review-of-the-literature-on-basic-education-in-nigeria-june-2014-3-1

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>literature</strong> on basic education in Nigeria<strong>of</strong> instruction and assessment plays a major part in poor attainment – a view endorsed by <strong>the</strong> recentEGRA and EGMA in Bauchi and Sokoto states (USAID 2013a, b and c) – but this was not consideredwithin <strong>the</strong> ESSPIN report.The EGRA results clearly indicated <strong>the</strong> benefits <strong>of</strong> learning in a first language/language <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> immediateenvironment. Although <strong>the</strong>re were very few pupils performing well, <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong>irresults for reading in <strong>the</strong> two languages suggested that reading Hausa has an important role to play inlearning to read and understand English:Children who are among <strong>the</strong> high performers in Hausa reading comprehension also tended to perform wellin English reading comprehension. Conversely, <strong>the</strong>re were no children who performed well in Englishreading comprehension who did not also perform well in Hausa reading comprehension, suggesting thatlearning to read Hausa plays an important role in learning to read and understand English (USAID 2013b: 45,and c: 47).The reports also concluded that children should be taught to read in Hausa, while English should betaught as a foreign language:More attention needs to be placed on instructional approaches that focus on teaching English as a ForeignLanguage. Improving children’s Hausa reading ability and improving instruction <strong>of</strong> English as a subject willboth facilitate English language acquisition (USAID 2013b: 69, and c: 72).4.3.2 Language in education policy in practiceNational government policy on <strong>the</strong> MOI dictates that <strong>the</strong> ‘language <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> environment’ should be usedfor <strong>the</strong> first three years <strong>of</strong> primary schooling, with English taught as a subject, before a ‘progressive’transition to English-medium teaching (FME 2004a). However, practice varies and <strong>the</strong>re is no policyguidance for children in multilingual environments. Theobald et al. (2007) claim that lessons in primaryschools in all years are predominantly carried out in one <strong>of</strong> Nigeria’s three main languages, i.e. in Hausain <strong>the</strong> north, Igbo in <strong>the</strong> South East and Yoruba in <strong>the</strong> South West.In contrast, Adekola (2007), summarising findings from several national studies, claimed that teacherstaught in English up to 70% <strong>of</strong> time, even in Primary 3. Similarly, a study <strong>of</strong> lower primary Science classesin 12 schools in Lagos State found teachers predominantly used a mix <strong>of</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r tongue and English withan increase in <strong>the</strong> intensity <strong>of</strong> use <strong>of</strong> English from Primary 1 to 3 even in <strong>the</strong> more rural schools, where<strong>the</strong>re was greater homogeneity <strong>of</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r tongue (Okebukola et al. 2013). Even at pre-school level,according to <strong>the</strong> 2003 ASC, over 70% <strong>of</strong> pre-schools claimed to be teaching in English (FME 2005).At lower primary level <strong>the</strong> ESA survey found that out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sampled 1,000 schools English was mostwidely used (44%), followed by one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> three main Nigerian languages (36%) and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> language<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> community (19.1%) (FME 2005). However, <strong>the</strong> report also claimed that information ga<strong>the</strong>redfrom field visits organised by <strong>the</strong> ESA Unit under <strong>the</strong> auspices <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> DFID-sponsored Task Force onSchool-Level Management found that in a state where <strong>the</strong> language policy was being properly adheredto, <strong>the</strong> performance <strong>of</strong> Primary 4 and 6 pupils on <strong>the</strong> MLA exercise was ‘exceptionally higher than all <strong>the</strong>o<strong>the</strong>r states’ (ibid.), although no statistical data were presented to back up <strong>the</strong> claim.The use <strong>of</strong> English is much more marked in <strong>the</strong> more multilingual, urban environments, when it is <strong>of</strong>tenused as <strong>the</strong> default language, especially when <strong>the</strong> teacher does not share <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r tongue <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>dominant linguistic group (Dunne et al. 2013; Okebukola et al. 2013). Yet, as Adekola (2007) points out,<strong>the</strong>re is a lack <strong>of</strong> preparation in initial teacher education for bi- or multilingual education and a shortage<strong>of</strong> textbooks in Nigerian languages (Adekola 2007; Iyamu and Ogiegbaen 2007).Code-switching is a common feature <strong>of</strong> most classrooms (Hardman et al. 2008; Salami 2008; Dunne etal. 2013; Gabrscek and Usman 2013; Okebukola et al. 2013). In Hardman et al.’s (2008) survey <strong>of</strong>Primary 6 Maths and English lessons in 20 schools, primarily in <strong>the</strong> north, code-switching was observedEDOREN – Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria 37
Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>literature</strong> on basic education in Nigeriain around three-quarters <strong>of</strong> lessons, although fewer than a quarter <strong>of</strong> teachers admitted to <strong>the</strong> practicein <strong>the</strong> questionnaires. Similarly, in Salami’s (2008) study <strong>of</strong> code-switching in primary schools in <strong>the</strong>South West, close to two-thirds <strong>of</strong> teachers code-switched between English and Yoruba, even whenteaching English, whereas <strong>the</strong> vast majority claimed to use only English in class. The difference betweenpr<strong>of</strong>essed and observed practice is likely explained by teachers not wanting to admit to contraveninggovernment policy (Hardman et al. 2008; Salami 2008).4.3.3 ‘Mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongue’ teachingImportantly, as Salami (2008) points out, language-learning <strong>the</strong>ory posits that cognitive development isbest achieved through a solid foundation <strong>of</strong> learning in a child’s first language(s), before embarking onlearning in a second or foreign language (see also Benson 2004; Alidou et al. 2006; USAID 2013 a, b andc). Studies in o<strong>the</strong>r West African countries have found that ‘mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongue’ teaching has been found tobenefit girls and rural children in particular (Hovens 2002). Additional benefits <strong>of</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongueteaching demonstrated in o<strong>the</strong>r studies in SSA have included: More active pupil participation, involving greater numbers <strong>of</strong> pupils (Benson 2004; Hovens 2000;Heugh et al. 2007; see also Adekola 2007 on Nigeria);More relaxed teacher–pupil relations (Hovens 2002; Benson 2004; Brock-Utne 2007); and Better pedagogy (Hovens 2002; Brock-Utne 2007).Box 4.1The ‘mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongue’ experimentA longitudinal language and literacy programme funded by <strong>the</strong> World Bank in <strong>the</strong> 1980s in SouthWest Nigeria showed that after six years <strong>of</strong> Yoruba-medium teaching pupils attained better results,including in English, than in English-medium schools (Ejieh 2004; Adekola 2007). Intensive schoolbasedteacher development and mentoring, community mobilisation, availability <strong>of</strong> textbooks inYoruba, and parental support – given after <strong>the</strong>y could see improved results after <strong>the</strong> first year – wereall vital to its success. There were not <strong>the</strong> same results with <strong>the</strong> Hausa-medium and Igbo-mediumprogrammes, attributed to <strong>the</strong> greater overcrowding in classrooms, <strong>the</strong> absence <strong>of</strong> textbooks inHausa or Igbo and <strong>the</strong> fact that community support was not mobilised so successfully.Source: Adekola (2007).Yet Salami (2008) noted that in her study that, judging from <strong>the</strong> high level <strong>of</strong> code-switching, <strong>the</strong>re waslittle lasting trace <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> successful Yoruba-medium policy experiment conducted in <strong>the</strong> 1980s (see Box4.1). This suggests that sustained political (including financial) and community commitment is necessaryfor such a policy to succeed in <strong>the</strong> long term, whatever its apparent success in <strong>the</strong> short term. Any policypromoting multi-lingualism would need to be accompanied by <strong>the</strong> production <strong>of</strong> textbooks andmaterials in <strong>the</strong> relevant Nigerian languages (Ejieh 2004).4.3.4 Pupils’ views on <strong>the</strong> medium <strong>of</strong> instructionPupils, whose views are rarely sought, generally prefer a bilingual approach to teaching; for example,over 60% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> children in Salami’s study expressed a preference for teaching in English and Yoruba. InDunne et al.’s (2013) study most pupils preferred learning in a mix <strong>of</strong> English and Hausa. Salamiconcludes that ‘mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongue’ teaching should be given an enhanced role alongside English in Nigeriaso that teachers can enjoy <strong>the</strong> ‘educational benefits [<strong>of</strong> code-switching] in a situation <strong>of</strong> bi-/multilingualism, low English pr<strong>of</strong>iciency, lack <strong>of</strong> or poor language teacher education training, and lackor scarcity <strong>of</strong> material resources in mo<strong>the</strong>r-tongue education’ (Salami 2008: 109).EDOREN – Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria 38
Page 1 and 2:
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON BASICED
Page 3 and 4:
Review of
Page 5 and 6:
Review of
Page 7 and 8:
Review of
Page 9 and 10:
Review of
Page 11 and 12:
Review of
Page 13 and 14: Review of
Page 63: Review of
Page 115 and 116:
Review of
Page 117 and 118:
Review of
Page 119 and 120:
Review of
Page 121 and 122:
Review of
Page 123 and 124:
Review of
Page 125 and 126:
Review of
Page 127 and 128:
Review of
Page 129 and 130:
Review of
Page 131 and 132:
Review of
Page 133 and 134:
Review of
Page 135 and 136:
Review of
Page 137 and 138:
Review of
Page 139 and 140:
Review of
Page 141 and 142:
Review of
Page 143 and 144:
Review of
Page 145 and 146:
Review of
Page 147 and 148:
Review of
Page 149 and 150:
Review of
Page 151 and 152:
Review of
Page 153 and 154:
Review of
Page 155 and 156:
Review of
Page 157 and 158:
Review of
Page 159 and 160:
Review of
Page 161 and 162:
Review of
Page 163 and 164:
Review of
Page 165 and 166:
Review of
Page 167 and 168:
Review of
Page 169 and 170:
Review of
Page 171 and 172:
Review of
Page 173 and 174:
Review of
Page 175 and 176:
Review of
Page 177 and 178:
Review of
Page 179 and 180:
Review of
Page 181 and 182:
Review of
Page 183 and 184:
Review of
Page 185 and 186:
Review of
Page 187 and 188:
Review of
Page 189 and 190:
Review of
Page 191 and 192:
Review of
Page 193 and 194:
Review of
Page 195 and 196:
Review of
Page 197 and 198:
Review of
Page 199 and 200:
Review of
Page 201 and 202:
Review of
Page 203 and 204:
Review of
Page 205 and 206:
Review of
Page 207 and 208:
Review of
Page 209 and 210:
Review of
show all

review-of-the-literature-on-basic-education-in-nigeria-june-2014-3-1

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?