| |
| |
|
|
9. Language in Education
|
| |
|
"Literacy
in the mother-tongue strengthens cultural identity and heritage"
(Declaration: 6)
"An active
commitment must be made to removing educational disparities.
Under served groups -..indigenous peoples; ethnic, racial
and linguistic minorities,….. - should not suffer any discrimination
in access to learning opportunities" (Declaration: 5)
|
| |
|
| 9.1
Introduction |
| |
|
| Language
in education is an issue raised in the Jomtien Declaration both
explicitly and implicitly. The preamble emphasises the importance
of recognising and respecting traditional knowledge and indigenous
cultural and linguistic heritage. These are regarded as having
value in their own right as well as the potential to promote
development. Addressing the basic learning needs of all includes
recognising that the scope of learning needs will vary across
cultures. Strong emphasis is placed throughout the Declaration
on those under served by education and the Framework specifies
those denied access as a result of various factors, including
language. Generally, Jomtien focuses on the importance of universalising
access, promoting equity, enhancing the learning environment,
improving quality, reducing disparities and focusing on actual
learning. Language is a factor in all of these concerns. In
terms of choice of language for education the Declaration suggests
that priorities for action at the national level include specifying
the languages to be used. |
| |
|
| 9.2
Quality and Access |
| |
|
| Language
choices are made by governments both for practical and political
reasons and not necessarily based solely on concerns for education.
However, the implications for quality and access of these language
choices are central for the education system. In multilingual
societies where the medium of instruction chosen is that of
the majority the needs of other language speakers are also an
issue. Countries have to consider at what point, or whether,
to introduce other national, regional or international languages
into their education systems. Such complex questions are important
for who has access to education, the quality of education and
equity for minorities. Although language choices are important
at all levels and in all forms of education, they are especially
important for basic education as it is the basis for all further
learning. |
| |
|
| 9.2.1
Quality |
| |
|
| Language
is important for the development of educational materials, especially
those which cater for marginalised groups. It is also important
in the training of teachers who have to work in a second language,
or have to teach in regions where they do not speak the local
language. In those cases where students learn from early on
in the medium of a second language (local or international)
there are issues of achievement. Those agencies which work in
areas such as curriculum and materials design do not raise the
issue of language choice for education particularly in the documentation
received. This is possibly as decisions on language in education
are considered a matter for governments. The exceptions include
Australia, working on producing mother tongue materials and
developing orthographies for local languages in the context
of small adult literacy projects and other larger projects,
for example in PNG and other countries in the region. |
| |
|
|
GTZ (Germany)
points to language of instruction components in 15 out of
53 projects and other projects focusing on Amharic, Tigrinya
and other languages. All their language orientated projects
cover curriculum, materials, teacher training and linguistic
groundwork issues.
The World
Bank also mentions the shift towards 'software' in education,
which includes curriculum reform, as well as issues of language
of instruction. One example is their support for the teaching
the national language of Laos to ethnic minority students
(World Bank 1999).
|
| |
|
| 9.2.2
Access |
| |
|
|
In terms
of access, particular groups may be disadvantaged by the language
used as the medium of instruction. The Round Table discussions
point to the problem of minority cultural groups whose language
may not have a written form, as well as the plight of refugees
and other displaced persons in terms of their access to education.
When referring to literacy for children and adults, the Round
Table discussions stress the community as the learning context,
stating that "if literacy is to be sustained, children and
adults need occasions to use their literacy within the community"
(UNESCO 1992: 17). Some agencies discuss the problem of language
choice explicitly in their discussions of interventions to
support quality and access to basic education.
CDB look
at the issues surrounding language for the region, and highlight
the lack of policy in the area. They state that "English is
not the natural language of the majority of the students,
that all languages present in a society are equally valid
and that multi-lingualism or multi-dialectalism are positive
attributes" (CARICOM 1993:34). They go on to relate this to
problems of achievement and teaching.
|
| |
|
|
Box
9.1 Agencies Which Explicitly Raise the Issue of Language
Choice for Education
Australia
Germany The Netherlands Switzerland UK CDB WB UNESCO
|
| |
|
| 9.3
Agency Policy and Practice |
| |
|
| Agency
approaches range from not mentioning language in education,
through raising it in the context of foreign languages as curriculum
subjects, to promoting and advocating mother tongue and bilingual
education. It should be noted that these observations are based
on policy documentation which has been provided, and it is of
course possible that agencies may have de facto policies which
have not been articulated in policy documentation. Literacy
is most often mentioned by agencies as a necessary part of basic
education intervention, especially for adults and within that
for women, but often without specific reference to mother tongue
literacy being important for cultural maintenance. Literacy
is normally addressed in terms of poverty alleviation and as
part of the original targets drawn from the Jomtien Declaration. |
| |
|
| 9.3.1
Language as Curriculum Subject and Language as Medium of Instruction |
| |
|
|
Agencies
supporting language often discuss language's role as a subject
on the curriculum, such as the addition of international languages,
or language's role as the medium of instruction in multilingual
contexts.
The CDB
raises both these issues in its discussion on language choice.
Another group of agencies which present a potentially interesting
perspective on the language issue is the ex-colonial powers;
Portugal, Britain, France, Spain.
Portugal
makes no policy statement in this area, but cites the funding
of the construction of Portuguese language centres in Maputo
and Luanda and subsidies to Portuguese schools and to Portuguese
language teaching, as well as towards a Lusaphone bibliographic
network.
The UK
has a long history of association with language issues. After
years of funding English language teaching projects, there
has been a shift in policy. The current position is to stress
the acquisition of literacy in a 'familiar language', for
poverty alleviation and for providing for a good foundation
for further learning and participation in society.
DFID's
current position on English is related to the need for other
languages within the education system. "Education in a familiar
language has to be complemented in most education systems
with access to opportunities embodied in a more widely used
national language or international language" (DFID 1999:26).
Thus, Governments may opt for English or other international
languages as a tool for poverty alleviation.
DFID's
response is to stress the need for basic literacy skills in
the familiar language first, a balance in the curriculum between
different languages, the availability of materials in local
languages, as well as teacher training and other curriculum
measures. This would imply that DFID, in line with the declaration,
respects the role of national Governments in decisions on
language policy, but has a view on the importance of basic
literacy in a familiar language. DFID point to perceived dangers
of "a narrow focus on a minority language" saying that it
"may reinforce social and economic marginalisation" (1999:26).
They also point to other potential pitfalls such as "overloading
the curriculum".
Other
agencies which mention English language teaching include AusAID
in reference to distance and vocational education. Also, UNESCO's
paper illustrating success stories in education mentions ELT
in Mongolia, with UNDP as the donor and in Sri Lanka with
Norway as a donor.
Unfortunately
there is no information from France, and Spain does no work
in basic education.
|
| |
|
| 9.3.2
Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education |
| |
|
| Bilingual
and mother tongue education (MTE) are most often associated
with addressing the needs of minority / marginalised groups.
Bilingual education is often linked with the word 'intercultural'.
Hyltenstam and Quick (1996:10) define it as follows: "teaching
of and in two languages" (original italics). The use of the
two languages is perceived as contributing to the languages'
and their cultures' preservation and development. Box 9.2 below
shows agencies supporting mother tongue and bilingual education.
|
| |
|
| Box
9.2 Agencies Working in Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education
|
| |
|
|
Agencies
supporting mother tongue education
Australia
Germany The Netherlands New Zealand Switzerland UNESCO
|
|
|
Agencies
supporting (intercultural) bilingual education
Austria
Australia Germany The Netherlands New Zealand Sweden USAID
UNICEF IDB World Bank
|
|
|
Austria
does not explicitly mention language issues in their sector
policy but do support measures in bilingual education, for
example in Guatemala.
Australia
points to work with mother tongue education, for example in
Laos and Vietnam, as well as bilingual education to assist
the transition from mother tongue to the national language
for higher levels of education, for example in PNG.
Sweden
mentions bilingual and multilingual education as an area of
increasing importance from 1992 onwards, for example in Bolivia.
New Zealand
provide support for the development of language curricula,
in English where this is the medium of instruction and also
in the mother tongue, for example in PNG.
USAID
note that they have been involved bilingual education in Bolivia
since the 1970s, but with negligible impact.
UNICEF
emphasise their engagement in programmes directed towards
minorities which involve educational work in bilingual education.
They state that bilingual education is a context specific
issue, but simultaneously a global one. They also mention
language in relation to Peace Education.
IDB provides
support for bilingual education, for example currently in
Bolivia, Mexico and Peru.
The World
Bank emphasises that both bilingual programs and schools which
offer a choice of language of instruction are important, especially
in the case of primary education, as ways of addressing marginalisation.
The German,
Swiss and Dutch present more detailed cases in favour of mother
tongue or bilingual education.
A GTZ
mid-term review document states that "in assisting projects
to improve basic education we direct our main efforts at intercultural
bilingual education, natural science…." (BMZ, KfW and GTZ
1996: 2), [and] "based on the principle of intercultural bilingual
education, primary education in rural areas is to be oriented
towards the socio-cultural features there and the rural working
environment" (21). For GTZ, mother tongue education (MTE)
is a continuing challenge for the organisation, although they
have been involved in bilingual education in Latin America
since the 1960s and in Africa since the 1980s. MTE is related
to the culture of minority groups and the rights that they
have asserted for their own languages. Kueper of GTZ argues
that "teacher training is a key issue to introduce mother
tongue, based on the cultural background of a community/ society
thus also contributing to standardise the language" (GTZ 1998:
91). GTZ recognise the issue of efficiency of schooling on
which foreign languages can impose a ceiling, but also point
to the value of other regional and international languages.
Their general approach is therefore support of MTE and the
transition to other languages. The countries in which GTZ
is working in bilingual or mother tongue education include
Guatemala, Ecuador, Niger (in planning), Senegal
The Swiss
discuss mother tongue education in relation to groups which
are discriminated against. Seeing education as related to
identity the SDC will [help marginalised groups] "to develop
a form of basic education in their mother tongue, when they
themselves take the initiative to do so" (SDC 1996:18). In
adult education and literacy mother tongue education is also
a priority.
The Netherlands
stress the importance of mother tongue medium for the initial
years of education in the interests of higher achievement.
They point out that policy dialogue should include discussions
on mother tongue education and successful transition to other
languages. They also stress the necessity of appointing teachers
from communities who speak the mother tongue of the pupils
to ensure that underprivileged groups are able to participate.
|
| |
|
| 9.4
Poverty Reduction and Human Rights |
| |
|
|
As illustrated
in Chapter 6, poverty reduction and the promotion of human
rights are two major development objectives for agencies.
The Jomtien declaration also has a pro-poor focus. In relation
to language, however, the debate is complex and economic arguments
may seem to contradict those based on a concern for minority
rights. Discussions in favour of ex-colonial languages stress
the resulting economic and political benefits to the country
as a whole. This is especially the case with the promotion
of English.
Research
which has been carried out on the language of initial education
concentrates on achievement in education, which in the context
of current theories of education and development is assumed
to contribute to the alleviation of poverty. UNESCO is known
for its view that the mother tongue should be the medium of
instruction for as long as possible, in relation to achievement
and also cultural maintenance. LINGUAPAX is one example of
a UNESCO language project whose aim is to promote a "culture
of peace through multilingual education and respect for linguistic
and cultural diversity". The Amman 1996 report also concludes
that mother tongue education should be recommended where possible,
as well as calling for more research.
Limage,
analysing agency positions, states that bilateral and multilateral
agencies "for the most part, have little or no concern with
examining the status of languages / language speakers and
links with poverty with the possible exception of UNESCO"
(1999:15). In this review only DFID highlight this as an issue.
The other
important strand of agency policy on basic education is the
emphasis on human rights and democracy. The Jomtien Declaration
states that "literacy in the mother-tongue strengthens cultural
identity and heritage" (6). The Round Table discussions focus
on the importance of culture in development and the links
with language. "There is nothing that more deeply transforms
individual identities and cultures than literacy in the mother
tongue" (UNESCO 1992:11). Mother tongue literacy is seen therefore
both as a means of affirming cultural identity and also opening
the possibilities for cultural development.
In terms
of democracy, language is important as it is vital for full
participation in society, a goal the agencies and the Declaration
stress. There is little agency discussion on language in this
context. One exception is Sida. "When minorities, ethnic groups
and indigenous peoples are given the same rights as the rest
of the population - for example education, media and court
proceedings in their own language - democracy has a better
chance of becoming stronger" (Sida 1999: 48).
|
| |
|
| 9.5
Conclusions |
| |
|
| One of
the main questions to ask is not only whether funding agencies
do have policies on the role of language in basic education,
but also whether they should. The statements from UNESCO as
to the benefits of mother tongue education and the Jomtien Declaration's
emphasis on mother tongue literacy provide a platform for advocating
mother tongue education at a basic level. However, language
is the issue most obviously linked to cultural identity and
therefore a more difficult area for agencies to be involved
in. The 'non-interventionist' stance, such as reported about
the World Bank by Brock-Utne (1999), which states that language
policy is a matter for governments, is important. Decisions
on language choice are made not just on the basis of educational
achievement, poverty alleviation etc, but also on the basis
of ideology and concerns for national unity. |
| |
|
| 9.6
Outstanding Issues |
| |
|
| 9.6.1
Issues |
| |
|
| There seem
to be two common responses by agencies who raise the language
issue; non-intervention in relation to policy and actively supporting
bilingual / mother tongue education. The first fits with the
notion of local ownership and the idea of response to country
priorities highlighted in the Jomtien declaration. It also reflects
the Jomtien suggestion that language policy is a matter for
national governments. Equally, advocating mother tongue education
for initial years in order to guarantee achievement, as well
as a way of protecting and enhancing the status of minority
groups also reflects the results of research and the consensus
in the declaration. The Declaration therefore presents a potential
dilemma for agencies. Language choice in education is a sensitive
issue culturally and politically and therefore problematic.
Much of the work done by agencies in MTE and bilingual education
is aimed at supporting initial learning and the successful transition
to higher levels of education. The links between language in
education and poverty alleviation or the promotion of human
rights and democracy is also an issue which seems under explored.
To ignore the question of language choice means potentially
not addressing the central concerns of basic education fully.
|
| |
|
|
==============
|
|
| Return
to contents |
| |
| |
|
