By Patricia Paraide

There is conflicting information on the value of vernacular and bilingual instruction during the early years of formal learning. A portion of Papua New Guinea’s educated population does not support these language teaching strategies. However, language experts state that languages are essential for group and individual identity, and their peaceful coexistence. Languages constitute a strategic factor for progress towards sustainable development and a harmonious relationship within the global and local context.

They are important in achieving the Millennium Developmental Goals eradication of extreme poverty and hunger; achieve universal primary education; promote gender equity and empower women; reduce child mortality and improve maternal health; combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases and ensure environmental sustainability; and develop a global partnership for development. People who are literate in both vernacular and English languages can apply their literacy skills to translate information in both languages on health, agriculture, politics, economics, education, and so on, especially to the illiterate who can use new information for development and progress in the communities.

Conflicting views

The Papua New Guiena population has divided views on the value of vernacular and bilingual instruction. Currently, discussions and decisions have been made to introduce English in elementary schools. Such decision may stem from the belief that speaking, reading and writing in English will lead to acquiring formal employment and a better life.

However, studies show that a portion of the population who were taught to read and write exclusively in English and who have returned to their communities have lost their literacy skills in the English language because of the more dominant use of their vernacular languages.

So not only do they become illiterate in the English language, but also in their vernacular language.
What has not been understood by many is that the introduction of vernacular and bilingual instruction and the integration of indigenous and western knowledge in formal learning were attempts by the National Department of Education to prepare students to fit back into their communities if they missed out on post-secondary education or didn’t secure formal employment. If they are literate in both English and their vernacular languages they can still progress and improve their living standards back in their communities.
It is also well documented that valuable indigenous mathematics, science, medicine, law, politics, conservation, agriculture, land management and other knowledge are embedded in the vernacular languages and are expressed through these languages.

These knowledge systems are similar to the knowledge content that is taught in formal learning institutions. These indigenous knowledge systems can be used as a foundation to build on and use with new introduced knowledge in order to progress and develop further in the communities if vernacular and bilingual instruction is well supported at the lower levels of schooling.

Indigenous languages

Part of Papua New Guinea’s National Pledge states, ‘…we pay homage to our cultural heritage, the source of our strength…’. However, the use of vernacular languages in formal instruction is rejected by some decision makers. Our cultural heritage is embedded in our vernacular languages.

Cultural heritage is not only singing and dancing, as what many believe to be. Singing and dancing activities were interwoven with other community activities and mostly occurred when celebrating successful achievements. Valuable knowledge systems will be lost if our vernacular languages are not maintained through the formal curriculum.

Much of the resistance to the formal use of vernacular and bilingual instruction in schools may stem from the belief that these language teaching strategies cannot generate mastering the English literacy skills required by students in order to perform well in the Grade 8 national examinations.

However, studies have shown that incompetent teachers who lack competency in the English language do not teach English literacy skills well. It has been found that if English language learning is not supported well with appropriate teaching resources, then students have difficulties in mastering the English literacy skills.

In such cases, students may not master adequate English literacy skills in order to do well in the Grade 8 national examinations, even if English had been introduced at the beginning of formal schooling. Studies have also shown that well trained language teachers can teach literacy skills better than those who lack proper language teacher training.

It is also well documented that literacy, numeracy skills and other skills in a first language can be transferred when learning a second language such as English, if learning is supported well at all levels of learning. Studies in PNG show that students who have been instructed well in their vernacular languages are able to transfer their literacy skills to the second language being learned – in this case English.

As their education and exposure to the English language increases, their competency in the English language also increases. Also their participation in classroom activities is stronger than those who were instructed exclusively in the English language because they can communicate well in the language of instruction. Furthermore their understanding of mathematical concepts and other knowledge areas and their reasoning and application skills are stronger than those taught exclusively in the English language. Much negative publicity and negative attitudes about vernacular and bilingual instruction in early formal schooling have obstructed fair evaluation of the value and effectiveness of these teaching strategies.

Currently, decisions have been made to introduce English in elementary schools. Elementary teachers are not trained to teach the English literacy skills at this level. They are trained to teach in vernacular languages. Their competency level in speaking, reading and writing in English is generally lower than that of primary school teachers.

Much resources and time have been committed and spent on the preparation of primary school teachers in the past twelve years to prepare them to introduce English gradually and build up the students’ competency level in English at lower and upper primary levels. It is well documented that these strategies are effective language teaching strategies that can effectively teach a second language such as English if they are supported well with appropriate learning resources. Recent studies show that learning resources needed to support both vernacular and English language learning is currently lacking in many Papua New Guinea schools. This issue needs to be addressed urgently by appropriate authorities if Papua New Guinea is to have a literate population in both English and vernacular languages.

It is sound practice that stakeholders and especially decision makers should allow the implementation of the vernacular and bilingual language instruction policy, or any policy, to take root and be accepted, before any evaluation of their value and effectiveness is conducted.

Currently, the implementation of this language policy is at varying stages in schools and provinces – still in the transition period. Appropriate resources and manpower that is needed to make this teaching strategy work is generally inadequate. Therefore, any evaluation of its value and effectiveness may be unbalanced at this stage.

Patricia Paraide is a senior research fellow in the educational studies division at the National Research Institute.  

This article was published with permission from National Research Institute of Papua New Guinea. NRI website can be accessed at www.nri.org.pg

What do you think about this article? Add you comments and views below:

Comments

Add New Search

Write comment
Name:
Email:	do not notifynotify
Title:
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."