English and Development

Policy, Pedagogy and Globalization

Elizabeth J. Erling, Philip Seargeant, Elizabeth J. Erling, Philip Seargeant

• Publisher: Multilingual Matters
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781847699480
• Topic: Bildung
• Subtopic: Bildungstheorie & -praxis

This book investigates the relationship between English and personal and national development, as this is both discursively promoted (particularly through language policy) and practically realized in developing societies. It addresses the effects that the increased use of English and the promotion of English-language education are having in developmental contexts, and their impact on broader educational issues, on local language ecologies and on questions of cultural identity. It investigates these issues by drawing together a series of original examinations and case studies by a range of leading scholars working in this burgeoning field. The chapters focus on a variety of contexts from around the world, and the volume as a whole surveys and critiques the positioning and influence of English as a catalyst for development in the 21st century.

1 English, Development and Education: Charting the Tensions

Gibson Ferguson

Introduction

As one might expect, given divergent perspectives on the global diffusion of English (see e.g. Phillipson, 1992; Pennycook, 2000), the relationships of English to development are contested and controversial. On the one hand, an almost unanimous community of applied linguists see the continued use of English as a medium of education in primary schools in Sub-Saharan Africa, and elsewhere, as impairing the quality of education, and hence as holding back development. On the other hand, there are abundant official discourses that portray English-language skills as essential for economic competitiveness, for entry into the knowledge economy and for access to foreign investment and technology. Not uncommonly such views are buttressed by development experts who argue the benefits of widespread English-language skills. An example would be Green et al. (2007: 218), whose report for the UK Department for International Development (DFID) concludes:

Are there any straightforward lessons to be learnt regarding the benefits of promoting particular kinds of skills through education? Two points seem to emerge clearly from our analysis.

First widespread fluency in English language has proved to be a considerable asset in many developing countries, especially for the growth of service industries, as India is now finding. Some successful developers, like Singapore and Hong Kong, had this advantage built into their education systems through colonial inheritance and public policy decisions from the start since English was a major language of instruction ….

At the popular level, meanwhile, there is a seemingly insatiable demand for English-medium education and/or the early introduction of English as a curricular subject (see e.g. Trudell, 2007; Muthwii, 2004; Probyn, 2001, 2005; Annamalai, 2004; Nunan, 2003 with respect to Cameroon, Kenya, South Africa, India and East Asia). And this pressure has been reflected in policy: for example, in the drift to English-medium education in South African schools despite official multilingualism (Kamwangamalu, 2004), in the ever earlier introduction of English as a curriculum subject in East Asian countries and in the rapid growth in private English-medium schools in India, Tanzania and elsewhere (see e.g. Graddol, 2010; Lassibille et al., 1999).

If the relationships of English to development are controversial, they are also complex and difficult to ascertain reliably. One reason lies in the very variable relationship of education, hence of English, to development across different societies with different economies and labour markets, different education systems and different sociolinguistic ecologies. The failed neo-liberal ‘Washington consensus’ approach to development,¹ positing (almost) universal recipes for economic growth, has long since given way to more nuanced understandings of development, and of the role of local factors – governance, social cohesion and social capital, culture, equality, etc. – as conditioning the potential for, and the pathways toward, development (see e.g. Robertson et al., 2007). Thus, there are likely to be few policy prescriptions that are universally applicable, and the relationship of English to development is not a constant across societies.

Another source of complexity lies in the very definition of development. Narrow economic conceptions seem to have given way to broader conceptions that embrace improved governance, security, better health, social cohesion, environmental sustainability and so on.² Similarly, poverty can be defined from various perspectives – narrowly as a lack of income, or more broadly as a complex of multiple, interlocking deprivations – as precarious livelihoods, isolated places, hungry and sick bodies, low physical security, disrespect by the powerful, discriminatory social relations and disempowering institutions (see Narayan et al., 2000: 2). Our purpose here, however, is not to interrogate these definitions – there is insufficient space for that – but rather simply to note them, and observe that if development is indeed multifaceted, it is possible that English relates to the facets in varying ways – perhaps advancing development in some directions while thwarting it in others.

It is apparent already, then, that in discussing English and development one enters a terrain bestrewn with tensions, even contradictions – for example, between access and quality, equity and efficiency, educational research and public pressure, aspiration and economic reality. This chapter explores some of these tensions. Our focus is mainly on Sub-Saharan Africa, butbecause English-language skills are typically acquired through the formal educational system, it is useful to first briefly review what is known about the relationship between education and development generally.

Education and Development: The Wider Context

For many years, influenced substantially by human capital theory,³ education has been seen as having positive benefits for development. A historically influential methodology for probing the economic benefits of education has been rate of return analysis, a form of analysis that matches life-time earnings against the cost of education. Broadly speaking, these analyses indicate positive social and private returns to investment in education at all levels (Psacharopoulos & Patrinos, 2002), especially at the primary level.⁴ This finding, in combination with the rise of the poverty reduction agenda (see Robertson et al., 2007) and the international adoption of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), has led to a particular investment focus on the basic education sector, a key driver, so it is thought, of poverty reduction. Meanwhile, alongside the putative economic benefits, there are claims of indirect benefits: for example, education has been linked to enhanced agricultural productivity, better maternal health and reduced child mortality (see e.g. World Bank, 2005a; King & Palmer, 2006b).

However, while there is a broad consensus that education is positively associated with development, there remain uncertainties around the precise nature of this association, three aspects of which can be singled out for comment. The first is methodological, and concerns the reliability of the data on which rates of return analysis are based, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa (see e.g. Bennell, 1996). Samples may not be truly representative of the populations under study (Psacharopoulos & Patrinos, 2002), and the methodology is limited in not taking account of the non-economic benefits and costs of education. Thus, while rate of return of analysis may be one useful tool for guiding investment decisions, it generally needs to be supplemented by other methodologies.

A second area of uncertainty concerns the precise components of education that contribute most to poverty reduction and development:⁵ literacy, general analytical abilities, or specific technical skills (inclusive of language skills). Answers are elusive, however, not just because of the methodological challenges but because such contributions are likely to vary across locations, and, most pertinently, across time. Palmer et al. (2007), for example, suggest that information technology skills and scientific literacy may become more economically relevant due to globalisation, the rise of knowledge-based economies and the onset of rapid technological change. One mightalso speculate – no more than that – that the same economic changes may be increasing the economic utility of English-language skills, a point of view that Green et al. (2007) in the quote at the beginning of the chapter seem to endorse. That said, the dearth of tracer studies and of rates of return analyses for English-language education means that we lack detailed empirical evidence of how English functions for individuals in terms of life-outcomes, and of its benefits and costs for society as a whole.

A related question has to do with the developmental contribution of the different levels of education. As noted previously, governments and donor agencies have historically tended to prioritise primary/basic education, and indeed this is enshrined in the MDGs. But such prioritisation, and the attendant dangers of an unbalanced expansion of one sector of education to the detriment of others, has recently received critical attention from a number of commentators (e.g. King & Palmer, 2006a; Palmer et al., 2007), and indeed the World Bank itself (World Bank, 2005b), who, noting the interlocking nature of different education levels, point out the essential contributions of secondary and tertiary education. There are, first of all, benefits for primary education in that the prospects of continuing to a higher level of education incentivise primary school completion (World Bank, 2005b). The secondary/tertiary levels also provide trained teachers for primary schools, not to mention trained health professionals, IT professionals, business leaders, scientists and the like. Studies also show a range of indirect benefits (externalities): for example, women with secondary education tend to delay marriage, have fewer children and experience lower child mortality (Benefo & Schulz, 1996); secondary school study is also associated with greater use of agricultural technologies and the creation of more profitable enterprises (Palmer et al., 2007).

Conversely, the limitations of an education restricted to primary level are becoming more apparent. A number of country-specific studies (Fryer & Vencatachellum, 2002; World Bank, 2004b⁶) suggest that rates of return to primary education may be falling and those for secondary and tertiary on the rise, reasons for which include the very low quality of much primary education and the sheer numbers of primary graduates. At the same time, economic and technological change is altering the demand for particular kinds of skills, and in many places primary education alone confers little advantage in finding a waged job.

This growing appreciation of the contributions of secondary education (see e.g. King & Palmer, 2006a; Palmer et al., 2007) and the increased emphasis on the role of primary education as an essential preparation for further study is not without implications for English-language education. Secondary education, after all, is, in Africa, very much the domain of English-mediumeducation, and thus the quality of instruction and the outcomes of schooling will be partly dependent on how well pupils and teachers are prepared for the use of this medium.

The third, and probably most crucial, aspect of the education–development association we focus on is the importance of context. It is now relatively well-understood that education can facilitate development (see e.g. King & Palmer, 2006b; Palmer et al., 2007) – but only in an enabling environment. Put simply, quality education can promote the acquisition of skills and knowledge but does not guarantee their purposeful utilisation. There is no direct causal pathway from education to development, as is perhaps illustrated by the case of Kenya, where despite considerable investment in schooling over the past 20 or 30 years, there has, arguably, been little impact on incomes or social cohesion (see e.g. Oketch, 2007: 137).

Disabling factors, ones that block the developmental potential of education, are various and include poor governance, weak institutional capacity, a stagnant macro-economic environment that does not generate employment opportunities, a deteriorating ecology and a non-progressive, non-egalitarian political environment (e.g. arbitrary decision making, policy fluctuation, weak civil society). More specific factors may impede the realization of particular potential gains: for example, the benefits of literacy, whether in local languages or English, may be reduced if there is no literacy environment (e.g. few or no newspapers, books or printed materials, no electric light) to sustain literacy skills. The benefits to agricultural productivity similarly may not be realised if there is lack of access to credit, fertilisers, extension services, agricultural markets, etc.

If the above factors are part of the disabling/enabling external context, then the quality of education is surely one of the critical internal factors governing the relationship of education to development, and it is here that the applied linguistics literature on the effects of English-medium education in Sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere is especially relevant. Accordingly, it is to this that we now turn.

The Quality of Education and the Language of Instruction

It is now widely accepted, and has been for some time (UNESCO, 1953), that a local (or familiar) language is the most educationally effective language of instruction in early education and, indeed, possibly throughout primary education. The key arguments, briefly, are that cognitive development is best fostered in a language the child knows well. Instruction through a familiar language improves the quality of interaction between pupil andteacher, narrows the gulf between home and school, integrates the school better into the local community and gives recognition to the pupil’s home language and culture (see e.g. Benson, 2000). It is also sometimes suggested, in line with Cummins’s linguistic interdependence hypothesis (Cummins, 1979), that consolidation of academic literacy skills in the first language can facilitate subsequent acquisition of the same skills in the further languages learned.

These arguments are increasingly bolstered by empirical evidence. For example, Williams (1996) shows that Year 5 primary pupils in Malawi, where Chichewa is the medium up to Year 4, have no worse reading abilities in English and better Chichewa/Nyanja abilities than Year 5 pupils in Zambia, where the official medium from Year 1 is English. Experimentation with local language or bilingual media of instruction in Nigeria, Mozambique and Burkina Faso has had broadly favourable results (see Fafunwa et ...