DISCONTENT OVER THE USE OF ENGLISH AS THE MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION RIGHT FROM STANDARD ONE (PETITION BY CHANCELLOR COLLEGE EDUCATION STUDENTS TO MIN OF EDUCATION. PRESENTED ON 13TH MARCH 2014) We, Education students at Chancellor College of The University of Malawi, would like to express our discontent over the Ministry of Education’s plan to implement a policy that aims at introducing English, obviously a foreign language, as the language of instruction right from Standard One in the country’s primary education. This is a migration from the current policy which sees English being deployed as the language of instruction only after learners have reached Standard Five. We strongly feel that such an idea is a mockery to the various reasons that go with mother tongue instruction for the young learners. There has been support for mother tongue instruction amongst young learners from linguists, those in the know about the acquisition and learning of language, to as far as respectable international organizations responsible for disseminating the best possible ways in which education can be offered to the world’s citizenry. We heard on the news broadcast by Zodiak Radio Station (4th March, 2014) as well read in The Nation newspaper dated 5th March, 2014, with dismay, that the Ministry of Education is implementing a policy whereby pupils will be taught in English right from Standard One. You are quoted in the newspaper to have said that “It is the wish of government to see most of the pupils speak and write good English while at primary level. English speaking has been a problem to our pupils even those who completed secondary education.” According to the ministry, speaking and writing good English are reasons (or a reason) as to why the Ministry of Education in its entirety has decided to scrap off the current mother tongue instruction policy where learning in the first four early years of primary education takes place in Chichewa, save English as a subject. We feel that the desire for coming up with a new breed of good English speakers and grammarians is not enough a reason to drag the Ministry of Education into preference of the new policy over the current one. The following are the reasons that force us into thinking that the move is uncalled for in as far as the improvement of our nation’s education system is concerned: 1. Mother tongue instruction supports local culture and parental involvement. The use of a familiar language for instruction validates local culture and knowledge, creating a bridge between the formal school system and children‘s home and community environment. This is true to a very large extent as mother tongue instruction facilitates parental involvement and strengthens community support for education, since language is not a barrier to participating in children‘s schooling. Parents are required to check the academic progress of their children who at the early stages struggle to settle in school. It will be difficult for the parents (most of whom are not familiar with English), therefore, to follow up on the academic progress of their children. 2. The circular issued by The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in 1996 recognizes that learners achieve better education results if learning is in their language of play. As a matter of fact, the circular encouraged primary school teachers to use a familiar local language to explain English concepts whenever necessary. 3. Experience has shown that no country has developed while using a foreign language as the main means of classroom instruction. The policy appears to equate good English-speaking to development which is one of the goals of education. On the contrary, if one looks at the global chart of countries that have seen all sorts of development come their way, it becomes clear that it is only those that have been using local languages that are progressing, for example, all the developed nations of Europe, America and Asia use their own languages as tools for learning in schools and children. If Malawi is to adopt such type of a language policy, the socio-economic gap between the elite and the majority will continue to broaden. 4. It is not mother tongue instruction that lowers education standards. In fact there are lots of interfering factors such as lack of motivation for teachers and lack of resources just to mention but a few. We feel that the issue of language is just coming in as a scapegoat. 5. The use of foreign language (English) for instruction proved a flop when it was once implemented in Zambia, Kenya and Ghana and it is in the records of the Ministry of Education that once such moves flopped in Zambia, they came to learn in Malawi on how we do using mother tongue at the beginning of the first grades then switch to the foreign language. 6. Fellow SADC member states such as South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Zambia have adopted serious advocacy for the use of the child’s own language as a language of learning in the early years of primary school. 7. There is a usual misconception that long exposure to a foreign language (e.g. English) at an early age results in proficiency in that language. On the contrary, empirical facts as supported by numerous research results show that children who learn how to read and write first in their own language show better proficiency in the second language than those who start with the foreign language. 8. Mother tongue instruction improves children’s self concept and identity and it is through identity that culture and tradition can only be validated and reinforced. And it should be known that one of the goals of education is the preservation of the very same culture. 9. When instruction is in the mother tongue, teachers and learners can interact more naturally and negotiate meanings together, which greatly improve the effectiveness of the learning process. 10. Presentation of curriculum content in an unfamiliar language requires an enormous amount of time to teach children to understand, speak, read and write, something that is extremely difficult and wastes valuable years in the early grades that would be spent in learning academic concepts in a mother language. 11. Language is a vehicle of culture. Therefore, eliminating the only strongest surviving element of the native culture amongst our learners is a major blow to the much-talked about cultural preservation. 12. Learning concepts in a foreign language does not mean the mastery of that language. Thus learning in English (thus, as language of classroom instruction) is different from learning English as a language, that is why there is English as a subject. Therefore to claim that teaching pupils in English will result in learners speaking and writing good English is not true. It is against such a background that we vehemently oppose the Ministry of Education’s intention to implement the said policy. In our view, such a policy has nothing to offer in as far as the improvement of the country’s education is concerned. It is our hope that government, through the Ministry of Education, will consider the plea seriously and urgently. We are looking forward to a Malawi that will at some point be using a common local language as medium of instruction at all educational levels. We too, would love to go through the development experiences of those countries that use their own local languages. WE RECOMMEND THAT THE MINISTRY SHOULD NOT IMPLEMENT ITS PROPOSED POLICY BUT RATHER CONTINUE WITH THE CURRENT POLICY. Sad we have to write this in English. This is Malawi.
Posted on: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 15:53:43 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015