Policy makers’ decision that vernacular languages be taught and that the language of instruction in schools should change to local vernacular through the publication of Sessional Paper 14 of 2012 was received with mixed reactions.
Education and thus culture and traditions are passed through activities or instructions directed through language. Formal education follows a premise of instruction for delivery through all levels. Countries across the world choose a language through which they term as the official language for communication.
Kenya has, through its constitution identified English and Swahili as the official languages. It therefore follows that all educational institutions will give instruction using either language. There are exceptions to this though like in institutions which specialise in training other languages such as French and Chinese.
Schools in the rural areas that have resulted in using local languages as a mode of instruction up until Standard four (4) or lower primary. In my view, using local language as a medium of instruction has only made the outcome worse. How do you teach a child Swahili or English in the local vernacular and expect a person to become fluent and proficient in the said language?
Culture
Let us also look at the other side of the coin. Why did they suggest local languages to be taught in our schools? Is it because local languages are presumed to preserve culture? If this was their reason then I would say they are wrong since language is only but a medium of communication. Speaking French does not mean that you have now adopted French culture.
Is it because they do not want local languages to disappear? That could be a factor to consider. As we become more cosmopolitan even in the villages; people tend to adopt a lingua franca. New generations adopt and continue to modify the language to suit their particular communication needs and it becomes the language of choice. On the other hand, teaching local languages may preserve or heighten the stereotypes that exist to a whole new level. Why would you teach Kamba and ignore Kuria in a school in Mandera?
Is the teaching of local languages going to improve communication across the tribes or will it increase confusion and lack of enthusiasm of our pupils to learn? I did seven subjects at primary school and I thought that those were many. I cannot get my brain round to a child doing forty two – papers (it doesn’t matter even if short) or one paper written in many languages. If they maintain the training in the local tribal areas then are we not creating tribal enclaves that are now being propagated through schools?
Why doesn’t the ministry of education strengthen the use of Swahili as a language of instruction and preserve our identity as East Africans? The use of Kiswahili as a language does not rise any passions. English on the other hand is more international and people will always refer to it as the language of the former colonialist.
When choosing these languages, does the policy makers bear in mind that there could be a child who might not be from the predominant community around? Is there concern of the children in the cosmopolitan towns or cities? I continue to ask, does anyone care about that child that is moved from Mombasa to Turkana to continue his education where the language of instruction is new due parents work commitments? What of the future; what happens to our form of expressions in an international forum?
When a policy maker says that we should teach local tongues in our schools is serious misadvise and lost vision. I think the person(s) who came up with issue did not take time to think this widely. S/he might have had a deadline to come up with a new policy. Did s/he just want more teachers to be hired to specialize in these languages? Did s/he consider that all teachers were to be re-trained, change of curriculum and delivery methods, reprinting of books and instruction materials? Or is there a Chinese contract somewhere in the making? Was there any consideration that teachers are hired and distributed nationally? This distribution is not based on ethnicity or rural background but need.
Our focus on education should be one that will offer long term solutions to our perennial and recurrent problems instead of languages to be taught in schools. We must be able to offer human resource that is competitive locally, regionally and internationally. A recent UNESCO report on literacy highlighted that one (1) in four (4) children in school cannot read or write. The report further states that teachers in Kenyan schools are weaker than their pupils. If that is truly the case why are we wasting time discussing languages to be taught and language of instruction? Policy makers and politicians should desist from trying to use the education system to address parochial, naïve, myopic and retrogressive interests for selfish short term political gains.
Research has shown that multilingual children grow to be more confident and tend to become successful in their lives. The bit they did not mention is that research focused on internationally spoken and recognized languages. So will teaching our children local languages (not mother tongue) help our child in the future? This could be a new research area. Think of it this way: Andrew – has fair proficiency in the following languages – English, Swahili, French and Chinese. On the other hand Brian has fair proficiency in English, Maasai, Giriama and Swahili. Which of the two would you consider hiring for your multinational company?
Culture in my opinion can be passed on to new generations through habits, training observation and education on traditions where language is a medium of communication. A country’s success and that of its citizens can be attributed to the education that they receive especially in the formative years. We therefore should not be held hostage by selfish short term vision of policy makers or politicians. We should re-focus our energies to giving better content and enabling environments that our children will prosper anywhere in the world and thus an educated citizenry.
