Staff Reporter
Education experts have strongly condemned Professor Jonathan Moyo’s recent critique of Zimbabwe’s universities, describing his characterization of the institutions as “good-for-nothing” as baseless and as dismissive of the complex realities facing the country's higher education system.
Moyo's comments, made following the publication of university rankings, fail to consider the ongoing issue of brain drain that significantly affects the nation’s academic landscape, according to Professor Thandiwe Mutambara, an education analyst.
“The migration of skilled professionals from Zimbabwe is a testament to the high calibre of our graduates. Our universities—such as the University of Zimbabwe, the National University of Science and Technology (NUST), and Midlands State University—are producing professionals who are in demand globally. To call them ‘useless’ is to ignore their substantial contributions to advanced economies worldwide,” she argued.
Professor Mutambara highlighted that Zimbabwean graduates continue to fill critical roles in medicine, engineering, information technology, and education sectors in countries across Europe and other global powers.
“If these institutions were truly ‘good-for-nothing,’ their graduates wouldn’t be absorbed into these advanced economies with such consistency,” she added.
Another expert, Dr. Tawanda Nyoni, emphasized the transformative potential of the Education 5.0 model that is currently being implemented by the Zimbabwean government.
“Professor Moyo’s critique is not only dismissive but also fails to acknowledge the significant strides being made under Education 5.0. This model integrates Teaching, Research, Community Outreach, Innovation, and Industrialization, aiming to turn Zimbabwe’s universities into innovation hubs,” Nyoni explained.
Nyoni noted that while the transformative journey of Zimbabwe's education system may begin with fundamental innovations, the long-term vision is to foster a culture of industrialization through university-led research.
“Moyo’s comments about ‘embarrassing mediocrity’ are misplaced because they disregard the foundational nature of any meaningful academic transformation. Basic innovations pave the way for sophisticated research outputs,” he said.
Dr. Rumbidzai Chikwenhere, a senior lecturer at NUST, further criticized Professor Moyo’s remarks for overlooking the global recognition of Zimbabwean academic output.
“European and other global economies are well aware of the quality that our education system produces. The fact that Zimbabwean professionals are highly sought after globally proves that our universities are offering knowledge and skills that are competitive on an international level,” Chikwenhere asserted.
Chikwenhere emphasized that Professor Moyo’s disparagement undermines the value of initiatives that aim to position Zimbabwean institutions as centres of innovation.
“The world is recognizing our worth, yet we have local critics like Moyo who are quick to dismiss efforts that are building the nation’s future. This is counterproductive,” she added.
As Zimbabwe navigates the challenges of brain drain and seeks to elevate its universities through strategic reforms, experts believe that critiques like Professor Moyo’s overlook the complexities involved in improving any academic system.
The Education 5.0 model, which aims to align higher education with national development goals, has been touted as a forward-looking approach that deserves recognition rather than derision.
Bottom of Form
