Book notice:

[Harold F. Schiffman]

Forwarded from LINGUIST List 16.3223, Tue Nov 08 2005


EDITORS: Lin, Angel M. Y.; Martin, Peter W.
TITLE: Decolonization, Globalization
SUBTITLE: Language-in-Education Policy and Practice
SERIES: New Perspectives on Language & Education
PUBLISHER: Multilingual Matters
YEAR: 2005
Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-2092.html

Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu, Department of English, Howard
University, Washington, DC

INTRODUCTION

Decolonization, Globalization: Language-in-Education Policy and Practice
is an edited collection of papers aimed not only at presenting regional
reports on language policy and practice in postcolonial contexts, but also
at "theorizing and problematizing issues in these contexts.." (p.1) The
volume seeks to explain how postcolonial formations, both social,
cultural, economic and educational, collude with new forces of
globalization and global capitalism to perpetuate educational, social and
material inequalities in postcolonial contexts.  As the editors put it,
what distinguishes this volume from similar anthologies on language
policies and practices in postcolonial societies is that it attempts to
"link old colonization processes with new globalization processes, seeing
the latter as in many ways a continuation of the former and yet not in a
simple binary imperialism- resistance logic, but in new, complex ways that
also offer new opportunities of collusion and interpenetration,
hybridization and postcolonial reinvention, ways that go beyond the
essentialist, nationalist, national identity and 'two cultures' politics
that defined earlier phases of decolonization, nationalism... in many
postcolonial societies" (p. 2). Noting that the project of decolonization
that has been going on in the post-colonies is now being replaced by
another project, that of globalization, the editors call for
"institutional changes that ... will allow people who, due to family
habitus, excel more in local than global languages [such as English] to
have a chance for socio- economic mobility" (p.12). The debate around the
consequences of globalization, the papers in this volume argue, must move
from mere critical deconstruction paradigm, one that focuses on a
criticism of existing language policies and practices, to a critical
construction paradigm and look into the nitty-gritty of the everyday
realities of students and teachers to come up with constructive
suggestions for policy and practice alternatives. (p. 13)

SUMMARY

The collection, edited by Angel M.Y. Lin and Peter W. Martin, consists of
12 chapters including a foreword by Luke Alan and an afterword by Suresh
Canagarajah. The introductory chapter, titled "From a critical
deconstruction paradigm to a critical construction paradigm: An
introduction to decolonization, globalization and language-in- education
policy and practice" (pp. 1-20), is written by the editors themselves and
seems to be designed to provide a critical overview of all the chapters
that make up the collection. Highlighted in this chapter is the role that
English plays in encounters between the West and postcolonial societies.
English is seen as an indispensable resource and linguistic capital which
many postcolonial peoples and governments seek for themselves and their
younger generations, ... [it is] the most important language for
socioeconomic advancement and for access to higher professional education
and to ..knowledge- intensive job market (p. 3), [it is] the medium that
drives the shift from the project of decolonization to that of
globalization in postcolonial societies, and is one that ruling
multilingual elite use to exert internal colonialism and produce subaltern
identities in these societies.

In the chapter "Nation-building in a globalized world: language choice and
education in India", E. Annamalai addresses the very theme of the shift in
language policy and practice from decolonization to globalization in
postcolonial societies, with a focus on the role of English in education
in the Indian subcontinent. He describes how India has addressed the
tension between the need for nation-building, which requires replacing
English with local languages, and that for developing skills and knowledge
for an industrial economy, which requires the retention of English. In
response to this conflict India has given a statutory recognition and
elevation of Indian languages as the medium in the domains of power such
as public administration, law and education, but in practice it has
delayed their actual use until they become ready through internal
development to perform the assigned roles. As is often the case, delayed
implementation has been a recipe for policy failure. Since English is not
equally accessible to all, it does not equalize opportunities but rather
reproduces inequality. Annamalai argues that for language-in-education
policies to succeed in India education must be decolonized. This entails
questioning the colonial dichotomy between tradition and modernism, which
says that local languages are good for keeping cultural traditions and
practices and English for embracing modernity and material progress. He
concludes that as long as education perpetuates this dichotomy, then in
India nation-building will remain notional. (p.36)

Angel Lin offers -- in a very condensed and at times hard-to-process style
(see, for instance, the 12-line sentences on pp. 48 & 51) -- trans-
disciplinary perspectives on language-in-education policy and practice in
Hong Kong. In particular, Lin examines existing critical analyses of
colonial and capitalist discourses (pp.41-45), of social stratification
mechanisms, and of critical ethnographies (pp. 45-51) in the former
British colony. Her discussion also considers two critical projects
including one aimed at destabilizing the centre-periphery dichotomy in the
process of academic knowledge production; and second, that of reflexively
problematizing and revisioning the role of the academic researcher
researching on language-in-education policies and practices in
neo-colonies. She advocates the need to do away with the dichotomy of
centre-periphery in academic disciplines, where the periphery applies the
theories produced by the center. Instead, Lin argues for the concept of
'multiplying the centers' (p.39) and for multidirectional and multifarious
ways in which theories, applications and knowledge are generated,
appropriated, reappropriated, circulated and recirculated. Against this
background, Lin believes that the 'centre-theory-periphery-application
dichotomy in the academic disciplines can be reworked into more fruitful
networks of hybrid types of studies which interpenetrate and
interilluminate one another' (p.39).  In conclusion Lin calls on
researchers working in the periphery to develop self-reflexive,
trans-disciplinary epistemological and political perspectives in a
critical project of language-in-education policy and practice research
that not only challenges the noted dichotomy but also goes beyond mere
academic knowledge production and consumption (p. 39).

Rani Rubdy's chapter (pp. 55-73) addresses the tensions and conflicts of
interests in Singapore's language-in-education policies, especially the
tensions and conflicts associated with the ideology of pragmatism, of
multilingualism, and of meritocracy. The ideology of 'pragmatic
multilingualism' is based on the principle of multiracialism, which means
equal status and treatment for all races (Chinese, Malay, Indians, and
Others) and their languages (Chinese, Malay, Tamil (and English?) and
cultures. The author notes that despite this policy English has, because
of its instrumental value, been the dominant language in the Island-State.
It is explained that English dominates because it is perceived as
ethnically neutral for it apparently does not favor any major community in
the city-State. As such, the language serves two purposes: At the
community level English is said to foster racial harmony and national
unity. At the individual level the language is said to be available to all
and so it provides equal opportunities for everyone irrespective of their
ethnic background (p. 59). Rubdy does, however, question the 'social
equalizer' role of English. This is because, according to the author, in
Singapore's socio-economic structures there has always been an asymmetry
in power relation between the English-speaking elite and the
non-English-speaking masses, as can be inferred from the ideology of
meritocracy. The latter, which is a euphemism for elitism or what Alastair
Pennycook terms "the planned reproduction of socio- economic inequality",
dictates that the individual's rewards after school are closely linked to
success in school (p. 66).

The third ideology, that of multilingualism, is based on the idea that all
four official languages of the city-state, English, Chinese, Malay and
Tamil, be available as media of instruction [for their respective
speakers]. It seems that the ultimate goal of this ideology has been to
promote bilingual education apparently in any two of the four official
languages. Rubdy observes that in reality, however, in Singapore bilingual
education has come to be defined as 'proficiency in English and one other
official language' (p. 61). This confirms further the asymmetry noted
earlier in power relation between English and ethnic mother tongues in
Singapore, where English is the medium for acquiring new knowledge and
keeping the nation abreast with its economic and development objectives;
and the mother tongues are for preserving old knowledge and ethnic
cultures (p.62). In spite of this positive image of English, the language
has also been seen as a carrier of undesirable Western values and a threat
to Asian ones. To counter this, Rubdy remarks that in 1979 the Government
of Singapore launched the Speak Mandarin Campaign. The unplanned effect of
this Campaign has been the emergence of Singlish, Singapore's local
colloquial English, as the symbol of intra-ethnic identity and cultural
integration in Singapore (p.64). The emergence of Singlish has,
expectedly, triggered another campaign, the Speak Good English Movement,
whose goal has been to counter the ill effects of Singlish and
re-emphasize the importance of Standard English (p.65). In the final
section of the chapter Rubdy considers the social consequences of the
Speak Mandarin Campaign and the Speak Good English Movement. These include
an increase in power status for English and Mandarin at the expense of
other languages, social stratification and divisiveness, and language
shift.

The chapter by Peter Martin (pp. 74-97) examines classroom language
practices in two rural schools in Malaysia. In particular, Martin
discusses the discrepancies between official language policy - which
recognizes Malay as the official language and requires that subjects such
as mathematics and science be taught through the medium of English -- and
what the author calls 'the voices of the local classroom participants' (p.
75). Drawing on data from lesson recordings Martin shows that, contrary to
the official language policy, teachers and learners make use of
codeswitching or 'safe' language practices involving English and Malay
rather than the learners' primary languages, Se'ban and Kelabit. And yet,
codeswitching is not recognized officially as a resource and is, rather,
described as 'bad practice' (p. 88). The chapter concludes with a plea for
the development and use of learners' primary languages in the classroom,
alongside Malay and English.

Abdolmehdi Riazi describes the political-linguistic history of Iran, with
a focus on four eras: the era of the Persian Empire (550BC-211AD), during
which Old Persian was used as official language; the era of the
Islamization of Iran along with the spread of the Arabic language and
culture (7th century); the era of the Qajar dynasty (1794-1925), which was
marked by the exposure of Iran to Western culture and language, especially
English; and the era of the Islamic Revolution (1979- present), which saw
the return of Persian as the official language of the state. The article
then concentrates on teaching methods employed for L1 (Persian) and L2
(Arabic or English) teaching; and highlights the impact of globalization,
which uses English as medium, on the status of languages and language
learning in Iran (p.113).

In their chapter Timothy Reagan and Sandra Schreffler report on an
institutional language policy adopted by the Istanbul Technical University
(ITU) in Turkey. They do so against the background of the dilemma often
facing tertiary institutions in developing countries, whether to use a
language of wider communication as the principal medium of instruction
and, in so doing, succumb to linguistic imperialism; or to use a local
language and, in this process, cut off students from the international
scholarly community. Traditionally ITU has used Turkish as the medium of
instruction. However and given the influence and power of English
globally, the institution has adopted a language policy that requires
students to complete one-third of their university courses in English. The
policy is intended to ensure that students acquire competence in English
to be able to compete in what has become an English-dominant world, while
at the same time maintaining a scholarly and academic context in which the
Turkish language remains viable. The later sections of the article
describe the English language program designed to implement the adopted
institutional language policy. Reagan and Schreffler remark, however, that
"neither students nor their teachers ..[are aware] of the underlying
rationale and justification for the program, [which is to challenge
English linguistic imperialism,] nor do they seem to recognize the
political and ideological forces that have driven the policy" (p.127).

The next three chapters discuss language-in-education policies and
classroom practices in Africa, and are followed by an afterword by Suresh
Canagarajah. Grace Bunyi's chapter (pp. 131-152) reports on the functions
of codeswitching in a rural school in Kenya, among them improve
communication between the teacher and the learners, enhance learners'
understanding of lesson content, classroom management, etc. Bunyi
apparently attributes codeswitching incidents to teachers' incompetence in
the English language. She argues that this practice (CS) may be doing more
harm than good to the learners, and calls for in-depth interpretive
research that will explain how poverty interacts with the classroom
practices she has described in this chapter (p. 148).

In her chapter (pp. 153-172) Margie Probyn concentrates on
language-in-education policy in post-apartheid South Africa, and describes
the tension between the need to promote the indigenous languages and
redress inequality on the one hand, and the instrumental need to acquire
English for participation in the global affairs on the other. She shows
that there is a mismatch between language policy and practice, and that
teachers commonly switch from English to the learners' home language for a
range of communicative, affective and management purposes, much as
described by Bunyi with respect to the Kenyan context. Unlike Bunyi,
however, Probyn argues for teachers' codeswitching skills to be recognized
as legitimate classroom strategies, and to be woven into effective
classroom practice for the strategic and coherent use of both the
learners' home language and the official medium of instruction, here
English (p.167).  She concludes, however, that "even if CS is recognized,
school communities are unlikely to be convinced of the value of indigenous
languages since politically and economically these languages have a lower
status vis--vis English" (p.168).

In the next chapter Birgit Brock-Utne also documents the use of
codeswitching in African classrooms, specifically in Tanzania and South
Africa. Also, the author critically revisits the argument often advanced
mostly by Western donors that Africa's multilingualism, among other
factors, hinders the development and use of African languages in the
educational system. Drawing on the work of Kwesi Prah and others on
harmonization Brock-Utne argues, and I agree with her, that the argument
against multilingualism and related factors does not hold. Prah's work
shows convincingly that the number of languages spoken in Africa has,
against the background of a painful colonial history and vested interests,
been overstated. Also, there are countries in Africa, among them Tanzania,
Rwanda, Burundi, Botswana, to name a few, where indigenous languages are
not used throughout the entire educational system despite the fact that
the majority of the population in these countries speak one major
indigenous language. Like Probyn, Brock-Une calls for the legitimization
of codeswitching and for its use not only in teaching but also in
students' examination answers.

In the final chapter Suresh Canagarajah addresses the theme that runs
throughout all the chapters that make up this collection, namely, the
tensions between language policies and practices in postcolonial
communities. Canagarajah remarks that these tensions should be seen as
normal rather than as unusual, for language planning involves constant
negotiation among various stakeholders. He points out that the negotiation
takes place against the background of two competing projects, the on-going
project of decolonization on the one hand, and the emerging project of
globalization resulting from the spread of English on the other. As a
response to the tensions noted above, Canagarajah suggests the ecology
model and the continua of biliteracy proposed by Nancy Hornberger (for
details, see p. 198).  Within this framework codeswitching is seen as a
productive strategy, one that can contribute to the development of
students' communicative and thinking skills. Drawing on Hornberger's work
Canagarajah argues that irrespective of whether codeswitching is used in
the classroom or not, it is important that nations give all languages not
only a place in their curriculum but also a functional status in their
social and economic life. Giving the former without the latter is a recipe
for policy failure (p. 200).

EVALUATION

Decolonization, Globalization: Language-in-education policy and practice
is a must-read for anyone who is interested in issues in
language-in-education policies and practices in post-colonial societies.
I have found the volume to be cohesive, resourceful and well-written,
except for the complex, 12-line sentences that one comes across in some of
the chapters. I strongly recommend the volume as required reading for
graduate seminars in language policy and planning. In what follows I
comment on the scope of the collection and on some of the objectives it
set out to achieve. With regard to the scope, the collection provides a
partial but critical survey of language-in- education policies and
practices in the neo-colonies. Aside from Reagan and Schreffler's
contribution on Turkey and Riazi's chapter on Iran, the majority of the
contributions in this collection focus on Asia and Africa. It is not clear
why post-colonial societies in Latin America are not represented in this
volume. In spite of its limited scope, the volume provides useful insights
into language-policy failure in post- colonial societies.

The collection seems to have the following two objectives, among others:
one, underscore the similarity between the failed project of
decolonization and that of globalization and, two, urge language
researchers to move away from "mere critical deconstruction paradigm" and
concentrate on "a critical construction paradigm [to] ..come up with
constructive suggestions for policy and practice alternatives" (p. 13).
Virtually all the contributions in this volume have met the first
objective but they have not, in my view, delivered on the second. Instead,
much of the discussion in the volume offers a criticism of post-colonial
language policies (see chapters by Annamalai, Lin, Rubdy and to a lesser
extent Riazi) and a description of classroom practices such as
codeswitching (see chapters by Bunyi, Probyn and Brock-Utne). These
practices have been documented extensively over the past two decades
(e.g., Martin-Jones 1988, Rubagumya 1994, Camilleri1996, Elridge 1996,
Espiritu 1996, Lin 1996, Butzkamm 1998, to list a few). It is not
surprising, then, that current literature on these practices hardly breaks
new grounds.

The legitimization or recognition of classroom practices such as
codeswitching is not the answer to the problems facing indigenous
languages and their speakers in post-colonial societies. As Probyn notes
pointedly, "even if CS is recognized, school communities are unlikely to
be convinced of the value of indigenous languages since politically and
economically these languages have a lower status vis-- vis English"
(p.168). Canagarajah makes a similar point when he says that "it is
important that nations give all languages not only a place in their
curriculum but also a functional status in their social and economic life"
(p. 200). Put differently, what is missing in language policies in
post-colonial societies is an awareness of the relationship between
language and the economy. Until policy-makers officially recognize and
establish this link, no progress can be made in attempts to promote
indigenous languages in domains such as education. In this regard, I have
found the Turkish case study of an institutional language policy discussed
by Timothy Reagan and Sandra Schreffler most illuminating. The case shows
convincingly that ex-colonial languages and indigenous languages can
coexist, in a productive way, in post-colonial communities. The problem is
that they hardly do, and competing forces ensure that they do not, as is
evident from the tensions, described throughout this volume, between
language policies and practices in these communities.

REFERENCES

Butzkamm, W. 1998. Codeswitching in a bilingual history lesson: The
mother tongue as a conversational lubricant. International Journal of
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 1, 2: 81-99.

Camilleri, A. 1996. Language values and identities: Codeswitching in
secondary classrooms in Malta. Linguistics and Education 8: 85-103.

Elridge, J. 1996. Codeswitching in a Turkish secondary school. ELT
Journal 50, 4: 303-311.

Espiritu, C. C. 1996. Codeswitching in the primary classroom: One
response to the planned and the unplanned language environment in
Brunei. A response. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development 1, 2-4: 145-148.

Lin, Amy. 1996. Bilingualism or linguistic segregation? Symbolic
domination, resistance and codeswitching in Hong Kong schools.
Linguistics and Education 8: 49-84.

Martin-Jones, M., ed. 1988. Codeswitching in the classroom: A review
of research in bilingual education programs. Lancaster: Center for
Language in Social Life Working Paper series No. 22.

Rubagumya, C. M., ed. 1994. Teaching and Researching Language in
African classrooms. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu is a graduate of the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign. He teaches Linguistics and English at Howard
University in Washington, D.C. His current research interests include
codeswitching, multilingualism and language policy, language and
identity, African Englishes, African American English, and African
linguistics.

http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-3223.html