| |
World
Education Forum
Dakar, Senegal 26-28 April 2000 |
| |
| Building
social integration through bilingual and mother tongue education
|
|
|
|
Issues
Paper
|
| |
| Strategy
Session III.3 |
| |
|
Original
: English
|
| |
 Multilingual
education as understood here becomes an issue if the language
of instruction differs from the language children understand
when they enter school. Education in an unfamiliar language
hampers EFA. Over the last four decades, evidence has accumulated
suggesting that teaching learners in a language they do not
understand is not very effective and causes a high incidence
of repeating and dropout. One can safely assume that it affects
access to education: parents are known to keep children out
of school whom they consider unable to learn well. If this is
so clear, why is it that mother tongue instruction is not universally
applied? |
| |
| 1. Technical
aspects |
| |
| 1.1
Pedagogy - By and large, the pedagogical problems associated
with teaching in a language familiar to the learners (L1) can
be resolved. Tools are available or can be developed at short
notice. We know how to sequence the learning of reading and
writing in any language for which basic linguistic analyses
are available. We know how to design school books, teachers'
guides, teacher pre- and in-service training courses. We know
how to introduce the major foreign language used in a country
through a second-language teaching approach, and also how to
link local language and local content in teaching, be it cultural
subjects, mathematics, or life skills. And we have learnt how
to share such knowledge and skills with our local partners and,
more importantly, how to develop locally adapted approaches
with them. |
| |
|
Developing the required teaching skills becomes a matter
of logistics, finance, and management: for quality teaching
in local languages, large numbers of teachers need to be retrained
in a short time. This means retraining the personnel in charge
of teacher education, as well as additional trainers (master
trainers, best teachers, learning co-ordinators, etc.). This
may encounter acceptance problems, and generally requires a
lead time of up to three years. |
| |
|
Transition to a foreign language of instruction is the one
pedagogical aspect that is most neglected. In most countries
that use mother tongue (L1) instruction in the early grades,
the language of instruction shifts later to the dominant (often
foreign) language used in the country (L2) . When L2 is taught
earlier as a second language, one assumes too easily that
pupils master it well enough to follow courses in the later
primary grades or in lower secondary without further preparation.
This has led to problems in many countries, e.g. in Tanzania
and Madagascar.
|
| |
|
1.2 Linguistics - It would appear that the linguistic issues
can also be handled very well. Methods are available for putting
a language in writing, describing its rules and norms, identifying
the vocabulary used by school age children, and identifying
its specific points of interference with the dominant language
(L2). |
| |
|
1.3 Sector Management As soon as several languages of instruction
are admitted, the posting of teachers could become much more
complicated than before. Where there is only one language of
instruction, any teacher can serve anywhere in the country without
any specific linguistic requirements or preparation. This is
no longer the case when two or more languages are used in education.
Teachers should best be native speakers of the language they
use in school. Where this is not possible, they would have to
undergo language training each time they are posted to an area
with a different language of instruction. The education ministry`
s partners could be helpful in designing strategies to cope
with these such difficulties. |
| |
|
Provision of teaching and learning materials in several local
languages (L1) at affordable costs is an unresolved issue. Print-runs
are always smaller than an edition in a single language for
the same country. Co-operating agencies should, as a matter
of priority, explore solutions to this issue. Based on their
own experience and looking to the most modern technology used
by publishers, they could present model calculations and compare
costs of the options with savings expected from lower repetition
and dropout. |
| |
|
Schoolbook publishers bidding for large international contracts
to supply schoolbooks are usually not in favour of multilingual
education. It would increase costs if they were in charge of
the editorial process, whereas if they are supplied with print-ready
material, it reduces the print-runs and thus lowers their profits.
It is well known that various means are used to oppose decisions
in favour of schoolbooks in local languages (L1). Here is an
area where advocacy work is required. The reason why so little
has been done to introduce L1 into education seems to be political. |
| |
| 2.
Acceptance |
| |
2.1 Attitudes toward languages - The basic issue is one of
acceptance of a local language of instruction by the L1 speakers
themselves. One root cause of the neglect of local languages
is the relative prestige of the language of the former colonial
power and the slow-down effect this must have had on the development
of the local languages. On the one hand, during the colonial
period, most L1 lacked the concepts and vocabulary to communicate
the very contents - technical, organisational - that underlay
the relative "superiority" of the colonial power. On the other
hand, as part of the coloniser's negative attitude towards
local cultures, the L1 were considered as incapable of dealing
with such content. This argument was used against most African
and Native American languages, but also against such prestigious
languages as Arabic. In varying degrees, the colonised populations
accepted this negative attitude to their own languages.
|
| |
|
|
Due to the same colonial legacy, there is confusion between
learning in and learning of a language. In many developing countries,
going to school has meant first and foremost learning a foreign
language before anything else could be learnt, and illiterate
parents tend to perceive it thus. No wonder the usual argument
of parents against mother tongue instruction is that "the children
know our language already". Here, much more explanation and
advocacy directed at the beneficiaries is required. |
| |
|
|
2.2 Strategic value of the foreign language in the economy -
In both Latin America and Africa, the economy puts a premium
on the mastery of the dominant language (L2). The majority of
the more profitable economic transactions are conducted in L2.
This is not the case in most of Asia where transactions in the
huge internal markets are conducted in L1 languages, and the
L2 language becomes a real asset only in the import-export sector.
Parents are very much aware of the commercial value of language.
They expect proof that starting school in an L1 does not prevent
their children from mastering the L2. If one can demonstrate
that it even enhances the mastery of L2, the better. One of
the main tasks of the education ministry's partners is to provide
such evidence in a way that is credible, convincing and easy
to understand. A strong position in favour of reinforcing the
status of an L1 will be counterproductive unless there is a
strong popular movement in that direction. |
| |
| 3. Language
policy |
| |
|
3.1 Language standardisation - For mother tongue or multilingual
education to work, a country clearly needs to select a limited
number of languages as L1. Linguistics would help to identify
the minimum number of core languages to be standardised, keeping
local and regional variants as dialects . The tendency to declare
ever "smaller" languages as separate languages needs to be reversed
for the sake of a feasible language policy for education. Identifying
the "common core" of several L1 languages is as much of a linguistic
challenge as getting another small language recognised as an
unique language of its own. Yet, past experience shows that
it can be done. Using Germany as an example, two native speakers
of the variants spoken on the northern and the southern borders
would hardly be able to communicate. Yet, they recognise and
use Standard German, and so do more than 80 million speakers
in Germany, Austria and the German-speaking part of Switzerland.
Co-operating agencies could assist countries to develop such
linguistic standardisation. |
| |
|
3.2 Utility of local languages beyond school: the literate environment
- Given the acceptance problems, the technical-pedagogical argument
alone has little power of persuasion if school is the only place
where the L1 is written and used in a modern context. Parents
and teachers alike are more easily convinced when there are
newspapers, fiction, religious and non-fiction literature in
their local language. However, experience shows that such literature
needs to appear spontaneously. External partners can only support
genuine local initiatives. In the few cases known to the author,
attempts at initiating and launching such literature have died
when project support ended. |
| |
|
3.3 Language policy in education: transition or development
- Whether an L1 is to be fully developed or used as a transition
to better mastery of the L2 is the sole responsibility of the
L1 language community. There has been a long-standing controversy
whether an L1 used as a language of instruction should be developed
and promoted in its own right or whether it should be used to
ease the transition to the L2. This controversy has been particularly
acrimonious in Latin America, among scholars, under the slogan
of mantenimiento versus transición. The point of view of the
community of L1 speakers hardly mattered. Apart from the fact
that no L1 can be stabilised and promoted against the will of
its speakers, does anybody have the right to impose a particular
course of action on them? |
| |
|
3.4 Language development and the functionality of language -
Most languages can be developed in such a way that they can
handle complex technical and organisational subject matter.
The development of Arabic is a case in point, Kiswahili, Bahasa
Malaya and Bahasa Indonesia are other examples among many more.
External partners could support such efforts. The real issue
arises in countries with extreme linguistic diversity. How many
languages and which ones should be so developed? Where is a
reasonable lower limit for full-scale linguistic development
- 20,000 speakers, 200,000 speakers, 20 million speakers? This
blends in with the issues of language standardisation and the
reduction of linguistic diversity to manageable proportions. |
|
|
Most countries are multilingual. How the different languages
are treated is an indicator of a country's power structure and
the respect it has for minorities and marginalised groups. This
has a highly symbolic value. Historically, there are basically
three situations found in the developing world: |
| |
(1)
Multiethnic states that did not adopt a European language
as the official language and therefore the language of instruction,
or that replaced it with a regional L2. This, for example,
is the case in China and most of South East Asia.
(2)
Multiethnic states that did adopt a European language as
the official language and therefore the language of instruction.
This is the case in most sub-Saharan African states, with
Tanzania, Madagascar, Rwanda and Burundi as major exceptions.
(3)
Former settler colonies where, at independence, the settler
population or their descendants remained in the country
and continued to dominate the indigenous population. This
is the case in all Latin American countries with a sizeable
Amerindian population. These lessons and questions just
scratch the surface of an extremely sensitive topic that
is often not addressed because emotions can run so high.
But, the experience of the 1990s shows that these issues
must be addressed if the goals set at Jomtien are to become
a reality. How can the international community help countries
to make their schools safe havens for learning, for girls
as well as for boys?
|
| |
| This paper
will focus on situations 2 and 3. |
| |
|
4.1 Power relations among ethnic groups - Where a European language
is used as the medium of instruction (situation 2 above), language
as an indicator of relative power has been neutralised. This
does not eliminate the power competition but removes one very
visible element. Advocating the use of one or several L1 languages
in school would need a consensus among the various ethnic and
linguistic groups. It would have to be understood that selecting
a few L1 and leaving aside others is done for pragmatic reasons
and does not jeopardise the outcome of more complex transactions
on power sharing. Co-operating agencies could offer a forum
for reaching such a consensus for the education sector. Efforts
at standardising languages and reducing the linguistic diversity
would also be helpful. |
| |
|
4.2 Relations between dominant and dependent population groups
- In the third situation above, the subordinate status assigned
to the local languages of the formerly colonised population
groups cements and stabilises the dominance relation. In Latin
America with its 500 years of colonial history, this has become
part of the identity of many individuals of both the dominant
group and the indigenous population. The privileged majority
finds it difficult to "let go" of its privilege, particularly
at the second of two levels. The first level is to concede to
the indigenous population the right to education in their mother
tongue (L1), and to finance it. The second level involves moving
towards a real bilingual and intercul-tural education for all,
where the children of the dominant group are expected also to
learn one of the local languages. For pedagogical reasons, the
first level is sufficient. For reasons of social justice, social
integration, and balanced socio-cultural development, the second
level is required. However, the author is not aware of any instance
of this happening. |
| |
| 5. Potential
effects on social integration |
|
|
Usually, a multilingual education system is an indicator of
successful social integration, but not its cause. In the absence
of a basic consensus on the value of each national language
and the rights that go with it, pushing multilingual education
might even be socially disruptive. The policy issues should
come first in any strategy to use mother tongue instruction
to improve the quality of education. |
| |
| 6. The
role of external agencies of development co-operation |
| |
|
This Strategy Session will explore the various ways external
partners can assist countries to develop and apply realistic
language policies in education that are both pedagogically sound
and socially acceptable. Should external partners limit themselves
to strictly technical, pedagogical and linguistic, aspects of
the language issue, or should they also raise issues of language
policy for the stakeholders to find solutions? Would it ever
be proper for them to "take sides" in favour of maintaining
and stabilising a given L2 language of instruction? |
| |
|
= = = = = = =
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
