Implementing ME policies - navigating complexity and key barriers to and drivers of implementation efficacy

• In Event: Highlighted Session: The power of language and languages of power: understanding language of instruction policy change across six postcolonial contexts

Proposal

Studies have documented how LOI policy is either not adhered to or is appropriated at the local level for various reasons, which affects the degree to which L1 is used for reading instruction or as the LOI, significantly impacting the conditions under which students acquire learn language and reading skills (Okebukola, Owolabi, & Okebukola, 2012; Trudell & Piper, 2014; Piper, Schroder & Trudell, 2016; Nakamura et al., 2017). These local adherence or appropriation decisions can affect dosage of L1/L2 instruction and fidelity of policy adherence.


We identify three major hypotheses from the research literature to explain these phenomena: socio-linguistic drivers, contextual factors, and the presence or absence of adequate conditions affecting teachers’ sense of efficacy.


Regarding socio-linguistics, scholars point to teachers’ and parents’ attitudes regarding language use, especially the devaluing of local languages, as a barrier to uptake (Trudell & Piper, 2014; Benson, 2007). Recent research, however, notes the malleability of teacher attitudes regarding ME. Teachers' attitudes may be linked to their sense of efficacy in ME instruction, which is related to ME resources and support (de Galbert, April 20, 2022; Benson, 2021). Finally, we note that context, such as the degree of urbanity or linguistic heterogeneity, may be factors in local appropriation or adherence.


This study examined the following questions: To what extent is multilingual education policy adhered to or appropriated in schools? and What factors influence these processes?


To explore the question of school level uptake and appropriation under diverse conditions, the study employed a multi-case, multi-country design, using qualitative methods. The sample consists of a purposively selected diversity sample of 36 schools (6 per country), representing a range of conditions. Data was collected from semi-structured interviews (144 teachers, 4 per school; 36 school directors, 1 per school), focus groups (36, 1 per school), and teacher observations (144, 4 per school). Data is being analyzed first at the school-level, then at the cross-case, national-level, and then at the cross-national level.


Preliminary analysis (from one of the six countries, as analysis is ongoing) suggests that:


Parents and some teachers show modest socio-linguistic preferences for L2 language use, but there is recognition of the value of multilingual approaches among many, suggesting less local resistance to ME than is often portrayed.
Where L1 TLMs are lacking, there is minimal ME instruction and policy adherence. Despite having been developed in Kenya in 18 languages, there was almost no evidence of L1 (Ekegusi and Dholuo) TLMs in sampled schools.
Schools reported fluid language use patterns in attempts to respond to students’ abilities and external pressures. English is often used widely as an LOI well before the official transition year (4th grade), as educators feel pressure to prepare students for national assessments.
Language use patterns vary widely and are influenced by: the subject matter taught, the linguistic composition of students, teacher’s language skills, and students’ language skills, regardless of the transition model.
Translanguaging was used extensively and with little regard for the official curricular guidelines for LOI transition in some contexts.

Author

• Andre Kone, University of Arts and Human Sciences of Bamako