<div dir="ltr"><br clear="all"><h1 id="DailyNewsHeadline">Jonathan Jansen's views at variance with the Constitution</h1>
<div class="">
Advocate Jacques du Preez
</div>
<div class="">
03 October 2013
</div>
<br>
<div class="">
Jacques du Preez notes that the Bill of Rights says that everyone has
right to be schooled in the official language of their choice
</div><br>
<p><b>CONFUSING RACIAL PREJUDICE WITH LANGUAGE RIGHTS</b></p>
<p>Remarks made by Prof Jonathan Jansen - Rector of the University of
the Free State - in the Percy Baneshik Memorial Lecture to the English
Academy of South Africa on 18 September, have caused a furore in
Afrikaans cultural and educational circles. They have been widely
interpreted as a call for English-only education and as a claim that
"Afrikaans‐exclusive or even Afrikaans‐dominant white schools and
universities represent a serious threat to race relations in South
Africa".</p>
<p>Jansen said that "one major solution to the long-term resolution of
the crisis in education" would be to "instruct every teacher and every
child in English from the first day of school rather than add to the
burden of poor instruction in the mother‐tongue in the foundation years
to the trauma of transition to English later on".</p>
<p>Jansen has since then insisted that "his careful argument on language
in education has been distorted to create a media hype". Nevertheless,
it may be helpful to remind participants in the debate about what the
Constitution actually says regarding language and education.</p>
<p>Section 6(1) of the Founding Provisions of the Constitution enshrine
English - along with 10 other languages - as one of the official
languages of the Republic. No one disputes that it would be
unconstitutional for any school (or other academic institution) to
implement exclusivity on the basis of race, and, similarly, if it was
unfair, on the basis of language. Neither does anyone really dispute the
idea that English is the <i>lingua franca</i> and thus, as Jansen proposes, should be the language of reconciliation.</p>
<p>However, Prof Jansen's apparent proposal that a long-term solution to
the education crisis would be exclusive English education - from the
foundation phase - cannot be reconciled with the Constitution's
provision for multilingualism and for the space that it clearly provides
for education in any of our official languages - also in single-medium
education institutions.</p>
<p>It can also not be reconciled with UFS's own language policy - which
is based on recognition of the language provisions in the Constitution.</p>
<p>Section 29(2) of the Bill of Rights states that everyone has the
right to receive education in public educational institutions (schools
and tertiary institutions) in the official language or languages of
their choice, where that education is reasonably practicable.
Consequently, the state must consider all reasonable educational
alternatives, including single medium institutions, taking into account
equity, practicality and the need to redress the results of past
racially discriminatory laws and practices.</p>
<p>Section 29(3)(a) of the Bill of Rights is clear: everyone has the
right to establish and maintain, at their own expense, independent
educational institutions, as long as they do not discriminate on the
basis of race.</p>
<p>The <i>South African Schools Act of 1996</i> - which applies to all
school education in the Republic - defines in clear terms [section 6(2)]
that the governing bodies of public schools determine the language
policy of such schools, subject to the Constitution, the Schools Act and
any other applicable provincial legislation. The caveat on school
governing bodies' prerogative to determine such language policy can be
found in section 6(3), which determines that no form of racial
discrimination may be practiced when a language policy is established
according to this article (of the Act).</p>
<p>Where a governing body thus fulfills its duties and powers in legal
manner concerning the determination of a language policy, and the policy
is consistent with the Constitution, it can hardly be said that unfair
discrimination will follow.</p>
<p>Poor mother-tongue education is indeed a problem (but this is very
seldom the case in Afrikaans schools). It has also been shown - fairly
conclusively - that mother-tongue education during the first six to
seven years of schooling achieves far better educational outcomes than
education in a second language - even with regard to learning the second
language (English) for use in high school.</p>
<p>The poor state of mother-tongue teaching could also be addressed by
carrying out the provisions of section 6(2) of the Constitution, which
"because of the historically diminished use and status of the indigenous
languages of our people" requires the state to "take practical and
positive measures to elevate the status and advance the use of these
languages". Mother-tongue education in these languages, and the
development of much-needed infrastructure in this regard could be viewed
as a form of practical and positive measures to increase the status and
use of those languages.</p>
<p>Also, the root of the educational crisis is not primarily the
language of education but the failure of policy. If we hypothesise that
only English were to be used in the South African education system as
the medium of education, it still would not help with the current
education crisis in the long-term. Particularly if learners are without
textbooks halfway through the academic year, without computers or
electricity, without basic sanitation, without proper classrooms - and
with teachers who do not have basic reading or writing skills - whether
in English or any other language.</p>
<p>In this regard Prof Jansen is correct: a race and class-based system of exclusion is detrimental to poor, black students. <a name="_GoBack"></a>This (and other problems within the South African education system as mentioned above) touch on the failure of education policy<i> </i>and have nothing to do with language in a constitutional order in which all South Africans enjoy equal language rights.</p>
<p>We cannot accept that it was Prof Jansen's intention to express views
that are so much at variance with the Constitution, his own
university's policy and with his own laudable record in promoting
reconciliation and positive relations between our communities. Surely,
in the light of the tragic experience of 1976, he did not mean that
South African schoolchildren should once again be forced to study in a
language that they do not regard as their own?</p>
<p>We accordingly must accept his explanation that "he was misquoted" and that "media hype" is to blame.</p><p><a href="http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=410673&sn=Detail&pid=71616">http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=410673&sn=Detail&pid=71616</a><br>
</p><p><br></p><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 the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message. A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br>
<br>For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to <a href="https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/">https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/</a><br>listinfo/lgpolicy-list<br>*******************************************
</div>