1
The most recent developments concerning the debate on language of instruction in Tanzania
By Birgit Brock-Utne[1]
Institute for Educational Research
University of Oslo
Presented to the NETREED conference from the 7 th to the 9th of January 2002.
Introduction
Tanzania is one of the few countries in Africa that has a uniting language, Kiswahili, that almost the whole population (about 95%) speak and understand. For many Tanzanians Kiswahili is the second language, but the number that has it as the first language is rapidly growing. Kiswahili is the language used in Parliament, in the various Ministries, in the lower judicial courts, in all of primary school. Plans existed to have Kiswahili as the language of instruction in secondary school and the universities.
In a research project started in January 2001 I look at the fate of these plans, the prospects of them being followed up now, and the language situation, especially for secondary school students in Tanzania. In my current research project I have analyzed documents to find out the most recent developments concerning policy guidelines on the language of instruction in Tanzania. I have also searched documents to find discussion and decisions on the implementation of the recent language policy. I have further started interviewing policy makers in Tanzania about the language policy and the implementation of it. Further interviews with policy-makers will be conducted in November of this year. Apart from my own direct activity I have also had research assistance from Tanzanian Master students who, under my guidance have made, and are in the process of making, studies in Tanzanian secondary schools. They study the practice going on in secondary schools when it comes to what language is being used as the communication vehicle in class and outside of the class-room. They look at how much students understand of what is going on in the class-room and what strategies teachers use to impart knowledge in class-rooms where the language of instruction is one that students do not use outside of the class-room. They also make inventories concerning the views of teachers and students when it comes to the language of instruction. This paper deals with these tentative findings.
Historical glimpses of the language policy of Tanzanian education
I have elsewhere given short historical glimpses of the language policy of Tanzanian education (Brock-Utne, 1983; 2000:2001a;2001b). Here I relate how already in the second Five Year Plan of Tanzania (1969-74) the continued use of English as a medium at secondary and tertiary levels of education was deemed unsatisfactory. The move to Kiswahili as the medium of instruction in primary schools was thought to be only part of a larger plan to implement the use of Kiswahili as the medium of instruction throughout the educational system. In 1969 the Ministry of National Education sent a circular to all Headmasters and Headmistresses of all secondary schools outlining the plan for the gradual introduction of Kiswahili as the medium of instruction. According to Bhaiji (1976) secondary school teachers also favored a shift to Kiswahili as a medium of instruction. The Ministry's circular suggested that political education "siasa" should be taught in Kiswahili from the school-year 1969/70, domestic science from the school-year 1970/71, history, geography, biology, agriculture and mathematics from 1971/72 (Bhaiji, 1976, p. 112). Bhaiji (1976) tells that at this time curriculum developers had already started to translate and compile all the technical and scientific terms of school subjects. Some schools had already received a booklet on mathematical terms in Kiswahili. Polome (1979) claims that the initial plan was for Kiswahili to become the medium of instruction in all subjects in Form I and II by 1973.
The teaching of political education - siasa - through the medium of Kiswahili was introduced. But then the reform stopped. A study commissioned by the National Kiswahili Council showed that secondary school students had great difficulties learning the subjects taught in school because the medium of instruction -English - represented a great barrier (Matteru, & Mlama, 1978). The study argued for the shift into Kiswahili both at secondary and tertiary levels of education.
At the end of 1980 the then President of Tanzania, Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere, appointed a Presidential Commission on Education to review the entire education system. He made Mr. J. Makweta the Chair of the Commission. The Makweta-Commission presented its report to the President in February 1982. The recommendations on the medium of instruction more than refueled the expectations by actually setting a date for a change from English to Kiswahili. In January 1985 the first year of secondary school i.e. Form I, was to start using Kiswahili and in 1991 the University was going to start teaching through the medium of Kiswahili. However, this recommendation was deleted from the official report published in 1984 (Rubagumya, 1991).
In the years 1969 to 1983 Tanzanian educators were waiting and preparing for the shift to Kiswahili as the medium of instruction in secondary and later also university education. But in 1983 "the government quite unexpectedly sought to turn the tide" (Lwaitama, & Rugemalira, 1988: 2). In August 1983 the Minister for Education, Mr. J. Makweta was quoted in the press (UHURU, 1983) as saying that the expected change of medium was not going to take place. This must have been a statement that was difficult for Education Minister Makweta to make. He had himself chaired the commission, which had suggested the change of the medium of instruction in secondary and tertiary education from English to Kiswahili. When discussing the issue with him, he told me that he personally favored a switch to Kiswahili but it was a government decision to stop the further development of Kiswahili at higher levels in the educational system. The decision seems to have been taken by President Nyerere himself, partly with the support of the British Council, the cultural arm of the British government.
When discussing the same issue with Makweta at the end of April 1992, he partly put the blame for a reversion of the decision to switch to Kiswahili on the university people, especially at the then Department of Education. "You intellectuals betrayed us", Makweta said to the Dean of the Faculty of Education. "We did not get the support from you we needed. How could we carry the decision through with so little support from the intellectual community?"[2]
During July/August 1984 Dr.Clive Criper, a linguist from EdinburghUniversity and Mr. Bill Dodd, an administrator with long experience from Tanzania, were carrying out the British government funded study on levels of English presently existing across the educational system. Their study confirmed earlier research showing that the levels of English were too low in most schools for effective learning to take place. Here are two of their findings:
- Only about l0% of Form IVs are at a level that one might expect English medium education to begin (p. 14).
- Less than 20% of the University sample tested were at a level where they would find it easy to read even the simpler books required for their academic studies (p. 43).
Based on these findings Criper and Dodd reached the following astonishing conclusion: "The Ministry of Education should issue an unambiguous circular setting out the policy on English medium education" (Criper, & Dodd, 1984:73). To many of us this conclusion by the authors seems highly illogical. Building on the two research findings quoted above one would think that their conclusion would encompass an argument for a switch to a medium of instruction with which the students were familiar, namely Kiswahili. Lwaitama and Rugemalira (1988) claim that this last statement was no coincidence. The British government that had paid the consultancy also wanted to see the British language strengthened in Tanzania. Rubagumya (1991:76) also comments the paradox that although Criper and Dodd stated categorically, after having concluded their empirical research, that English had ceased to be a viable medium of education in Tanzania, their recommendation for the English Language Support Project (ELSP), which the British Government was to fund, was on the condition that English continues to be the medium of instruction!
Rubagumya (1991) claims that the decision by the Government that English will continue to be the medium of instruction in secondary schools was not taken because Kiswahili is not ready to be used as a medium:
In fact this has never been given as a reason by the Government to justify its decision. The reason given is that we need English as the language of technological development.(Rubagumya, 1991: 77)
But in the report "Tanzania Education System for the 21st century" it is argued that Kiswahili is not ready to be used as a medium of instruction:
As a matter of policy, Kiswahili should be a medium of instruction at the pre-primary and primary school levels. However, English should continue to be strengthened at primary level and used as a medium of instruction in post primary institutions until such a time when Kiswahili is ready to be the dominant medium of instruction." [italics added] (URT, 1993: 23)
The economic crises in Africa have made it easy for the old colonial powers to move in all over Africa. The strengthening of the ex-colonial languages is of no help to the masses of Africans but functions as a means of separating the African elites from the masses of Africans.
In Tanzania the aid given by Britain has been in the form of an English Language Teaching Support Project, financed by the Ministry of Overseas Development as a "top priority of British aid to education in Tanzania" (Bgoya, 1992: 179). A British Council Annual Report admitted that although the British government no longer has the economic and military power to impose its will in other parts of the world, British influence endures through "the insatiable demand for the English language". The report maintained that English languageis Britain's greatest asset, "greater than the North Sea Oil" and characterized English as an "invisible, God given asset" (British Council, 1983: 9).
Newer studies e.g. by Zaline M.Roy-Campbell and Martha Qorro (1997) have shown that the language crisis in Tanzanian secondary schools is to-day even more severe than it was twenty years ago. Results of the university Screening Test (UDSM,1994), a test usually administered to all incoming students (from secondary schools) at the beginning of their university studies, indicate that despite the fact that these students have studied under the ELTSP (English Language Support Project financed by the British Council) their English language proficiency was not any better than that of students before the ELTSP was launched. In fact the level of English is still going down. The indecisiveness of the Tanzanian government on the language issue is, however, a problem that is difficult to understand and analyze. New language policies are being made and the debate goes on.
Recent policy statements concerning the language of instruction in Tanzania
The official language in education policy that is currently being followed in Tanzania is the one led down in Education and Training Policy (MoE,1995) which, inter alia, states:
The medium of instruction in pre-primary schools shall be Kiswahili, and English shall be a compulsory subject (:35)
The medium of instruction in primary schools shall be Kiswahili, and English shall be a compulsory subject (:39)
The medium of instruction for secondary education shall continue to be English, except for the teaching of other approved languages and Kiswahili shall be a compulsory subject up to ordinary level (:45)
In August 1997, the Ministry of Education and Culture in Tanzania issued a policy document entitled: Sera ya Utamaduni (Cultural Policy). Chapter 3 of this document deals with language issues, including the language of education policy. The aim of this policy is to clarify the position of the Tanzanian Government when it comes to the place of the different languages of Tanzania in the formal education system. Section 3.4.1 of the document includes the following statement:
Mpango maalum wa kuiwezesha elimu na mafunzo katika ngazi zote kutolewa katika lugha ya Kiswahili utaandaliwa na kutekelezwa (MEC, 1997:19) (Translated: A special programme to enable the use of Kiswahili as a medium of instruction in education and training at all levels shall be designed and implemented)
The Ministry was, however, aware of the important role of English and also wanted the teaching of this language to be strengthened but then as a subject. The policy explicitly states:
Kingereza kitakuwa ni somo la lazima katika elimu ya awali, msingi na sekondari na kitahimizwa katika elimu ya juu na ufundishaji wake utaboreshwa. (MEC,1997:18) (Translated: English will be a compulsory subject at pre-primary, primary and secondary levels and it shall be encouraged in higher educational. The teaching of English shall be strengthened).
The question I have tried to find some answer to through my field-work in Tanzania this year is: How is the decision to implement Kiswahili medium instruction at all levels of the educational system being followed up? What has happened to the language question in secondary schools after the Sera ya Utamaduni was published in August 1997? I have been trying to gather recent documents on this issue and in the beginning of February of this year I conducted a series of interviews with government officials and university people.
At the University of Dar es Salaam I came across the Report on the 1998 UDSM Academic Audit (UDSM,1999) published in March 1999. Point 4.4 ( UDSM,1999:71-73) of the report discusses “Language as a Medium of Teaching and Learning”. The authors of the report mention that from the talks and discussions they held with various groups of students and staff:
it was evident that most students have problems with the language medium of instruction (i.e.English). Proficiency in the language is low and leaves much to be desired (UDSM,1999:71)
The members of the panel are very concerned about the fact that members of staff who have a good English proficiency are approaching retirement and no new recruitment of chronologically young staff has been authorized since the abolition of the tutorial assistantship. They also refer to research findings pointing to the low command of English in secondary school. They express their concern in the following words:
One can only guess what will happen when the seniors begin to exit in numbers in the next four or five years and the University is forced to recruit from among the products of secondary school English language training of the 1980s and 1990s. Then the problem of English language communication among University teachers will be visible and painful…If nothing should have been done by that time, then it should be time for the University to decide going into the lingua franca (Kiswahili) – a language in which both teacher and student will be able to interact meaningfully and confidently (UDSM,1999:72).
This is, however, a decision that is already the official policy of the Ministry of Education and Culture as it is laid down in Sera ya Utamaduni (MEC,1997). And the decision about what language to use as a language of instruction in Tanzania is a decision to be made by the Government and not the University. In their discussion on the language issue the panelists refer to Jean Jacques Rousseau who was very critical to the French education system and the teaching in Greek and Latin. He asked: ” If the master’s Greek and Latin is such poor stuff, how about the children?” The panelists ask:
In similar vein, in the next five to ten years, the University of Dar es Salaam should be able to judge and, if appropriate, to query: If the master’s English is such poor stuff, how about the students? Stop it. Let us go Kiswahili. The University needs to take a decision and to act very soon in connection with the language problem. (MEC,1997: 73).
Here again it looks like the panelists think that it is the University that takes the decision on the language of instruction, bypassing the Ministry of Education, the politicians and the Government. But the attitudes of university people of course count when a decision to change medium of instruction is to be taken. After having discussed the problems caused by the low proficiency of students in the medium of instruction at the university the authors of the Audit report conclude with the following illogical and astonishing statement:
But judging from the current and projected global trends and the fact that English is fast becoming the ICT language globally, UDSM should continue to use English as a medium of instruction. (MEC,1997:73).
In reaching this conclusion the panelists have chosen to ignore that they themselves discovered that “most students have problems with the language medium of instruction (i.e. English).” They have also chosen to ignore the1997 policy of the Ministry of Education and Culture on the language of instruction issue. The fact that English is the most frequently used language on the internet is no reason to have English as a medium of instruction. It is an argument for a strengthening of the subject English, completely in line with the policy statement of the Ministry of Education and Culture in Sera na Utamanduni (MEC,1997).
Politicians and academics are divided on the language issue
In early February of this year I conducted a series of interviews – all in Kiswahili – with policy makers, government officials and academics in Dar es Salaam to come to grips with the question: Why is the policy outlined in Sera ya utamaduni not being followed up? In an interview I conducted with Martha Qorro, Head of Department of Foreign Languages and linguistics at the University of Dar es Salaam in her office on 2.2.2001 she said that both politicians and academics were divided on the language issue.