<br clear="all">
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="700" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left"><img height="116" alt="allAfrica.com" src="http://allafrica.com/img/static/aa-trans_200x116.gif" width="200"> </td>
<td align="left"><img height="1" alt="" src="http://allafrica.com/img/static/s_trans.gif" width="20"> </td>
<td align="left">
<div align="center" valign="middle"><span></span><span></span><span></span><span></span><span></span>
<div id="beacon_118" style="LEFT: 0px; VISIBILITY: hidden; POSITION: absolute; TOP: 0px"><img style="WIDTH: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px" height="0" alt="" src="http://ads.allafrica.com/adlog.php?bannerid=118&clientid=71&zoneid=0&source=en%2C_leaderboard%2C_stories%2Fprintable%2F200706130664.html%2C-nonindex%7Cen%2C_leaderboard%2C_ros%2C-nonindex&block=21600&capping=0&cb=825879874ea7b78ba4e6a1ff194fa38e" width="0">
</div><span></span><span></span><noscript></noscript></div></td></tr></tbody></table><br><br><b>Language And Literacy - Tools of Repression Or Freedom?</b> <br><br><b>The Daily Observer</b> (Banjul) <br>OPINION<br>12 June 2007
<br>Posted to the web 13 June 2007 <br><br>By Demba Ceesay<br><br>
<p>Language and literacy are like Siamese twins. The more literate people are especially in a language familiar to them, the more they can fight against exclusion. Literacy undeniably returns power to where it belongs: the people. It also facilitates societal development by means of increasing the number of active participants in the development wheel. It can serve as a catalyst for co-operation. The absence of mass and critical literacy has been found to be big hindrance to development as literacy has become an integral part of the development cycle in terms of the human resource potentials that go with it. It follows that if people are to fully participate in both democratic practices and general development, they must be literate. And in a modern world rapidly overtaken by advanced technology in information communication, we are no longer talking of the basic post-independence functional literacy programmes that limited students and non-formal education participants to basic writing and arithmetic.
</p>
<p>Rather, we are talking about an education and literacy programmes that cater for both the general and specialised operation of the individual in a modern nation-state. By this, I mean literacy for employment opportunities including research and scientific enquiries, computer technology, literacy for democratic participation, commerce and trade and production. This implies that the new demand for genuine literacy in a modern nation-state requires both acquisition of the innovations in communication and increased competence in language use, whatever language such opportunity is available. This requires competence in higher-order thinking skills such as effective negotiation, analysis, reflection and the ability to participate discursively on myriad issues of national importance grounded on popular involvement in debates and criticisms in a language the people are proficient in.
</p>
<p>It is therefore evident that for people to take part in a more co-operative and pluralistic society, the initiatives of getting critical literacy to the people must emanate from the state. It is no wonder that generally, countries with high literacy rates tend to forge ahead of those with low literacy rates. This is because in most developed countries, the state has a poor view of illiteracy and efforts are considerably made to eradicate it. In these countries too, illiteracy is seen both as denial of human rights, as well as a waste of human talents.
</p>
<p>On the contrary, in most developing countries particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, the formal education system serves only the well-to-do and is usually not responsive to the growing demands of language and literacy for the modern world. The non-formal education sector is usually left for NGOs to run. Because most of these NGOs originate from some where in the west, and since most of them are not able to practically deal with the conflicting issues around language, their programmes are normally not in the language of the people. Such programmes cannot easily bring people closer to genuine information. And for people to make sound decisions and partake in the affairs of the state literacy programmes must be able to contribute to knowledge and attitudes required for making informed decisions and exercising their rights and responsibilities in a democratic society.
</p>
<p>Language and literacy programmes must be structured beyond the scope of traditional functional illiteracy programmes meant to enable participants to merely fill forms, write letters, read agri-business instructions manuals and choosing menus at a restaurant. Literacy for development in a modern society calls for a more critical approach in which different strategies of thought and problem-solving in abstract atmosphere are fundamental. How this can be achieved in a foreign language is a question whose answers are still debatable. That is why the argument for local languages, the language of the people, as media for instruction is growing from strength to strength. Paolo Freire argues that literacy programmes can only bring the best out of people if they are in constant dialogue and reflection with the people. Unfortunately, as briefly highlighted earlier, most literacy programmes in many parts of the developing world do not fit in this direction. First, they are given in a foreign language. Modern curricula in most developing countries are still contemptuous of local knowledge and cultures, in the same manner colonial education systems were. Then there is a problem of pedagogy. The education system, both in the formal and non-formal systems continues to portray the teacher as the custodian of knowledge and the student the passive recipient. There is little dialogue in the system as everything in the classroom is one-sided. And Freire further argues that:
</p>
<p>The man who proclaims devotion to the cause of liberation yet is unable to enter into communication with the people whom he continues to regard as totally ignorant, is grievously self-conceited. </p>
<p>For literacy to bring the best out of the people it is supposed to serve and facilitate societal development in a culturally plural society, it must start with the trust in the ingenuity of the people, which is only truly expressed through communication in a language familiar to them. This dialogical approach necessary for genuine literacy reflects heavily on language ability with both the teacher and the student requiring effective discourse to discern learning objectives and learning outcomes. When literacy programmes and education systems are used in a familiar language, they facilitate legitimate participation in a democratic culture and economic development. If we want to change the status quo, we must first change the status of language in our schools. The irony of the education and economic policies in most of the developing world is that while they are asking for popular participation, they insist on using a medium which still alienates the people. With the re-introduction of local languages in some education systems in many countries, there are signs that such languages will flourish to higher heights to enhance more active learning.
</p>
<p>This is because familiar language distributes power within the learning environment as well as between the elite and the masses in a culturally plural society that we now have. </p>
<p>As illustrated earlier, languages have always been associated with power, being it economic, political or cultural power. One needs not be a linguist to understand this in the context of the place of English in the new world order. English has indeed emerged as a global language at the detriment of hundreds, possibly thousands of other languages, thanks to the processes of globalisation. The readiness to push for a multilingual language policy in schools is far less impressive because indigenous languages do not get any support from state initiatives in the education sector. Even thought most African countries are having their local languages taught in the school systems, this is only so at the very basic levels as these languages are rarely taught beyond the secondary school. For some, for example, it is envisaged that in New Education Policy in The Gambia, local languages would be part of curriculum for the early part of primary education. The policy states that:
</p>
<p>The national language pilot programme will be expanded to form the basis of a smooth transition from the home to the school to enhance performance and the appreciation of indigenous languages and knowledge </p>
<p>The policy further states that the "predominant Gambian language of the area in which the child lives" would be the medium of instruction for the first three years of basic education and that English would be used as a medium from grade four onwards. However, the policy is somehow silent on what to do with these languages beyond primary education. In other developing countries as well, there is also the serious misconception that advanced scientific concepts and arguments cannot be expressed in these languages as they cannot handle discourses in many domains of knowledge. So in most cases, even where a local language is given a role in schools, there are still a number of unsettled contradictions that children have to grapple with as they climb the educational ladder. That is why curriculum developers usually take the easier option: let them learn English (or French as the case may be!) since they are going to server the wider world.
</p>
<p>As if that is not enough, at societal level, local languages are given low status as they are used only in traditional tribunals and petit trade. For instance, even though the Gambian Constitution categorically states that national languages could be spoken in Parliament, we are yet to hear Wolof, Fula, Sarahule or any other language spoken. One can imagine the House could be losing lots of ideas as some members might have been more productive if they had expressed their ideas in a more familiar language. How many times have we had jokes of people saying that if they were given to opportunity to speak in their mother tongues, they would have said more? In The Gambia, as in other African countries, if one is even very fluent in one's mother tongue, that is regarded as old-fashioned and the person occupies an inferior position compared to someone who can quote volumes and volumes of Shakespeare. I am not in any way suggesting that foreign languages like English should be abolished in our school systems. Every language is important. Serere, Sarahule, Hawsa, Arabic, Urdu, Japanese, Fante, English, etc are all important. For people to participate fully in a democratic and culturally plural society in our today's world, they should be given the opportunity to learn and use their language as far as possible to increase the potentials of self expression and thought as well as enrich knowledge.
</p>
<p>We are told that we are in an information age. Globalisation has shifted the thrust of the development debate from industrialisation to information technology. Access to information centres around computer literacy together with all the related skills around it to the extent that if Bill Gates were Chinese, we would all be learning Mandarin now. But to all intent and purpose, of all the skills we need, ability in a language that we are familiar in is crucial if we are to partake in this information revolution. Therefore, we cannot run away from the language and literacy debate even if we are talking about computers. If one turns a computer on, it responses in a language. Let us hope that some day our languages would be developed so that, when our grandchildren (if not our children!) boot on their PCs, the menus on their screens would be in their languages.
</p>
<p>To conclude, it is evident that language articulates identity and gives freedom to people who acquire it. In a world of disappearing national boundaries, we are witnessing both the supremacy of English as the global language and growing contestations against it by virtue of the increasing campaigns for use of indigenous languages. The taste for literacy especially in a familiar language is also growing because it has been found to be the best way of rescuing endangered languages across the world. We have observed that familiar language does not only confer power, but serves as a potential resource for mass participation in a democratic culture.
</p>
<p>Consequently, countries are gradually giving indigenous languages the priority they deserve while maintaining dominant languages such as English to be able to function well in a globalised world. The notion that local languages cannot express advanced scientific thoughts and concepts is a fallacy. If any language is developed, its orthography well articulated and standardised with existing world languages and discourse, it can no doubt fulfil the role that other languages have fulfilled.
</p>
<p>We have seen that, generations after generations, language has been used as a tool of both repression and freedom. It will still continue to be used as such depending on who possesses it. We have also seen how genuine literacy programmes drawn with the people in their own language can serve as a catalyst for producing a critical mass which is employable in a modern nation-state and capable of participating in a viable democracy. If we want to turn around the world for people for positive development, we have to address the status of their literacy and use of language by putting every language in its proper perspective.
</p>
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="middle"><br><a href="http://allafrica.com/stories/printable/200706130664.html">http://allafrica.com/stories/printable/200706130664.html</a></td></tr></tbody></table><span></span><span></span><span></span><span>
</span><span></span><br>-- <br>**************************************<br>N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members<br>and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of
<br>the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a <br>message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br>*******************************************