An interdisciplinary approach to reconstruct the politics of process underlying student unrest in African universities

Abstract

From time immemorial, universities in Africa have faced various social crises, particularly student unrest, which significantly obstruct the aims and objectives of these institutions. The politics of the process, involving policy formulation, management styles, and organisational culture, is often implicated in these crises, exacerbating the unrest. The focus of the study was to deconstruct the politics of the process allegedly responsible for student unrest in African universities. Three theories underpin this study: Decoloniality, which explores the social aspects of university unrest and the remnants of colonial and militaristic influences; Environmental Determinism, which examines the geographical and cultural factors affecting student activism and university responses; and Ubuntu, which addresses the psychological impacts of unrest and promotes a philosophy of unity, humanity, and mutual respect. The study is situated within the transformative paradigm, employing a qualitative research approach and a participatory research design to effectively implement the investigation. The participants for the study were selected from one university in Nigeria and South Africa using a convenient sampling technique. The study involved 28 participants, including university authorities, conflict management committee members, student leaders, lecturers, security personnel, heads of counselling centres, and community leaders. Data collection was conducted through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and unstructured interviews. The data analysis was carried out using Socio-thematic Analysis (StA), which combines thematic analysis and conversational analysis to interpret the social interactions and power differentials among participants. The study is presented in the form of articles; hence, the findings are based on the three articles. The first article found that adopting democratic and facilitative leadership styles enhances the resolution of student conflicts by involving all stakeholders in the decision-making process, fostering a sense of inclusion and respect. This approach addresses the root causes of unrest and promotes long-term stability and positive change on campus. The second article reveals that effective crisis management in universities involves a combination of administrative policies, conflict resolution committees, and security measures, with a focus on strategic planning and collaboration to address underlying causes of unrest. However, the reliance on reactive security measures and lack of university-community collaboration often exacerbates tensions and misses opportunities for sustainable conflict resolution. The last article showed that inadequate funding, overcrowding, ineffective conflict resolution mechanisms, academic pressures, and political interference significantly hinder the management of student unrest in universities. Improving communication, promoting university autonomy, effective resource allocation, conflict resolution training, curriculum revamping, increased funding, community engagement, and mental health support are essential solutions to these challenges. In conclusion, the study successfully examined the politics of the process and its impact on university productivity, highlighting the importance of democratic and facilitative leadership in addressing student unrest. It found that management styles, decision-making processes, and organisational values are crucial for creating inclusive environments that mitigate unrest. The investigation into crisis management in South Africa and Nigeria revealed the need for proactive strategies, community engagement, and tailored approaches to address historical and geographical contexts. Recommendations include improving communication, resource allocation, mental health support, and conflict resolution training to foster a supportive and stable university environment.