Blignaut (2020:1) is concerned about the slow pace of transformation in South African higher education. There is no complete transformation in higher education without redressing ways of enacting the curriculum and without re-centering social justice issues such as equal learning opportunities, fair participation and language equity (Leibowitz & Bozalek 2016; Maistry 2021). Higher education pedagogical practices in South Africa continue to draw from the Western Eurocentric views, which undermine and dismiss indigenous philosophies such as Ubuntu as false assumptions and a simple illegitimate African thinking (Letseka 2014:334). Such negative assumptions about African indigenous knowledge systems result in students from African cultures feeling unwelcomed and alienated in higher education (Ndlovu-Gatsheni 2018:8). In fact, Ndlovu-Gatsheni refers to this rejection of knowledge that African students bring to higher education as ‘epistemic violence’. Epistemic violence is considered as ‘violence at the level of curriculum, including pedagogies, perpetrated by untransformed and alienating higher education landscape’. Heleta (2016:48) concurred that epistemic violence is an unacceptable form of oppression and marginalisation directed at indigenous students to make them feel inferior and undeserving of higher education.

In response to ‘epistemic violence’ in higher education Chilisa (2016) called for ‘epistemic freedom’, which departs from social justice and human rights perspectives. Chilisa (2012) asserted that ‘epistemic freedom’ is not an event, but a process that involves enactment of decolonising research and pedagogical methodologies as means of achieving ‘epistemic freedom’ by formerly colonised people, women and indigenous people whose knowledge systems remain rejected and marginalised. In similar ways, Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) defined ‘epistemic freedom’ in the following way:

Echoing Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) on the importance of critical consciousness about issues of equality and social justice in education are Blignaut and Koopman (2020:82) who argued that issues of social justice in education cannot be swiped under the carpet, especially amongst teacher educators as they play an important role enacting the curriculum. In fact, Blignaut and Koopman (2020) emphasised that:

It is upon these debates and insights by Blignaut and Koopman (2020) and Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) that other South African scholars (Heleta 2016; Le Grange et al. 2020; Maistry 2021) call for urgent transformations in South African higher education that will put an end to epistemic injustices that devalue indigenous knowledge systems such as Ubuntu whilst promoting scientific knowledge. In this article, we argue that the discrimination and marginalisation of indigenous knowledge systems such as Ubuntu in higher education and the persistent preference of Western scientific knowledge systems remain a throbbing issue, especially for people from indigenous knowledge systems. We therefore join transformational scholars such as Maistry (2021) and Le Grange et al. (2020) in their call for socially just higher education, especially in South Africa.

In defence of Ubuntu philosophy in education as a social issue, Ramose (ed. 2002) proposed that despite Ubuntu philosophy being a significant and a powerful education instrument that has been used for many centuries by indigenous African communities to educate, guide and maintain positive human interactions and relationships amongst African indigenous people, it has been excluded and oppressed in formal educational arenas in favour of Western philosophies. Ramose (ed. 2002) contended that such rejection of Ubuntu philosophy has prevented this indigenous knowledge from being effectively transferred to the next generations. As a result, Ramose (ed. 2002) thought that educational contexts such as universities are the most suitable for the restoration of Ubuntu philosophy to its rightful position: that of being at the centre of preserving African values amongst young people. Ukpokodu (2016) holds similar thoughts, he asserts that it is through Ubuntu pedagogy that Ubuntu philosophy can be accorded an honourable and fair recognition. Besides, Metz (2011) observed that Ubuntu philosophy represents social justice in the sense that it embraces social values of inclusion, participation and respect for all and as a pedagogical tool, it has a potential to preserve indigenous knowledge systems and practices amongst students and restore their identities (Le Grange 2011).

In consideration of the arguments raised by scholars (Le Grange 2011; ed. Ramose 2002; Ukpokodu 2016) on the connections between Ubuntu philosophy and social justice, this article builds on such debates to advance justifications for the rethinking of teaching and learning in higher education from Ubuntu pedagogical perspective. We argue that Ubuntu philosophy, which is an indigenous knowledge system and way of life for African people, when embodied with esteem and dignity it deserves, has the potential not only of restoring indigenous values, heritage and cultures amongst students, but also Ubuntu philosophy has a capacity to promote values of co-existence and social cohesion amongst students from diverse backgrounds.

It has an ability to promote values of social justice such as inclusivity and fair participation amongst students (Letseka 2014:547). We suggest that an understanding of Ubuntu philosophy and social justice is essential for appropriate implementation. In the following section, we thus begin by unpacking, first, the concept of Ubuntu philosophy and its intrinsic values and principles. We then move to the concept of social justice and we attempt to position it within the context of higher education, where we argue, it belongs. We draw from Mbigi’s (1997) Collective Fingers Theory and Social Justice Theory (Fraser 2008) to propose for Ubuntu pedagogy, which draws from the indigenous Ubuntu philosophy, as a transformative approach that can bring about co-existence, respect, inclusion and social justice in higher education classrooms. Later in this article, we suggest practical guidelines for possible and effective implementation of Ubuntu pedagogy in diverse higher education classrooms.

Different African philosophers and scholars have grappled with the notions and constructions of Ubuntu philosophy (Broodryk 2005; Le Grange 2011; Letseka 2014; Metz 2014; Mbigi 1997). Firstly, they all agree that it is difficult to translate the concept of Ubuntu into English since there is no equivalent meaning. These scholars also concur that during translation into English the concept of Ubuntu loses its essence and true meaning. Even though the term ‘ubuntu’ is mostly known to come from South African Nguni languages (isiZulu, isiXhosa, isiNdebele, isiSwati), it exists in different lexes across various Bantu languages of sub-Saharan Africa. In Chewa language of Zambia, the term ‘ubuntu’ is referred to as Umunthu. In Yao language, Malawi, it is known as Umundu. Amongst Tsonga speakers in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Swaziland, they refer to it as Bunhu. In Shona language of Zimbabwe, it is known as Unhu, whilst Venda speakers in South Africa call it Vhutu. Nguni languages refer to it as Ubuntu (Letseka 2014; Mbigi 1997). Now, how do all these different African communities understand Ubuntu?

Amongst South African philosophers, Ubuntu refers to ancient African worldviews associated with humanness or being humane (ed. Letseka 2000; Metz 2014). In explaining ‘humanness’ or being human(e), Johnstone (1981) in Letseka (ed. 2000) expounded that:

Le Grange (2011) argued that it is difficult to define Ubuntu in a standard form as ‘the meaning is interwoven in the cultural practices and lived experiences of African peoples’ (p. 71). Meanwhile, Ramose (ed. 2002:26) stressed that humanity is ‘to be a human being and one’s humanity is affirmed by recognising the humanity of others and, on that basis, establish humane relations with them’, hence, a Nguni axiom ‘umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu’ (I am because you are, you are because I am). At the same time, Mbigi (1997) in his Collective Fingers Theory emphasised that Ubuntu philosophy is underpinned by social and human values of togetherness, solidarity, compassion and interdependence. All these constructions of Ubuntu philosophy encapsulate social justice principles of respect for individuality ‘umuntu’ (a person) and his belonging amongst other people ‘abantu’ (Chilisa 2012; Sibanda 2019). Furthermore, Chilisa (2012) paid more attention to the Ubuntu notions of ‘I/We’ which are more acceptive of interdependence, as opposed to the Eurocentric ‘I/You’ relationships, which assert individualism.

In furthering the conceptions of Ubuntu axiom ‘umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu’ Mbigi (1997) observed that:

What Mbigi (1997) is arguing for, is that in African cultures an individual is not complete without the group and the group is not privileged over the individual. Equity is fundamental to Ubuntu. In his Ubuntu theoretical work, Collective Fingers Theory, Mbigi (1997) built on social justice principles of equity amongst members of the social groups. This is how Mbigi (1997) related his Ubuntu theory to social justice:

It goes that survival was an essential aspect of indigenous communities as it enabled them to get through harsh environmental conditions, and to effectively do that, they relied on each other. Despite their differences, they needed one another for existence. Solidarity spirit was also fundamental for working together and cooperatively to achieve a common goal. The same goes for compassion that was also important to generate a feeling of belonging and interconnectedness amongst African communities. The Collective Fingers Theory implies that even though there was little formal education for indigenous people centuries ago, Ubuntu philosophy provided traditional education for indigenous people whereby they were socialised into respecting one another, being responsible for themselves and towards others and to co-exist. Metz (2011) argued it is relatively impossible to bypass issues of social justice when addressing matters of Ubuntu. Therefore, in the following section we intersect Ubuntu and social justice.

Even though there is limited research that looks at the intersection of Ubuntu philosophy and social justice in South African higher education, scholars such as Leibowitz and Bozalek (2016) have explored social justice in the context of scholarship of teaching and learning in South African higher education. Blignaut (2020), on the other hand, continued to advocate for social justice in the South African schooling system as he believes that curriculum that is anchored on social justice is likely to cultivate compassionate citizens who have enthusiasm for sense of justice and creation of equal opportunities for all. Another important work on social justice and curriculum comes from Maistry (2021) who recently theorised curriculum in South African higher education from the social justice framework. Elsewhere, scholars (Chilisa 2016; Sibanda 2019) have also attempted to explore Ubuntu theory and social justice in global contexts such as Zimbabwe. In this study, we largely draw from these recent works on social justice and Ubuntu philosophy to bring together these two frameworks in the context of South African higher education. We argue that there is a compelling connection between Ubuntu and social justice and that these two terms do not compete, but they harmonise each other. To base our argument, we draw from the notions provided by Sibanda (2019) who contended that Ubuntu embodies the essence of humanity in values such as respect, dignity, equity and interdependence. In that way, ‘Social justice is part and parcel of what it means to be human’ (Sibanda 2019:76).

Like Ubuntu philosophy, social justice is more concerned with recognition and acceptance of shared values and resources amongst community members (Metz 2011). Social justice attests to and speaks of the acceptable and shared values of those who call themselves ‘abantu’ (people). This implies values of togetherness, communalism and respect amongst those who share similar values. Both Ubuntu and social justice are shaped by positive human relations, how people in a particular context accept and negotiate values for their togetherness (Metz 2011). The values of Ubuntu embrace principles of social justice such as equality (promotes equal opportunities), equity (encourages interdependence) and fairness (brings about equal sharing of resources such that all members survive). Where there is no equal recognition and respect, principles of Ubuntu philosophy are compromised (Metz 2011).

In the same way that Ubuntu thrives on communalism and co-existence, Fraser (2008) in her Social Justice theory, argued that social justice advances notions of equal participation and fair distribution of resources amongst members in a social context. Expanding on the connections between Ubuntu and social justice, Sibanda (2019) contended that:

From these constructions, we understand that living in a socially just, respectful and harmonious environment is central to Ubuntu. This is possible when an individual respects himself and others. That also goes for respecting the rights and ideas of others, which are the desired principles of social justice. There are many ways in which Ubuntu philosophy resonates with social justice. As a result of the limited number of words for this article, we highlighted a few. Having defended connections between Ubuntu philosophy and social justice, we now turn our focus to the pedagogical aspects of Ubuntu, which Ukpokodu (2016) conceptualised as Ubuntu pedagogy. We situate Ubuntu pedagogy within the context of social justice and higher education.

South Africa has a long history of racial oppression, segregation and social inequalities as a result of apartheid. After 28 years of democracy, higher education is still grappling with issues of socially just higher education (Leibowitz & Bozalek 2016) and transformative pedagogies (Badat & Sayed 2014). It has been noticed that there is little cooperation, co-existence and social cohesion amongst students from diverse cultural backgrounds in South African higher education (Goduka 2000).

Such lack of social cohesion, cooperation and co-existence amongst students from diverse social backgrounds mainly stem from the fact that South Africa during apartheid was divided according to racial and cultural lines. Before 1994, different racial groups were confined into separated areas and attended different schools. Consciously or otherwise, students bring along these social divisions and inequalities when they join universities. One group of students, mainly African students, and to some extent, Indians and mixed race, come from a background of oppression, marginalisation, limited opportunities and exclusion whilst the other group, white students, come from a privileged background of opportunities and higher status in society (Badat & Sayed 2014). Suddenly, all these students come together in higher education and they are expected to harmoniously build relations and live happily. It is not easy to achieve social cohesion without any interventions geared towards promoting social co-existence amongst students from diverse backgrounds. Ubuntu pedagogy thus has a potential to promote togetherness, coexistence, respect and cooperation amongst students. Ukpokodu (2016) clarified this in the following way:

From the above Ukpokodu (2016) discussion it emerges that the main tenet of Ubuntu pedagogy is that all students, regardless of the racial, educational, economic and linguistic backgrounds and sexual orientations, all have potential to excel in their learning if their humanity is positioned at the forefront of their learning processes. In furthering his defence of Ubuntu pedagogy, Ukpokodu (2016) asserted that:

In this way, Ukpokodu (2016) affirmed Ubuntu pedagogy values equity, dignity, compassion and respect of all students in the classroom. It has a potential to bring together students such that they perceive each other as significant others who bring unique backgrounds, experiences and prior knowledge to build on towards the development of new knowledge and create meaningful learning spaces. In that way, all students perceive each other as equal partners and begin to understand that they need each other for effective learning. One is not complete without the other. Hence, the essence of Ubuntu pedagogy lies in the recognition of equal partnerships and co-existence between the teachers and students as co-creators of knowledge. Thus, the Ubuntu maxim ‘umuntu ungumuntu ngabantu’ (a person is a person through other people) comes into full blossom in the classroom (Letseka 2014).

Ukpokodu (2016) argued that teachers embracing Ubuntu pedagogy provide all students, irrespective of their cultural, linguistic, social class, religion and sexual orientations with equal opportunities to develop and to exercise their full capacities. At the intersection of Ubuntu pedagogy and social justice, all students are treated with dignity and respect regardless of their backgrounds. The value of Ubun tu pedagogy is to build positive relationships between diverse students and break down the barriers of diversity within the classroom settings (Ukpokodu 2016). These are the goals of social justice in education (Broodryk 2005). Broodryk (2005) observed that Ubuntu encompasses values of social justice and promotes relationships between learners breaking down barriers and stereotypes with regard to race, gender, ability, language and culture. For teachers in higher education to fully practice social justice, they should first be influenced by Ubuntu values. Ubuntu, therefore, can be regarded as a weapon that can be used by teachers to challenge the inequity and injustices.

When higher education teachers understand and embrace Ubuntu it is likely that Ubuntu values can empower them to combat exclusion and employ pedagogies that aim to reach all students in the classrooms. Inclusive pedagogies thrive on the connectedness between students alone and between their teachers, which all provide a positive learning environment. This, in turn, positively influences students’ self-worth, self-belief and achievement. Successful learning depends on these networks of support. Inclusive education is the essence of Ubuntu – ‘that we live in a delicate web of interconnectedness and interdependence with each other, I am because we are’ (ed. Phasha 2016). Like Ubuntu, inclusive pedagogies embrace equal participation, cooperation and solidarity amongst students and between students and teachers. In this way, all learners feel a sense of belonging and acceptance.

Ubuntu pedagogy does not only encourage development of all students as individuals, but it also promotes active collaboration between students from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds who bring different characteristics and learning needs into the classrooms. In this way, Ubuntu pedagogy affirms diversity as an ordinary aspect of development in a higher education classroom. Ubuntu pedagogy rejects exclusion, marginalisation and inequality in the teaching and learning spaces (ed. Phasha 2016). These notions of Ubuntu pedagogy further solidify the connections between Ubuntu and social justices into the learning environments. There is limited information, especially in South Africa, on the pedagogies that depart from an African indigenous knowledge systems framework such as Ubuntu pedagogy within the realm of social justice. This study seeks to fill the existing gap. We further provide, in the following section, guidelines for possible implementation of Ubuntu pedagogy in diverse higher education contexts, especially in South Africa.

Ubuntu pedagogy is anchored by six principles that underpin and guide its possible and effective implementation as a transformative and socially just pedagogical strategy in higher education settings: recognition of self and others, building positive relationships, getting students to work cooperatively, nurturing of the students’ minds, teaching from a position of love and care and utilising students’ linguistic resources to promote meaningful learning (Ukpokodu 2016).

In this article we argued that many years after democracy in South Africa, higher education has not transformed. Pedagogical practices, by and large, still draw from the Western philosophies and world views, despite majority of students in higher education being students from African cultures. We join Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) in declaring this continuous oppression and neglect of belief systems and values that African students bring to higher education as ‘epistemic violence’. We also join scholars (Blignaut 2020; Chilisa 2016; Maistry 2021) in their urgent call for ‘epistemic freedom’ through decolonial and transformative pedagogies. Drawing from Mbigi (1997) Collective Fingers Theory and Social Justice Theory (Fraser 2009) we proposed for Ubuntu pedagogy as an alternative teaching method that draws from indigenous Ubuntu philosophical values. We argued that Ubuntu pedagogy, when embraced with understanding and dignity it deserves, has the potential not only of initiating and reconnecting students with their values and cultures but it also has a capacity to cultivate social justice values of inclusion, recognition of self and others and activate participation. We have shown how Ubuntu can foster understanding of self and others amongst learners, build positive relationships, encourage cooperation and respect amongst learners, inspire teachers to teach from a position of love and care and promote inclusion and social justice for all students and, thus, become a transformative pedagogical method for post-apartheid higher education. We hope to make contributions to ongoing debates on transformative pedagogies, decolonisation and social justice in higher education.