m .2 “firwa E...~._‘...P
r . 3.
fl, 3% .. ._..,.,;%.,§,. ,
flunfiwa 8.?
3%???
.rfifi firm... ”fix?“
a...
um...“ «and. .
. as: .

It

)3...
53.51%. 2 ‘
..l .2! I

24.3. .
.Si.....v.§...u
u' ‘

$94.!

«it..- .A

.14.._.~...\.1.
W .l. at..." .
t r!

 

 

£13.23. u
n.3,)?
. 9 3., s . .
z .312. u\
‘

 

r “‘
.7. .iituazo I - ‘13:..an
lltIXVi‘ltl. .VOII..‘.XILS «It | .v
‘0‘. W‘Qlfizm.‘ ‘h‘ I Ific
, n t nun-m‘ 0%
, t a 1‘5“

 

.
it...
v.
V ”It‘i V .U‘
..- ..:.i.:....i...uu$.3.¢.5 94W“.
Burt; ; «lurk... .. 1;“..- I
. {slfi‘ ‘ 0 4m
. (guuflfi: I.“ :0“
LE... 3...;
,. t! E I}...
in? .38... .1...
Runny

Dial}!
11:6
u...
5‘ 1.

It!
bllbxlbtté!
23:53?!
.v
5.: ézsszl ‘. u
5.3. £3.§v€1..~iin¢\|i.f

tr: ‘ I

u:
ill‘IV§IHIA .331!
a... \.|Itttf.lvblooazu I". o

10:91. ‘ot..0ltvtt\.éi| .1
1108...: 3 .. .

I11!

 

 

 

 

 

it". :1"
ellivtvsn ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

i’ LIBRARY '
‘ mamas: State
LL University

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

POLICY AS PRACTICE: LOCAL APPROPRIATION OF
LANGUAGE AND EDUCATION POLICIES IN LESOTHO
PRIMARY SCHOOLS

presented by
Stephen Backman

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

PhD. degree in Curriculum, Teaching, and
Education Policy

 

 

 

Major Professor’s‘Signature

Humbug ll. flood

Date

 

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

 

 

 

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 K:IProj/Aoc&PrelelRC/DateDue.indd

 

 

 

PIZ'LI'CI' .«iS PM I
EDL Wail l\ '

 

POLICY AS PRACTICE: LOCAL APPROPRIATION OF LANGUAGE AND
EDUCATION POLICIES IN LESOTHO PRIMARY SCHOOLS

By

Stephen Backman

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Curriculum, Teaching, and Education Policy

2009

run is PR-it‘l :r
EDL'Ciiil .\ E

. . . L ‘
1" wnq-fi . F1 in.
r .

 

‘_~.n~..o.oI.. ‘K..I\I.i - JN
' 4 . - i ..
‘ ‘ ‘r ' h ‘ .v
. , .4 1‘ .P , ,-
\K. hhvbdnxl. .‘uJu‘.5r \4\
. ‘ .
" """ u- ru- , . . .
-' s
‘ 4 e - '\
It‘fiy‘S.‘ u. .g‘..uu‘§ , \ '
~ ‘ .
. , _‘
t.) ~.-»‘~,\ I. h _
.5. _|I.“Hd\t. .47 .
.

.~_A.n~\
\ -

r
_.:f;.‘..--.~ “3“,»th '
-O\.‘II~. -. .guiuy‘ \a‘
s

v‘ ’I l
‘. a ""Y‘ 39-h I '
1m. .;i c“ r, .
I .. Nu” h“. K.

29" a
‘9‘ “Ema' '13

“"‘H~,l-.|\\

I

L: Jr, ‘0' O

.’
'. j; .
1.... _ ‘r ‘ A g . '
u“§¥ “.4“ ;‘.“\ .1: I!” a

n“.- ' .

‘ 'F 9
‘5 .4! o _
P- “\yl 5‘): N~c '1‘". .’ *-

‘ I
\“- s.-

 

'I.
l ‘ ‘v-J
s lLtfi in? .
. ‘ iggJJC Jh-I .
y K .I I
x l.“ \‘
1‘:
-.. n; .L: :36 :19“? ‘ I
‘5|\u L‘\ ‘1’.
far-
"\I
I‘Wg p1|1|\1.1
L \\ In F?!
2!; .
‘4. A.”- I
a. 'L a! ‘ '-
Xd. )Iqfi‘ci‘hl i
.l _ "'4‘
#F.
T‘ Eznlfia

ABSTRACT

POLICY AS PRACTICE: LOCAL APPROPRIATION OF LANGUAGE AND
EDUCATION POLICIES IN LESOTHO PRIMARY SCHOOLS

By
Stephen Backman

This dissertation study sets out to take a close look at the complex mix of factors
on the ground, which influence the appropriation of language and education policies by
local education stakeholders at Lesotho primary schools. I argue that much of the
research in language policy and planning (LPP) has focused too largely on the macro-
level dynamics of language policy, especially as they relate to education, while
overlooking, sometimes disregarding, the local dynamics which play a crucial role in the
actual implementation and appropriation of language and education policies in schools
and communities.

In order to investigate the various dynamics contributing to the appropriation of
language and education policy by local stakeholders, I take a “policy as practice”
approach to the research. In contrast to the traditional approach to LPP research, a policy
as practice approach begins with the actual practices and lived realities of key
stakeholders as the unit of analysis and investigates how policies influence those
practices. Thus, rather than analyzing the policy itself, a policy as practice approach
analyzes language and education policies as one of many different factors which
influence the attitudes and practices of local stakeholders. The intent of such an approach
is to place policies in proper perspective within the multitude of factors influencing how
and why local stakeholders behave and respond to their circumstances. Indeed, policy is

an important factor contributing to what happens at schools, but it is only one of many.

o
i
' h .|
”WV OI-J’." .‘VV'R I\ ..\
1|.n. \. ~HH'I Thfll _.
i. ugh... ~

5

i I

-u f I". 1
”MT-é """‘i" \\..L\. A‘ u. .
,, guru” . .

' ' \
. . 4 ~. , .. . F
3'“ »'I\ I Y!- I ‘
.‘\.~A1.tl~u iciAh )'~.u\. --\ Lu!

rim": .3.” ';\ '\’1\\'\\\_ '.'~
.‘ - k n I Ill

’ .

.n"

,‘I
.. in“... L\"x\..\ \x- —

"I-~0v...\ ‘L' '1' , . ‘
‘ I

 

I‘Lfl‘r‘) n] u h
. ‘ h
' " via" yo .~ , 1
§
‘y-. .
“Lia \ fins.

3"

I ,IJ '

'.i\“‘-‘1;. ‘1 .' " n . N
. . .
. :k. H" JL ‘\

J" u. u .

“A; ~"i 3‘. ., ‘ I

"“W- \. 1-H

L\\. .l H\ “Rd, \n

L I
-?'-n \\.19K!:\ 3?“: 'r

.
u,,~‘
4.
..
Pu
""~ " “.x . 1
r.- .
. my») “1.1.2:“ ("on ‘.,
u \.

,\“.\'R' 4‘

‘ .
'5 I \-_ Q
, 4 1, . .
‘M P-tr _ . M
my“ 5 ip..n_ ‘
\\.' I‘K.‘
_i
. .2‘ '
I |_ |
“\ . ‘vv .
5‘.‘ M n“
'M \ .
\‘ LQ" Ir l' a
A.
.. .
Ila."
A» p*_.‘
L“. ”,4; lira T' w
‘ D
I‘“\1 H I
:~ 4.
'9.
i i’. .‘,
l .
T‘ht

In this study I utilize three main conceptual frameworks to analyze the findings of
a year-long ethnographic field research conducted at five selected government and
private primary schools in Lesotho. Utilizing Bordieu’s concepts of cultural, social,
economic, and symbolic capital, I analyze the multifarious mix of capital that students
and their families possess, which either act as constraints on their educational
opportunities or provide certain opportunities not available to those who possess less
valued sources of capital. A second conceptual framework borrows from the linguistic
anthropology concept of language ideologies and investigates the various competing and
conflicting ideologies which play out simultaneously at schools and in the lives of
teachers, students and their families. These differ greatly, especially when comparing
government schools to private schools. The final conceptual framework investigates the
structure-agency dynamics by exploring the role which agency plays in the linguistic and
educational decisions local stakeholders make. Although there are many structural limits
placed upon schools and individuals, they are still able to utilize their agency to influence
their practices within certain constraints.

By taking a policy as practice approach and focusing on the lived realities of local
schools and their stakeholders, this study attempts to provide a deeper understanding of
the role policies take in influencing their language and educational practices. In so doing,
it is hoped that language and education policy studies will gain a greater appreciation of

the local dynamics which influence the appropriation of policies on the ground.

Copyright by
STEPHEN BACKMAN
2009

‘ “qu

“A. "$ng i"\ If}:

. I ' '
u. _. . w ‘\ I ’h,i . .
“£73,545“. 1. LA ‘\~M

I ' '

r'ar';'u'hé“"| 'HJO .‘Ipu
i5.» on. ql’b .. u'i n -.-‘

' V 1
:u;4. ' ,g-m. , "3' 9 v
a-.LLi,‘t‘..~r'...1...liL.L \ '
u I

- nu.

I I
I;‘[‘;,'OI‘ J' p» A'. '.|..
”JNHJKVP sLI SKI upt\-\ ‘

'I‘Iu L;

w ‘ . 'Ifi’h" ‘ .3"

~15. i3‘llnplb‘dltrg.\ .
‘ .

Ti,“‘r' . .

1“. J 4'

‘ V
V a ' ‘
n I I
mt mix. Juan. ‘N L. ‘L‘

 

\
a». ‘ .
4‘. ‘1 . . u
*x c .
‘ i “a.“ \
\
.. ‘ £9-
“-0 I..J.‘
-‘..,._“ I",3In 9“ _
\i\ ‘5 ‘ \ k 9
. .
...
1"
~ \ ll
._ ll a
uk’higbv. a...
I. ,‘
..;_)“‘.
.fl‘ . r30, .
Nu..-" \ Thai .
s S \ v ..
“us-u bk I‘
.2,“

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Much like many things in life, I never fully appreciated the effort it takes to
complete a study at the scale of a dissertation until I had to do it myself. I then began to
appreciate the work that others have done for their dissertations, and most importantly, I
gained a personal understanding of the appreciation they have expressed for the many
people it takes to complete such a major project. There are so many people involved in
the process of preparing, engaging, and writing up a dissertation that it is truly difficult to
recognize and acknowledge everyone involved.

I first would like to express my deep gratitude to all of the mentors in my life who
have believed in me and encouraged me to further my studies and pursue opportunities to
make a difference in this world. This includes David Shuler at Brigham Young
University, who was willing to sit down for over three hours with a young, eager
undergraduate student whom he had never met before and point him in the right
direction. His great belief and trust in me put me on the path to all I have been able to
achieve since then. Similarly, I would like to thank Michael Bush at BYU who
unflinchingly placed enormous responsibilities on my shoulders which he knew more
than myself that I could accomplish. He set the bar high for me, which I have always
tried to maintain.

At Michigan State University I have had many mentors, of which I would like to
recognize a few. These include Deo Ngonyani in the Linguistics Department who became
not only a mentor but a friend, David Wiley who provided me with great opportunities at

the African Studies Center, John Metzler who treated me like a colleague and fi‘iend from

i “.1 I ‘ I
M -_r-; I In‘ \\ hut.) ,Ir 0‘ h
..." ...I.\.u.. ...sis. I

3-1-0; ‘IF “A; ,Y'. "I l - "0‘
Di... LL Irb gn fl-‘u‘ I .
y

I I '
.‘r‘f‘r' 'A'vr' " "‘ '
‘ I .s‘slis... JAM \

.... ..n-JL in...

~ ,~ I I

. . . -. o y3‘vvh 'N F ‘
L......i'2\\.‘.L......1I‘..'C

. ‘ .
J" “an 7“ 't".|l MA "
'\_«—--A uqh ‘11. ‘hly~h A-‘\ I

-. --.,“ 7
~{ A . _ I 7.". O ‘ '3 RV,
L . t 1“...” .L P“, \'\.

.
r‘p-«r .. L. ,,
..._,.\J.\.B\ ""1 .10 n
I ......_..i .
\.

iv“! ,_ 5.,'
”
...a. “5|. ‘0‘ “1‘ 9" v - .

\I-\A‘-JI 3‘“.

g --
l')..

‘II.R'I. ... ‘ I

IIILV.‘..II 8 ' ll

. . I‘OA J.\. ll. d ‘l
I L \ ~\

I "“w '.
Mm; ,“ ‘ .‘l I I .,.
v 4&5 ITIL In, ‘J\: Y“-.

'I~.
“IA.“ I

 

 

 

~l

mph
"#12: W3.
A 4 I C
J. 3L: "I .
“L\ "kt
Lt" 2k .
‘ fi‘mi
I ' ‘
"-‘u ’:.l,
. \Hd
I'd-PI \I‘
i

day one, Chris Wheeler who taught me about passion for education and development
efforts on the ground, Lynn Paine who helped me to appreciate my own positionality in
international research, and Susan Florio-Ruane who seemed to always be more excited
about my research than me. I especially need to thank those who sat on my dissertation
committee and guided me through the frustrations, discouragements, and persistence of
my writing. I want to express my great appreciation to Lynn Fendler for her “critical eye”
and always pushing me to think deeper and more critically about my research and to Bob
Hitchcock for his encouragement and enthusiasm for my research. I especially am
grateful to Jeff Bale, my dissertation director, who as a brand new faculty member was
willing to take me in, last minute, as his guinea pig and walk me through my dissertation.
Without his persistent pushing and specific guidance, I’m not sure if I would have ever
completed my writing in time. I appreciate his patience and tolerance of my peculiarities.
And last, but absolutely not least, I cannot thank Jack Schwille enough for his thoughtful
guidance and quiet confidence in me. As my advisor and committee chair, he was my
steady guidance throughout my PhD program and dissertation study.

There were so many people in Lesotho who made this dissertation possible that it
is impossible for me to recognize them all. I need to thank all of the study participants,
especially the school principals, teachers, students, and their families for welcoming me
into your offices, classrooms, and homes for in-depth, and often intimate, access to their
lives. I wish I could thank you all by name, but for purposes of anonymity I cannot. I also
would like to thank all of the members of the Maseru Branch of the Church of Jesus

Christ of Latter—day Saints who welcomed me and my family back “home” to Lesotho for

a year. We truly felt a part of the branch family and miss you all dearly.

vi

III
M

I.‘ l" "" ' '
iDALIuJI- .5 .ii“ ..

Q. ' ‘
,. Nafl'. n- ,I “ .'-
7" J " ‘ to IIAAAE ‘ i.\

~o¢.vu..... "
.
u

.- y . :
\3‘3'2'53 I”; P 1"“)? ‘I"‘ -'
.h..~n-.\. ‘0‘ .L.I.l\l UII\\.'

., . |
.vt.._\.p. ..‘ ‘ "H " ...
u I . .
hub. dulutin \it.4‘\n‘n.‘ A.

‘1 A. 'nmtr.) ; 0‘.- ~
”rut—IN a? ”AI-5 HIKIF.‘ ...1.’

”ms-- '-;~r; '
|‘~-‘—‘~. ‘ . 7' ‘ “-l.|n v. '
. u luv-nun» .. d, h

o

" v;- I, I

)9 an! o- I
‘-’ ' ‘ ’3‘ .. '-
‘I:..sa.-1"ILI Inl‘yh ‘lll‘.

1h: a\§.> .a I. L
‘thl4\‘\~ | I t.

’-,
..._ -

L- z'v'.n‘..- -.
""“‘ LANA}. A "u N‘-
' 5\

‘ .
.~ W
.. '\"'Li‘ \I -
Mm. J -‘ rm I I
\I.I "
\ “"‘ I. D I‘. .
u ' .
I
ah , u
. ‘Ti" :1 ., .
.g‘, -
Lu 1
. axe“. u “tr 94’ ..
‘ \.
~-.. \ "’ ‘ 'v.
«wax-m. ,3 .
...u \Idr...‘
q':
. H‘ -‘
"‘1L*A£L'\: “9 .II
.14... I h ,
4‘
:C’C' .
6 "I.“h‘ I.
‘4‘... “I- q I ,
N 4..\_, \f- I... F
\ \ui‘. I.
a
,‘ 1-4”!
‘x... “I‘vv‘4 '
‘1‘ I11“ ‘ "
Js\ '
. u
.5.
._ L
T A’h‘ In-
u~ 0. .
‘4‘ N1“ VL'AI ‘
~I‘. mL O“ I
'Q ‘ i.
.- ,‘
1:}n‘ndnv _
I“ me ..x..‘ '.
l\\ "
.‘ ‘~
in».
.€’-‘- ”l
W .-
MAM'L .
“till"
u. ‘ ..r K
‘ LII?“
I].
i'w.
~‘. —“"
~. ..V
3"“ “he'd
“ . 9‘
“3,98 9
‘ ‘ It "It
'- .

I' _ x.
.\i , h
1. TD qu
“"38 '4- i
:‘- “h
n {V 3.;
"c. .
kmltlrh.\v~
I\-.t\ {If i
Mi

 

I would be remiss not to thank a few individuals in Lesotho by name, due to their
great efforts to make my field research possible. Lois Sebatane and her husband Molapi
Sebatane, the former director of the Institute of Education and now Pro-Vice Chancellor
of the National University of Lesotho (N UL), were my first contact for this research and
opened up more doors than anyone, to NUL, the Lesotho College of Education, and the
Ministry of Education and Training, not to mention their own home, where my wife,
daughter, and I stayed until we found a more permanent home. I also need to thank those
at the Institute of Education at NUL, especially, Sam Motlomelo the director of the center
and Pulani Lefoka, who became my colleague, mentor, and confidant. I thank the
officials at the Ministry of Education, especially Paramente Phamotse, the CEO of
Primary Education, for taking so much time out of his busy schedule to answer my
tedious questions and clarify many concerns and queries.

And most of all, I need to express to my family for all of their support, patience,
understanding, and belief in me. To my dad who is always excited and proud of anything
I do, and who was always there to encourage and talk me through my struggles. To my
mom who has taught me to listen to the voices often not recognized in society and who
has always made me feel like 1 can do anything in this world. To my mother-in-law
Grace, who without her coming to stay with us while I wrote my dissertation and my wife
completed her degree, it would have been physically impossible to complete this work. 1
will always admire her patience and longsuffering, along with her great love and care for
our children. To Palesa and Clyde, who are my inspiration and my joy. They brought

happiness and moments of delight during my most busy and frustrating hours.

vii

. I
‘ I IJTM‘ I I
lute.“ m“

u, , t" 0-.“ v‘ V" '
I ”‘I ‘w, ‘ '3‘. “‘5 flat J--‘

M L.w-~- '
. .

 

I ll
. “ n‘rv‘ Q t '0 I
I- .n“.\‘udlui~4‘ 'kJ.- L‘ .a
5

. .. y ' I
"'5‘ I. .~" 1.1"» ' 9 I '
b:s..\\-.a\, ...P L.“ ...h I)! II\'I\

' I
.1" "'Z’F“.l". ‘v‘ I I
I-.~.-§i...-bi.1,‘. Lib \“n\nu‘
’ I u I
'1" "' .1 PJ' 9' ,)n h' 9
..1. ...iIL .AL’L. \|5,. ‘1 .c .I‘

..‘ ". I | l
I... A.‘ _ - I
r, .
..., ---1«‘..C “h Xav- .v— .0

a 5...; .\

 

 

,. :x” . . -
it‘d; il‘iTII HA“, "" '
‘ \

a
.\.5‘1 '

 

 

I have saved my last acknowledgement for the most important person in my life,
and my greatest support and fan, my beautiful wife Claudia. She has been a shoulder to
cry on, a sounding wall to unload on, a rock to steady me, and a friend to talk to. She has
endured hours on end of listening to my theories, analyses, findings, discouragements,
enlightenments, and conclusions. Without her listening ear and thoughtful feedback I
may have never been able to process all of the information in this dissertation. I am proud
of all that she has been able to accomplish during my dissertation, not willing to take a
backseat to my own endeavors. She is truly an amazing woman. I’m honored to have her
as my companion and best friend.

I realize there are many who deserve to be recognized whom I may have
overlooked in this acknowledgement. To those I apologize and appreciate all that you

have done.

viii

 

"'I "\"H'

L.»-

.;..‘i. ..t l
i"- D CT.”
.‘Il’L' 'L ll‘.‘\

2931 RE RE‘» 1E ll (

l .
I-‘v.$ 0‘ r
L..i.\..u..“..
! I
""7 “,a y r‘ !
L41 ...:~s P'.‘ is i .1 "
‘3' " .30 , | H
w. ...-‘55 .us': .| ‘
. .
I- -- -
I," t .0
1L. '\ 1‘ kg‘wl‘
|
'3' \‘
Aunm‘
5
.
W
" .\I1§.p.~,"‘
{‘_ I
1" n
\1'..\,.‘ ..l

 

Rf. . , ‘
u._DhflKfl,\\l)P'
JIT‘ -:.c::1 .1
i 1
R1"‘ . '
t," . l «t

Resin}, (“1 ..
‘

‘ ‘
'ux‘m ',',\
v'n' ‘ ,
Ex ‘ ‘ ( |"‘ IG.
4il\u. 1. \ ..9 O

\‘5_ J I 4.
34:1 v.‘|:JEII\E§

I'-\\."'H K
\ '. , o.
~\I1.\h \:8..

\\
I
"I. .
l. \ l,".
- I.«A\J_‘ 1.1:: v |\“
~.a. . .

..If\§..
..‘J _ l
u ‘5. \ 4

w”.
’7 ‘hy“‘L

~‘\ ~ I I. "' l
. "\T5(lN)<V
1;“ .4 ,. ‘-
....ud\\;l'r‘
Lflv,‘:'\:.~

n: .
., ' -:R \
VrESfpr.
' K ‘ X)I_ f , ‘ I!
1“?!" ..‘ ‘l
c ‘\u\ H)?
“flfimh ~
r... ‘lisk(:h.."
L1." ”I RHJ‘
..“dl 3.1.
-\ .“U S, -‘
5‘)“: . 3,.‘8‘
“' Thw.‘
Fry- V .1} '4‘.
...K.‘\:1l}n
fl?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW/CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ................................. 21
Introduction ............................................................................................................ 21
Language Policy and Planning ............................................................................... 24
Language Ideologies .............................................................................................. 46
Forms of Capital .................................................................................................... 57
Agency ................................................................................................................... 68
Policy as Practice ................................................................................................... 72
Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 74

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH SETTING .......................................................... 77
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 77
Epistomological Considerations ........................................................................... 78
Research Questions ............................................................................................... 82
Ethical Considerations .......................................................................................... 85
Research Methods and Design .............................................................................. 92
Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 104
Research Sites ..................................................................................................... 107
Historical, Linguistic, and Social Background to Lesotho ....................... - .......... 121

CHAPTER 4

GOVERNMENT SCHOOL FAMILIES ........................................................................ 124
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 124
Economic Capital ................................................................................................ 125
Cultural Capital ................................................................................................... 145
Social Capital ...................................................................................................... 161
Symbolic/Linguistic Capital .............................................................................. 173
Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 176

CHAPTER 5

PRIVATE SCHOOL FAMILIES ................................................................................... 180
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 80
Economic Capital ................................................................................................ 182
Cultural and Symbolic Capital ............................................................................ 195
Social Capital ...................................................................................................... 21 1
Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 222

CHAPTER 6

ix

EEC 11.131141. NH 1 ‘.

,
n'"

t "1"1
“LR-uA-I

.
m~)’1" 1". ;
\Ilu.\I--;h 3““ "
. &

",r-"Enfl . JO
12111.5. Lsmis' '
. - I
l . g. ' R‘ -'
-\)-. n1 . ."
Elf.» "‘ \‘Ik '|

I~I‘. .I‘
a.

...‘nov-‘ q
.:-:.:R
":N'I'J‘ ' ' '\
1.3.1-1111 Md 1 ~
1:334:11:- 1
En mi

...au.\
. 5

I”! {u
\L .. .. t

A. 'I . ‘
il~.'\ p1. '- u \-
Lkm.....g rn‘ .\.. "5
~ \

(Orv-9““. V

U15 sun".
‘ S

'1‘

IF.
p” .11 w- -
III'1\\ ’ I

 

. R I
‘\‘\U\ u‘ ..I.
(1,1, .
a'uufill'f‘;
1" “’7 .
~31: LD‘
" “-LH,
-\“11“1~
1 ’l‘ 1"
‘ ‘~LLSIU\,
7‘ ~
‘7-
[J\‘n .I. ,
to v ‘
Is,...4~-u.'\"\.‘:"\l.
71"}! 8‘ ‘ .
‘MSI' "'7‘." . l' I
...iJ\,,g\\ ‘1‘ K‘.
. ,~

, I
‘.- "A m ,P I
‘-u\,‘_ ~’ .
: NIL \l '

.Ct‘.’ f)

.rr.\‘ 7 ‘FA

"~~. I I“
L;

I-..‘

v._‘.‘

Kl !

IDEOLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON LANGUAGE POLICY IN LESOTHO .............. 224

Introduction ......................................................................................................... 224
Competing Ideologies in School Practices ......................................................... 224
Colonial Legacy of English ................................................................................ 227
Hegemony of Global English .............................................................................. 234
CHAPTER 7
IDEOLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON SCHOOL PRACTICES IN LESOTHO ............. 243
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 243
Language Use in the Classroom .......................................................................... 243
Learning English versus Learning Subject Content ............................................. 255
Competing Purposes of Education ....................................................................... 262
Private versus Public Education ........................................................................... 269
Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 291
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 295
The Structure-Agency Dynamic in the Lives of Local Stakeholders ................... 296
The Influences of Ideologies at all Levels on Policy and Practices ...................... 299
Placing the Role of Policies into Perspective ....................................................... 301
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 303
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 306

{"17 .

.awl

v
1 'P
1’:

VJ? o: 2311‘

4

‘.'" .‘J 1’ 1"

-.'
-‘\ »- '.-¢-\ ‘. .
~ ~

\

" MI"

I ,

v3.1.1 I
~. 11 ll
~

"‘0' $
, a. k“.

..., ' u
,-' “'1‘; w» I
-—-\ b ”A

‘E ”"‘ 1" «er

Hr,

. \;;‘k II I:

[I I 3"“ "1' “PIIW‘J' . 0
uh-\\. I'.I I1.u.5. Il

A'- -O
“.1 .4 ¢\

..11

I,_
J\d\'\‘

I
IV)... '
...s.u-.-

r

I-u.

| I'
II
\I

1" “... ‘

‘5‘ ’ ‘1...

r- O

In I,
I‘d. ..

 

.:'vt",‘ -
-. ‘r- J ~O .
my -L\ \1‘ Jr. c\_\‘|“ .t‘
I .
:‘.‘-

., \ " iv- -I
”“h-‘JI. .1;

I‘"
"’n I “I "I
‘ I ‘ ""0 .mu‘d
"
g I
"~.'._ .
‘-. '\
4‘

I
by I
\|._>I‘..\ Ir I

.NF :' 14 '
.\\;. gysu Ir- 1

‘ \

1' I"
“ wk. ..
..
K ~12: :’,v- w ’ "
“k..- L. .
T‘“~s§ {U a H . .
‘ n.‘ 9
u.
\
" I
0:5;3" ‘ht ‘ I
\ t.“\ \'\h'kl "
.4, “‘1‘

 

0
-u¥‘h'o‘
R‘ I
1:1 I
-\_ .
r‘("v
1‘ TERI
1“.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 1: Introduction

Much of the literature on language in education policy (LiEP) in Africa has
advocated for “mother tongue” instruction, or the use of local, indigenous languages as
the language of instruction at schools. This literature draws from theories in language
acquisition, cognition, pedagogy, and curriculum while also relying on postcolonial and.
other critical traditions of scholarship. The typical argument claims that students learn
best in a language that is familiar to them (e.g., mother tongue). This is in opposition to
the common practice in Africa where most state education systems have policies which
favor the use of an ex-colonial language (English, French, or Portuguese) as the language
of instruction at schools instead of using local, indigenous languages. There is a rich
source of empirical research which supports these claims for mother tongue instruction
and has been used in forceful arguments advocating changes in these policies to utilize
African languages to a greater extent in schools.

Despite this scholarship which effectively advocates for the use of indigenous
languages at schools, most state education systems continue to use ex-colonial, European
languages as the language of instruction at schools. Perhaps more significantly, a great
majority of the citizens in these countries seem to support and favor the use of ex-
colonial languages at their schools. Scholars have attempted to explain this phenomenon
through structuralist or postcolonial theories, claiming that the legacy of colonialism
continues to play out in most African countries through neo-imperialism and other forms

of inequality. They claim the use of ex-colonial languages at schools helps to perpetuate

I I
”gi'm)‘ I’IJ
_. ..1u...l....s.\

‘I‘.,:‘\»n -

1.4m...

\'-"'\,‘.,II "'J‘ .I
..‘ L'. ...x shawl-sh 5

IL

. ‘ _’ .
L‘.JI \‘ 81': s

‘ , I " 0' I‘
3-17.”.2 *0- lfihilh
IIIIIu'mLuIL. Lib ‘»i\-t'\| III-
. . I I
u-v ' v, II. ‘H n 9 ~ ~ »
\ 1'\ l ' 7‘ '
.V. ~u-*I-|\lt .51“). &l\I...
:w“ '0 . '
.1 '\J "‘1‘ ”33"?” ‘ ..-
“ “‘1 . ”tug. tug ubus-Js;
§
-‘1'P I

ah-

H.121 i

1 .

‘F .-

n )4 \ I\' "1‘
....uM .L. ‘\

N -o ., I
“ '1 ."'~" .1
~- -" \. :kt’

I~' _
31.1.".\

I“

\L"EJ" ' I
._ J _.

1"

. I..': :\s\'{1.‘ ’

~:~_-‘Iu
""~‘~‘ l\’ H l
m.“ ‘ ‘
‘ :u~,. 1U\P‘.I ‘-
s l‘
w-
as, '1 .
LII ‘11 ‘h 0 .
......IT. Mg, W .n ,. h.
'f-\ 1., 'I
2 U. 1 l
I ~ ..
“yd '
“"4183 E"".IvT\.
~ ' h“\»|,

11‘3".
“'\.|
I
V.
I
i-L‘;‘|' ‘h ,
:w .
...I v
M“ '9‘.
H“ 8",4' I
knit?“ ‘1’.
‘0
i ._

A.
*1
‘ ‘.k:‘l ‘Iyr'.! ‘
“d. ‘11" v
11“,. I
.L':EE..‘A
Inl‘} andd
C

.‘H‘II --
XImCRv
I" . .
Ile I
"s. \‘\
ctr.» '
"H -
“"Iaan ..
Mk" III '
‘9, FM:
«“5. .
‘1. P‘
"“E" I)
. W ‘ .
k K“
L. '1-
' 14111111
I‘\ "I
I. 'b .
I .:\ ...V I!
‘I'I'I‘E‘ a“; a
h #-

 

the inequalities that were established under colonial rule and is now used to favor the
interests of the educated elite in Africa who are subsequently in control of governmental,
educational, and other influential systems of society. By using a foreign language at
schools, which is not commonly known to all citizens, and must often be learned in a
formal setting, the educated elite are able to maintain their social status while keeping the
majority of people at a lower level of education, and therefore, a lower status in society.

Many scholars argue that the complicit support of the general population of
Africans for using ex-colonial languages in education is due to their being “colonized in
the mind” (N gugi, 1986) and thus buying into the current systems that oppress them.
They claim that people make decisions within the structural frameworks in which they
live, which largely determine the options available to them. They claim this is even more
so in today’s world where knowledge of English and other western languages are seen to
be increasingly important in participating in the global economy and international
society.

Although these arguments may help to explain the structural systems which have
led to the current situation in most African countries, they do not satisfactorily explain
why most parents, teachers, and students continue to support, and even push for, the use
of ex-colonial languages at their schools. These theories do not take into account the
lived realities and decisions which face individuals and families on a daily basis. Rather,
they describe a somewhat deterministic system which perpetuates inequalities and allows
little room for agency to play a role in individuals’ and families’ lives. These
deterministic explanations are unsatisfactory because they put too much stress on the

structures involved and leave out the role of individuals. Under such models the only real

i};.\"""\ 3..§..J. I

hdbtfl“ ‘

. ,)
utisldt': '8'“ :"\' :1 “\

. . .
...”. u, ...," .r ‘ ‘ E !"
.\‘)~--\\-\\1~s\u lath Ll ’l‘. ‘ |.1\

F-

(I ‘
n ...th'. \‘lU: lkc. But... 5. ‘

."‘l'~“l' , '
'5‘ In \Lh‘lu‘ ll... nl\

.

.. '

.b’ ,

x”.lr\4'-‘ “Fm F19. a
».«....lL \‘ ...La ..s‘

l L] ‘
' V I -
at 5.n.§ ’nuh‘. I ..F. ‘

.1!
“Qt-- 6 ll. 3‘3“; \u l
¥

‘ \1 H
C‘bl. ”\r:a:‘ IF. ki'P‘I. O...
I‘ \

L‘-

«I “J:l.l: :1“ >-
':H“

,3 \ .0 .5.
.

'1.
“:~ ‘1‘ ‘|l'\:.

H3."
”\fl ilk?"

\‘ZJ’L:
l

:VN-L . L
Amt Antlm l “llrldld

I..‘)::‘:: '2 J
PlJC‘Ct, Ul‘t‘l‘.
'b‘ .. :::5._ 5' I.
.1:\()“ 2H .0
I :;‘\‘a.‘3

'1“‘13‘l'3t(' :"

--,n\
¢l\.__‘-

I F

 

~’\."‘-~ k
V ‘-.-.l:\ H a.
-..L. 41w \

i. FD, .H

...“,
. 1"r
-, x-
4"). It I) I“ .‘L .
.1 n
h .'.\ .
-,‘ -9
“"-"~'T:C“v~
\ ‘llll “T, .1.
3,__
x- '
"'é‘l‘h“

U

, .

F...
-.,v ha”! .
3,13 a
"\n: I. Q 1
‘ ‘ s(l Q:
.‘.
' _ ,l
‘06th
‘kt, Hp.

“1., [:7-

way structures can change is by changing policies from the top down. Therefore, much of
the scholarship on LiEP in Africa has argued for changes in policies at the national
education system level. As mentioned before, the scholarship in this field is quite
sophisticated and convincing, drawing upon strong theoretical traditions and a wealth of
empirical evidence. But even so, this approach has done little to influence significant
changes in education policies and practices, especially as they apply to the local level of
schools and communities on the ground.

In this study, I investigate the language policy issue from a more local
perspective. In doing so, I attempt to understand the role that lived realities and every day
decisions play into the attitudes and actions parents, teachers, and students have towards
the use of language at their schools and towards education in general. Further, I attempt
to gain a better understanding of the role agency plays in the attitudes and practices of
those with whom I worked. Throughout this study I attempt to understand not only what
constraints are placed upon individuals, families, and schools by the structures imposed
upon them, but also what opportunities are presented to them through the systems and
resources available to them. By doing so I hope to portray a situation in which not only
constraints, but also opportunities present themselves to local participants in various,
complex ways. It is within these constraints and opportunities that actors make decisions
which influence not only their own lives, but systems around them. By conducting an
etlmographic study of local primary school stakeholders in Lesotho schools and
communities I attempt to draw out some of the complexities of their lived realities and
come to a better understanding of how they influence larger policies and practices in

education.

m: folio“ .\. l

K

"3:130: III... 4;,

’.‘
Alb '5‘

‘ ‘3' ysé'pl’; .yr‘ ‘uc- ‘ '7
.lr'mguum II.:\...._‘. .
§

kur,‘ 1., rt 3

.‘Awob..: rufh '{'.

l 71;“ .. .
5. . ‘W ‘L‘

3" '3- '

“is “\\. il'g...\1::.‘.\‘

. l
. \- mm. b ”L.”
A

i'mfi- ‘ I
. .
‘:‘-:: Ujll‘m“. ,x\ ...‘n‘.

. y .

‘ ‘u l
I “‘l l 'h ‘V‘F‘r ‘ ll [)I)
": k. I |

\\

‘n‘
’3‘.

h': WWW] “n. .'

. .
.‘n,..

“ ‘- wt.

.1 ,_
i\‘."~1m1\ '-
' “‘“- “\Id

‘
\

\.

 

7“, I. ‘
.‘
m.:.:'\‘\ ‘ \wlz' 'n I.

'r.

In what follows, I will provide a brief overview and discussion of each chapter in
the dissertation. I will also make connections between the chapters and give a general

overview of the findings, interpretations, and analyses of this study.

Chapter 2: Literature Review/ Theoretical Frameworks

Chapter 2 discusses four main theoretical concepts which have driven this study
and are used for its analysis. The first discusses the history and development of language
policy and planning (LPP) as a distinct field of study. The second is a discussion of
language ideologies, especially through the lens of linguistic anthropologists as they
attempt to explain the daily uses and perceptions of languages in their various contexts.
The third, drawing largely upon the theories of Bourdieu, explores different forms of
capital (economic, social, cultural, and symbolic) which contribute to the constraints and
opportunities facing individuals within societal structures and systems, especially with
regards to educational decisions and practices. The final concept l will discuss in Chapter
2 is that of agency and how it is conceptualized in this study. l will briefly explain each
of these here, but will go into much greater detail in Chapter 2 itself. In conclusion, I
discuss how these four theoretical concepts work together to produce a theory of “policy
as practice” which analyzes how language and education policies end up being received,
interpreted, appropriated, and implemented by local populations in actual practice on the
ground in schools, homes, and communities.

Language policy and planning

With regards to research on language planning and language policy there have

been three main theoretical traditions. The first of these is a technocratic and descriptive

l.

,_.' L33 ‘.I.l. l'
“.'.1\:l'lil'\.rt XH'L I.“ ‘ a
unv-

 

'v
. .. 0‘ 0 n Y ' ,‘ I n
glitz“: 6:.) OI tJAILUJ:L f
G ;3~-1"I4 '0 a I" '-
..l.l.b.....' Julia 01 n‘dbl‘ I..\
... ,' H . I"
'~ Z'J. ‘ n}..- w-
-‘-r--'W 1‘ ul ”59'” JI . ‘I.

“K" .

' I
;, h ry- yn‘ ~-.n~ <
q:.'u‘o&1.l..du.t-\ LL11.AC l

Ht

l
‘V’ O. I " '
4 ..t’TE M) 3 17ml
~

9

, ;. .
.- .....3, or. m.» t" "

o D

T‘
N.) ‘ “ ‘ I

.l ‘3 .F ‘ p .
ll \ .ul .m p ,1\{‘ I,

l
J. .
MS :
«--.~.r-.-:n ..- . .
. .. ,_. ‘k‘ .4
g. .
\ ~, .
i" “5:14: A‘ uL'N" "
5 ll

L‘""”5€_\ D.) '7' :l _
*Ib“ . 4'\ 0 .
‘ ‘u.‘ \ H

ll\

~ & scnrfrrs of LPP 'r ‘

"‘s 13C Cl
\ ‘|.‘1‘:rT‘/‘n 'T
“...‘C;
N‘Id \ tip—N . ‘
\ \tLI.‘.r\'~.U
I
‘52,:
u,‘ '
"-5ng L)...
_ . L\; I I
- \fi 0" 'h
H "IL. .
I
l_‘-..
‘. 1 T] I ‘,
‘15. .'.- .
Juc \Lll:\.\br‘q
' \
3.
(‘44? . ‘-
>1. ... I .
Au.,,¢'\h‘K '
‘ J.
I“.
.\" '
5‘ #4., 7~
'*‘ 11 4" I x
1“ LW‘
1‘s.
...“ ‘1
b"‘-.‘ Ea"
‘ xi. ‘1
— _, L4.
. I} ~ I -
7.7.1132: ‘l
I
«cap:
I . ..d l.‘.'.1_
5 -'_' 5. h
V'- . .1;
-‘.-\;:‘fi_

 

approach where scholars and practitioners have attempted to describe the essential
components of language policies and develop models of best practices, with the ultimate
goal of developing language policies that will lead to the development, unification, and
modernization of nations. The field of LPP under this theoretical tradition has often been
portrayed as a “neutral”, scientific field with little ideological concerns. This technocratic
approach mainly came out of the larger field of national development during the 60s
when there was a great focus on decolonization and creating newly independent states. It
has continued on today in many different forms.

The second phase of LPP research is largely in reaction to the first. As
development projects and nation building efforts began to show signs of failure, many
scholars began to question and criticize the technocratic approach to LPP. They have
argued that LPP is not a neutral field of study and is strongly influenced by ideological
preferences, regardless of whether these biases are recognized or acknowledged at all.
Critical scholars of LPP in this phase have claimed that many of the efforts to create
unifying and modernizing language policies has had the opposite effect by perpetuating
the inequalities developed under colonial rule and in many countries has resulted in even
greater dependence on the former colonial powers. Powerful arguments within this
approach include concepts such as linguistic imperialism (Phillipson, 1992), linguicism
(Phillipson & Skutnabb-Kangas, 1986), and language ecology (Phillipson & Skutnabb-
Kangas, 1996). These concepts maintain that western languages, especially English, have
been utilized by dominant forces to create and maintain a global hegemony over
subordinate populations. They also argue that many language speaking communities are

being discriminated under this global hegemony, leading some languages (along with

 

|
. O r
z n ‘
"JF'.“‘-.IF"I“‘.‘ L’ \un-uh‘
...- 4‘“. ...r H“. ti :

. I
.‘ ...aO'h '

' .¢ ,1 . ' ,
5! J..:....". ..is\ ll'. ss.‘
5

 

y I I

gun ~ -. ~~~yu~ ’ 1h” 11’“ -v

...;- fink-11”). u!» its“
\r

l
.Je‘m J w?» 4-
' ‘\ .s..L§.

\.a..
-

o v - .
Tb.) .huofi D- J O
“A .....L. p...1.‘s U. .

5 .-.. .

..~ gym}: .-\ . 7:

'8-4- , ‘ '
.' . l ~O - O. .
. h-«erurxé {.‘l \Cs.\\1. ll '

'u

-_-II_I I‘- u‘.

..t m»: t -
' \u‘

”0-. '

g 1" . '

... L‘h E‘frihfl'. v»- v
‘

-.

K .[Xf "1:. l ,.

n. ' .' ‘.\ , '
& ..tudr‘ fi":\

'. I

”“11 3&1fo

4.3.1 ."
_. ,PP It‘xm’gf‘, c.1115 '

_g

“‘r». ‘ I
- a .4.

n. l‘ .1? a ‘ '
' -A.'.,‘_\_d

'. C I I.
tax. :\i“ 1(K‘
"n: 315.1". d "

o - , 0
T4:f\ r5]! :bJ‘o H
' “‘1 0 An P Pv-

I

-;

A.“

1&3." i
‘. ..y
5 ‘mpl ;H‘1'_.
|i

.‘ \‘
x; 3'.
xi ['1
m ”..I
‘\..‘J\ '.
L). "b I
\ O
I
M.
(“*Q
\ .',
Q‘, ‘1 ’
‘- int-Hu‘ n
t Carin-v, ...
u . II
a m
'L. .
lug”
| u
.1. J“
‘4.
r.
\u. H“
‘l‘ PL”, l| '
. .. ,
Lh‘a‘ ‘
‘ .\‘Lr."1
.101.
\J"
"5-re\‘\4—,.
"Astute oL
‘l.:i|'1
.'~ "
‘ «3"...»
-“3 I: ’H.
. -
tut \L’J.‘
Lf“\ ‘\
-. ‘I.
'.__ u ‘

 

 

their accompanying cultures) towards extinction. This branch of LPP argues that we must
work against these forces by fighting for linguistic human rights and implement policies
that work against the neo-imperialistic, hegemonic forces in order to reverse the current
negative trends.

The third phase of LPP research has, in turn, developed out of reactions towards
this critical approach. Although most scholars in this third trend would agree with the
overall claims of critical LPP theorists, they believe that critical theories are also too
deterministic and do not sufficiently explain the complexities of language issues in the
world today. Even though there are powerful global and national forces which strongly
influence the language policies, attitudes, and practices of local communities, they do not
determine how local actors appropriate, resist, and/or accommodate these forces. This
trend of LPP research calls for a greater focus on local interactions with LPP issues in
order to understand how local populations and individuals act as agents who “take over,
appropriate, adapt, adopt, and reuse” (Pennycook, 2000, p. 116) English and other global
languages for their own purposes and intents.

Another important concept in this approach is to look at language practice on the
local level in terms of resistance theories. Resistance theorists acknowledge that social
institutions impose a powerful reproductive force on society in general, but this does not
change the fact that local actors interpret and react to these institutional forces through
their own particular historical and culturally situated identities. It is through the agency of
local actors, resistance theorists claim, that we find the possibility for changes and
modifications in the status quo. Scholars that fit this model include Canagarajah (1999),

Pennycook (2001), and Ramanathan (2005). These critical theories on LPP help to

 

.0
kn‘ ‘l
u 5'

v V 4‘
' ' . d.¢'~ ‘|
J‘l' "e 'quv..dnu\-\
b» " ... -

I l l l'
. I n ‘1.) ‘
{2:3‘.‘ ‘1" p'n\l\‘ J". "T

1.... l

. x “o -r
1‘3"; :kifjfrt'fi,’ ‘ \l;

’ \
_.‘,.-—-.b¥o l‘. '

'
5- 4...!»

‘ l
m: 'a‘ I 4 "a. r..-
l..\ .‘sgk'..h u.sl|.\

”.Y.AJ.,,.L._¢',,‘J 6'
u " l
‘. --blu1.- u-L ln\u\.l I -

"rv '- ‘.l,'.‘-;_,.c" \\
b‘ ' l§\"‘§it\lxla. I“

‘35 . 'l
. .,‘\ “1‘ '~" Y“V O. ‘.
‘V“'-s.4.\..g \
\.
1‘- F
4-.“ 1‘

,_.‘“"‘ mu ...". g
4». . . _ s.‘
‘ ““¥-~.a\\\ 3“..-
.f. ... V
5 W'Hv
T‘ "‘\ mil'fidl Id” 'n-
. .
‘ \M\1_
5
r
.‘V.
«‘l ‘

 

.I‘
s
'1‘..-
"‘-~ 1"
.‘4 L! 1
\nlii“I'x,-.'
' udl ." x l
ALJ 7'
‘-
ac .
u“':‘ ..|
L“
A ' -.l
ldi\(l L '
.'_ . ,
.‘l O ‘0
k: -:‘
‘q 4 I
‘ .; ~‘-1‘
~ L 3‘, IT
a d i“.
: tn;
“a; i"

 

explore the dynamics between the constraints placed upon actors by the structures of
systems and policies along with the possible actions and reactions, either through
resistance, conformity, or a mixture of both, through the agency they possess within the
structures placed upon them.

Language ideologies

The second theoretical concept I draw upon is that of language ideologies as it is
explored in the field of linguistic anthropology. In Language Ideology: Practice and
Theory (Schieffelin, Woolard, & Kroskrity, 1998), a collection of influential linguistic
anthropologists explore the concept of language ideologies through various cultural
contexts and linguistic situations. Their conception of language ideologies differs from
those employed by the LPP theorists discussed above because its focus of research is on
linguistic differences within particular linguistic and cultural groups rather than those of
competing global languages and cultures. Therefore, rather than focusing on the macro-
level dynamics of a dominant linguistic group imposing its will upon less powerful
populations (i.e., colonial powers implementing English as the language of education),
linguistic anthropologists strive to understand the micro-level dynamics of why people
choose to use different forms of language over others within specific sociocultural
contexts.

By focusing on the micro-level dynamics this approach allows us to analyze the
particular contextual realities which influence the linguistic decisions made by groups
and individuals. It also helps to explain how individual and group choices are informed
and influenced by larger macrosocial issues. For example, it is easy to state that Sesotho

speakers in Lesotho are “colonized” in their minds when they express a preference for

'l ,' .
«at... p') . |
..;.:..1.LPPL.JthT.~l.\ .L. ..

.4 'll' ‘ 1‘ ' .)P r,x'.,‘rf
53....1‘ 59'sdhm5rww- .\
I

. . . \.

”-3.453 1,.., \no. ... fl

uALfi—a-nh‘!“'ak‘. \Aio\oc1. kl
s

.- q -
Wv.u.-‘.‘~l. A“ u 5 oh.
.‘.~b..l51.iaiu\.l\:.\ k‘l ‘I‘a‘b

... ‘ 7' ‘ 'l
.'.:;.:.1:.'.'.'t1. “6.1.“: .1.” x.

4. J_. , ‘
Jff 0.4318 b\ 22.12

..
1 ‘h‘
finv~ . '
«.... .1“. ‘11!»- r Q. ‘ M V
~ t" ‘5 . \_

 

”5...; i '
c a i ‘
4. ......)l: IU 131,-.“ J\::‘ ."\

 

 

.3‘l'fi- .\ ' 1 ‘ a -
u... ..‘ 4'1 1“
«a; fl‘L L ' 1" g . P
:‘ ‘44 It.‘.\L.\
r
42""llx Jl -. ..
\“l "L‘l
).
v 1
inc “HM?“ ,fi":l‘""' ‘
' "5..
"-1,“. '
....
‘w' H
l 4 us 1 ' ‘
"kmlk \(L ax
4\
‘E; H ‘
.,‘ 3 ’OP
" 5‘ ‘nvw-
Ll tyne 891.4.
“-\a.:“
:.
L". 4‘1” ‘
‘\u ‘ \"I1»}
\Lpl l“
1;?
11"»
‘~4,‘

TV- .-
“‘45.“.l"
~ ‘L. ”I‘Hr ..

Mr. :.

I
'4 fl.) 4
a; (l

h: shmo unit"

.jfa ‘4
- M. 2"! '
. l\.w\1n,\; _
' \Lukd.l'
.3"; .. _-
m, . -.
“My. ...“:
' I 41 ~. I
"k" \u.: 9
‘k‘s‘i ‘IH'F ..l
.H‘dl \"v ‘
‘ N 4 .‘k
&A~iil‘1drnf
‘ ‘ k. x ;1-
..‘
5 -
‘., Ln‘
“ K
‘ l
:‘dée .1 x
‘A\\ I
. 45 (1'
:3" ‘-.
., 1.
., '3'.“
“5.11,, .
llLrs‘t.
5Ail‘rc .1
. ' d "

“.-.”.
..1‘ ...
“ \“J.
.P\\-‘ It
41] ‘
\ u 3....
n

English as the language of instruction at school (which many reproductive-oriented
critical LPP theorists would argue), but this does not help to explain why those same
Sesotho speakers prefer to use their own language in nearly every other social context,
often including official politics and many aspects of official business. By parsing out the
specific influences of the local sociocultural contexts combined with forces from the
outside world, we are able to better understand why sometimes seemingly contradictory
choices are made by individuals under specific contexts. One of the most useful aspects
of using language ideologies as a theoretical framework for this study is that it provides a
mechanism to link actions of local agency within structural limitations imposed by
national and global forces.

Forms of capital

The third theoretical concept I draw upon for this study is that of different forms
of capital (economic, social, cultural, and symbolic). This concept draws largely upon the
theories of Pierre Bourdieu (1977, 1986) and his discussion of different forms of capital.
Bourdieu’s concept of capital helps to analyze the educational and linguistic decisions
actors make for their own families’ lives beyond just language policy decisions. I argue
that one of the shortcomings of the critical LPP theorists, with regards to the influence of
language policy in education, is that they analyze LiEP issues without taking enough
account of social and cultural influences outside of language-specific issues in education.
Educational stakeholders are concerned with many competing issues at the same time, of
which language policy is only one — and often not the most important — according to local
stakeholders. Therefore, although language issues play a significant role in the education

of children, especially when they are being taught in an unfamiliar language, they ofien

l 0 u ~rl ‘r'
1.1.“; "It liki.‘ Ennflit td..

' “1 r L.

 

‘ I 'l.
n ~. -.-.I- - 3 ‘r\ v \‘
:5-‘~I--b.\ B" 5‘ H l...:. I.

F

" ' '5- .
"u ', t ‘n‘ "'4,)o- \ \‘_
aguh nu‘ IEJE.-\¢.\‘ .\..‘ t

. u
.‘ I
‘1‘ ‘M “‘v-w l- J \' Oh .-
.."l§5“4'.1§1\s\..\ ...;
| s

. u

'f 5-,: - ' 5")? n 9 1' ' ‘I‘

\.4‘ur;:\\n\- urtu£.\“..:.
.

.... .. ' , .. _
‘ 1 ’11 .N' . n '0 ,
.141... I.» .\|-Ha¥l l~‘, \‘

....-

fi»t.} 1m );_. I
¥-»~»>:JP“>LL JP‘WZ.
.

.fi’uu.) ‘P' u... ;
... mun-£311; .rA... ' 1L4...

fif'm ta. ‘ 7
.a‘. :15). .~j~3£3‘ Jr‘d (”r

3‘,” u. l
I: A .3" ‘A‘I . ‘

my. V‘\"‘:“n\ In t .|

~ t..._‘

w

 

-‘~'~”.l
"Hc. .\ .1
‘H\ ..'l4‘ s:’\“ ir"...‘ O
' .A.
‘.
‘v Ill ... “.
5 ”Li“ "l‘ 4",.“ \ ‘ ..
:\45\- I‘ ‘l .‘
u. u §$i1 ‘3'. ‘ .'
' \\ .
' ‘ U‘ \(‘r‘kcnl
‘.

 

‘ \
\‘W
V
' I
‘H
1.“ I l
t "1""; .
‘ ll\ 5("‘1‘ ‘ ‘
. . ..
u,‘“.‘z
‘P ,~
" t. l
“n (IL-Ron. 1
r ~ CF"-
"? .:
-.‘.
.1' 5—“;
‘%l "‘ s I
"\‘ .h1 ~
hall“ \\‘ I...1' ‘
" CL A
'n ‘ .
‘. “KL '
-g‘ Q. '
ri‘H.1=).
‘°:n3\'1[..
' ‘ £\ rd.‘
’ \“
‘L. .
I‘tl-I‘ .‘
‘Q,\h-_4
\- ‘tlfi .
I‘Ku , ..
5 “fr R..\‘ ;
"s : '
§ ‘ ~
‘;;~.-
. "
«flu

are not the most important, or most pending, issues which weigh into local stakeholders’
decisions. By exploring the different sources of capital available to local stakeholders,
especially teachers, school children, and their families, we are able to see the conflicting
and competing factors that go into the decisions that they make. In addition, we are able
to gain a better understanding of which factors pose structural limits upon individuals and
which areas offer opportunities for potential acts of agency within the larger social
structures imposed upon them. By exploring the dynamics between constraints and
opportunities in individuals’ lives we can gain a greater understanding of why students,
families, teachers, and other educational stakeholders make the decisions they do and
how their decisions influence societal structures and policies around them.

Agency

The final theoretical concept I rely on for analysis in this study is that of agency.
The notion of agency is often an illusive one, with many different fields of study having
divergent ways of conceptualizing and understanding what agency is and what role it
plays in social dynamics. Therefore it is important to provide a thorough definition of the
concept, along with an explanation of the role it plays in social interactions. The basic
definition I use for agency is borrowed from Aheam (2001, p. 112) which states that,
“Agency is the socioculturally mediated capacity to act.” The expanded definition I
provide in Chapter 2 emphasizes that agency is not completely free will and is highly
influenced and structured by sociocultural influences, both local and global. In the way I
conceptual agency, it is rational and conscious, but only to the extent that groups and
individuals make the best decisions they can based upon the knowledge, experience, and

understanding available to them. Agency can be performed through acts of resistance, but

II.‘

. t ‘J
1.“:3ifT'LC) .iu no. .»

. . . . '
. . _ In

qr-tqln;4 'v-r V y .

......Luhu null. utn J““5

l

n - . . ,
"I!" "-y' 'P‘ is 9.13 4 .
"...... ...r.‘ ..‘u‘k. ' “.5 \‘. ..\

‘ .
.r.»- -9— . O \' .3
.n“‘s\.. .‘u'..\-u.-1n .K'I\\‘.

' I
l?" “J"'H‘ .v-‘J
M-I-n.s.\ Li‘- A-.L
«-

‘1 v ‘
4‘-\...;J.

*1-\0---‘yu-.‘.IH _”J'\‘, _
-~~" \nIJ

. . p
“\‘ bin}. \_

. 4
-cA|¢O.

”.3.” -n . _

... I
.usw ... h.'\ d\hg\1‘ ‘1??? H? '

.. ‘ I.
‘\E\u\.

kl \th1 b}

t

' ‘9. -l ‘
‘ \ . ..h‘ . )9
b.1_‘.\.‘l‘

.LL'\ 3: I‘c\l

."-
- a
.. (“.1

- .1.

.11. TlLJflch ...

v
n
1....“
u

.. 1 .
'4 "'at. g
:s 1.10 skJ\-J::||F1'o]

.m....i:§l lkh".l o
..u; 4““. z..
w. '

“L ‘.-1 -._ ‘I
anag} 4.1“ '

IS\I\.C.\" .

\\ '.\ '

o; _‘ '
’ o
s ""N‘ Luz.

 

 

 

acts of agency do not necessarily mean individuals are resisting. It can often be
performed through acceptance, accommodation, or hybridization of structural forces.
Within this study the concept of agency is very important because it is what mediates
between structural forces, as Bourdieu’s forms of capital help to explicate, and local
ideologies and individual interests. It is through agency where the possibilities of social
transformation and real changes lie. It is also through agency where policy and practice
meet in the actual appropriation of policies on the ground.

In short, by focusing on the linguistic and educational attitudes and practices of
local stakeholders in Lesotho schools and communities, I attempt to provide a more
complex and nuanced understanding of how global and national forces (such as national
language and educational policies) impact local actors and institutions (such as schools
and families) while also investigating to what extent the role agency plays in the actual
attitudes and responses which local stakeholders display through their practices. By
utilizing these theoretical frameworks we can hopefully obtain a better understanding of
the implicit role that local actors and the realities within which they live play in
maintaining social inequalities while also gaining a better appreciation of their potential
power agency provides to effect changes to the status quo, for better or for worse.

Policy as practice

At the end of Chapter 2, I have a discussion on how the four theoretical concepts
discussed above come together to form a theory of “policy as practice” through which the
findings of this study are interpreted and analyzed. In more traditional approaches to
education policy research scholars have focused on the theoretical and social foundations

of policies along with their intended implications for educational practices. Policy

10

'33.“-..u5“ 50.71155...” 5\-

_. 5‘55. D

I‘“IJ' .
1.8.5.5.. 5Ja5-fi-L “‘4' “pr“

Cr"! !- "pg Tow. 01.x n 1

...-.5 Lapin. lrnuiuk‘..u..‘
.
...... 0‘

’ ' P 5‘ .V'
.351 ..1. ;.J...C_. .1

I
.

-- l
1".)
‘4 ~4"~ T.) f3: “15.1KJ,

Tn;
.115 “‘1 M15} 3‘ r'J ‘

.-.. .

I 1 .‘P_ 'LP‘. '

5..5.:§ L’u 51-5 IY‘. ‘ Jn'd 1"“;
5

5‘.-

15 I" ‘O h ”L "h“
In.“ 1 ..l\ ”1:51?in

'1" ~—
‘ ‘ 1
"' l»:5.155. ”51.1..1115‘\\ U

.
5". .
w A m...

...“ .1.“ 4.11 .
ru:_ ICCLT 9‘». "
HAL

»

5 ..., 5.

l.“ 3“,}4‘ no

in.§~(l\s [‘1 ..
I.\

 

research is often concerned with how to produce the most “effective” policies that will
address educational “problems” which have been identified by key educational
stakeholders. Traditionally this has been done with a top-down approach, with policy
makers at national, regional, or other macro-levels devising policies which have
implications for the local level of schools and communities.

The “policy as practice” approach, in contrast, begins with the actual practice of
policies on the ground level (in schools, homes, and communities) and analyzes what
factors, at both the micro and macro levels, have an influence on how things are done in
actual practice, regardless of whether these practices follow the intended policies or
produce unintended results. This approach has less to do with trying to come up with the
most “effective” policies for education, but rather looks at how and why education is
practiced in actuality. This approach attempts to draw connections between policy
decisions and how they are realized in actual practice by focusing on local factors, such
as, the attitudes and lived realities of local stakeholders, the social, economic, and
cultural constraints placed upon individuals, schools, and communities, and the role of
individual and community agency in the appropriation, resistance, conformance, and/or
rejection of certain policies actualized through local stakeholders’ practices. In short, the
“policy as practice” approach theorizes that policies should be interpreted through the
ways in which they are performed in actual practice. This in turn can inform policy
decisions by understanding how local stakeholders potentially will receive, interpret, and
implement policy mandates from above. Without a strong understanding of the factors
influencing the actual appropriation of policies on the ground level, then policy formation

can be a misinformed and counterproductive enterprise. This is because ultimately it is

11

. I ‘l L '
than. 3:" “5.1.1..
.. ;,_.-u.5.n- "

U

Q l

‘ -. ‘ .1.” _ ... \r H
:m, Wfldut ..1. 1

‘9' l

l "
‘Ifi.”.
. U

-1 ”Fr; ‘1'}. )._I t.“
3.2: . .11.. ‘\' , ~_'

. ~. . ‘ 4
‘f‘ .w ‘ ‘
LUL-u15-8- .5 h‘\\"
£13.53 r f}, 9'", 0 ‘.
.«5...91..[,_‘i uu.‘ \\uko‘
.. .
.
g‘ 3"! 0n-
l

 

_ uh N...“ .
- l ' . .
“.~-'L11..I .ml' '\.1\ \n

l

35'!

I
"m “a .
_ ' l ‘1 .
':.u 51u.“r~IIu\ 5“::

line. (“r .. .
-- 1" 1 ;\ I .
“ “L35 5.1m"

\

“It... I .
“>1,‘ ‘1'. )9 g
«.5 e v
\1.‘~,\J.I.‘lr‘.\ \_.'-\
' \u.
‘5 .
. u ~
‘ ”‘18; r ' ‘7'
t. 1451‘ A!“ . ‘n
"' 1
‘s \ 1T '
5
1'5. ‘.‘n I
F.3 n.“ .5 "F I

 

§.:ht,
‘__\‘-
V. *3 \F ‘
5T; \‘IH‘C h.’ "-
Hg "C “H
l‘p.‘
"'5‘” -‘
" 3; CJF' ‘
51A. pa...,~.
l\.“\' .\
::‘..',’-.
‘1 JP .
”4.0er
5.

 

local stakeholders who have the final decision on how and whether or not to implement

language and educational policies at their schools and within their own lives.

Chapter 3: Methodology

In Chapter 3, I discuss the epistemological approach taken in developing a
methodology for this study, along with describing the particular methods which I utilized
while conducting research in Lesotho and the specific sites I worked at. The nature of this
research is largely ethnographic in which I employed the strategies of participant
observation, observation notes, interviews, focus groups, and artifact collection. The
majority of my time was spent evenly between government and private primary schools
working in classrooms with teachers and students from selected Standard 4 and Standard
7 classes. Over time I came to know the students and teachers quite well and through
informal conversations, semi-structured interviews, and participation in school activities,
such as teaching, marking assignments, maintaining discipline, eating lunch with
teachers, and playing with the children on the playground, and thus I was able to gain a
sense of their general attitudes and practices towards issues regarding education and
language policies and practices. Through these observations and conversations I was able
to conduct thorough interviews with the teachers, selected groups of students, and their
parents. Interviews with the teachers were conducted on school grounds, interviews with
students were conducted with focus groups of 6-12 students at a time, and interviews
with the students’ parents were conducted in their homes and communities. In addition, I

lived for part of the time in a community where students from one of the government and

12

72:1?“ P"..1...‘hwl\ t.

4-.»

" I
.*:1~.I1.cu...'~

'.J,n-.-‘- RV

tut?
'. fl . "I.
L_U pr. .11‘ \v

I
sw‘.“.}‘ ,1!- “in r’ 3'1
5.5.5.55 .‘5 “... .15. .5 "
§

 

MELT: .....‘1r.

"\4 q =""::\. 3“. ‘b‘IVL . 1‘
"' 1 in. 1‘ ‘K
"on; oLJ. 'T'

5 .555 .. hyu‘thlhn. 1.",-

v

45.1. ‘..‘ 1". r " .
.1.5-.1 ~ . u

- 1h5\don‘-IL “ol .|

-| .c

L: 3.. '1!- “ g .
‘ ‘5 ‘ .1 '
4.5.: ”A L~-\‘\5““!

O

.1
- c
.0

f5.

1
.,

~.

‘J L.

'5. " I. ‘11

55>L. km
5 ”5......” n‘ 15

"--....\c\,

H‘A‘C\ [II 1""

“HAL ‘ ‘ r
- g I ,l 0
. “‘[5‘1A

“(TEN 1
L
‘I 3*Ea
.Jll‘cy ‘ .u
35 .‘jL‘Er (I...
I.
«7".»
““5 'k; J ‘
\r\ bk qr c'.“‘
A‘ ",
5. .
k... .
2.1;; ' ,.
‘5 .‘Y‘g .
111.15 \(I III-5...
|“ "
5 h ‘
5 “- "I. "h‘Y1
“'A1 I
H.511 {U f.’
::‘~ ..;u I.
”5| ”-
ll!-1
5 [I
H
'r n“! l“
. \
TNL
.“rz'. ,l r
5 ‘
5...“...'-
A ' ‘1
‘1'. Ll

 

two of the private schools resided. This helped me to gain even greater depth of
understanding of the contextual realities of their lives and communities.

In support of my ethnographic research in the schools and communities I also
conducted lengthy interviews with leading officials from the Ministry of Education and
Training (MOET), principals of other primary schools in the area, and worked
collaboratively with a few scholars at the National University of Lesotho and the Lesotho
College of Education. Through working with these scholars and officials I acquired
official documents on national education and policy decisions, research studies on
education in Lesotho, demographic and other information on the schools I worked with,
samples of curriculum materials, teachers’ lesson plans, students’ class work, and exam
results. These sources of information were extremely valuable in understanding both the

local and national contexts within which the schools operated and the students lived.

Chapter 4: Sources of Capital for Government School Families

Chapter 4 uses Bourdieu’s different forms of capital (economic, social, cultural,
and symbolic) to describe and analyze the constraints and Opportunities which face
families who send their children to government schools. Through my field research I
found there were four different categories in which families fit. These were (1) those
families which are so limited in their different sources of capital that they are restricted to
sending their children to Free Primary Education (F PE) government schools only,
whether they like it or not, (2) those families which potentially have the economic capital
to send their children to a private primary school but choose not to, due to various

reasons, (3) those families who have just enough economic capital to send their children

13

“all?“ \)1‘\,,....

Lot"

U
~-q""‘-"' "\ I}. . H l
5 “bu-“0‘ {1‘53“ in n:

I Y ' 4 0
raw! «5. fir..~
WO‘SJB “:5: 51.11b.5

1
ma" '

J- '1 “51""? 'L.) ' I '1
..L‘:_ L' m' IO “...:k5

1 5445.51

{221:5 3-32.3111?

”Lag-v 1M '
155.- I a)? 1151. :Jl.l1115)‘!.n.

" in

m I‘M-.31 id JKI‘TE .‘U. I er‘

-K 4..
"1. VL 1

-.5 1.1.1:“ .tl‘,3'\‘;‘ \J'

““
I . -
o
to.¥5511..1i:._~'“':.h"'.
:5 ..5. .I

...

. ' I
'1.‘ \"5‘ 32'
..'_~1 \ ”0 ‘
5t. l,]~ Pu‘

T"

1.
,u

“1‘1";

.. v
51.155. 1.11:“: {cr\ bx“

 

P“ a .
~ 'M m. .1 :1.
f. 5
1 If”!
\ .5 \\qH:n\c‘
414:0:
.115 1 .1? “WILL“,

_\ (‘1‘.
~I. n5 \51“..- I

)1 541 ”L35

\1 ' - .
q: .5
V‘ .:i\ w! 5'
‘u ‘nc ._hll _
“LN!“ Hl
_ \
“.a..'
": i‘!"'--
"'5 W '
d\ in \nJh-vw.‘
t---'5
in; I u
‘Ll‘t‘h‘u
"m m "‘n 6'
| ‘
1“
~.':‘r{
. .,
I‘ll-5 )
(if ' "
J/(
. 'P
. «1'.
I’-
”:17?“P "
‘L c \ ‘i
5 “ a 5
LIN“.
‘ VI. H
;~ 1'
,1 l “ u
H) .w.
u‘hcq

 

 

 

to a private school (similar to those in category 2) and end up doing so despite the
constraints placed upon them, and (4) those families who have an abundance of economic
capital to send their children to a private school, and therefore the decision is a rather
easy one for them to make.

In this chapter I analyze the different sources of capital that contribute to the
decisions which families in the first two categories make for the education of their
children. In doing so, I draw from the stories of a few selected students’ families, as told
to me through interviews and observations, to illustrate how these different sources of
capital combine together to limit and constrain the choices available to these families on
various levels. The purpose of this chapter is to show that some families are more
constrained than others by the structures imposed upon them, but they all have
opportunities to exercise their agency, although to differing degrees and with differing
levels of consequences.

One of the important aspects to each of these students’ lives is the amount of
linguistic capital they can draw upon from their families and community networks. The
lack of knowledge of English and/or support in gaining proficiency in English plays a
strong role in the ability of students to benefit from their educational opportunities. It also
goes a long way in shaping what type of employment and educational opportunities are

available to them in the future.

Chapter 5: Sources of Capital for Private School Families
Chapter 5 is a continuation of Chapter 4 in that it analyzes the lived realities of the

families of students who fall into the categories 3 and 4 listed above. These are families

14

 

‘ 24.1. 1.1.1,,
‘7 5:515:51 .0 Milk 5‘15 .1 5

5

5
”so ans)‘ fir, '51-‘51de
' I .6...1.5. ..5 H55 5
.. --
,l 1 .
" ‘H v [I
' 5' o
J'ymn' It! w 15-: ‘-
. ‘.‘ .11: 155A‘.'-‘) 11‘5‘“¢J1
5

. .
9‘ “.'a"_ 3" P' I "'Jn‘n'
2.5...351‘51'51'. so). 35.5111, -

5 5
In;.‘, ~95 ‘3“. a” ‘ 'Lr“f O .V"
5115} i

.5): >545. 4.15.1 51.51.

.. _ i
1 % WM: 'W'r '

.5. uur _ Allllltkn " \~
~

~ .
:‘gr-h 19' “n" ’
p ._ m '
-5... .5) ”3.14.5 55' ri.‘
\

..1

‘1
3") ”3.5-. . ‘
.. 3:11.116: 1.": n ..

n1.»

Tl".-- . . 7
"fig..." 55..“ ...L)
“a

.:_~.‘.;ar:;1r~:d to

'5.
5‘1. ‘\'\‘ .‘

- ..
‘v

‘\ " -
"V... . .\ l',
..,_ 5U

«“15!1 ”3‘! ‘o -‘
“““--"\"‘..\ In? ’t- ....
‘ hm;

 

i. “:3 ~d
. .1 .1,‘." .25,
\ ~\‘.\‘l“r
I

“IX“

 

.,\

who decided to send their children to private schools. In this chapter I focus more on the
opportunities presented to families who have greater sources of capital in a combination
of forms. Through illustrating the families’ stories, as were told to me through interviews
and observations, I attempt to describe how the different forms of capital available to
these students and their families work in combination to help open up opportunities, and
at times impose limiting constraints, upon families in divergent way. Although each of
the families manage to pay for their children to go to an English Medium private school,
their experiences are not the same, as some students benefit more from their educational
experiences than others.

In this chapter I try to tease out how the structural forces of society differ for these
families compared to those who send their children to government schools. 1 pose
questions such as: What is it about these families’ lives that allow them to make more
beneficial decisions for their children’s educational experiences? What role does agency
play in these decisions? Do some families succeed simply because they make better
decisions or have greater ambitions? Or are there social, cultural, economic, or other
structural realities that make it more possible for some families to make certain
educational decisions while others cannot? By investigating these issues in detail I
attempt to show the complicated nature of how structure and agency play together in the
decisions of families and individuals. All families use their agency to make decisions, but
the sources of capital available to them have a strong impact on shaping the range of
choices which are available to them, thus limiting the power of agency for some families

compared to others.

15

_ I 1' I y 1: II.
1'1”}.15 “(In ’g-\~" ‘ '
-. .....L

l.” (".- put 6 de‘J

...? i5|

‘
. 1 1 l "V 1 1".
' "3‘ "-37 '1, . -
n.1\g.‘.‘ 41(IU55-k.:-5Jl “1

Ir-- ".‘
1
A

' l' 5",)", '.‘n‘ -
...; 10‘3“ .1..5. ' .5 '~ ‘ '\
§ r

‘ l
~.~-. - n"- Fa "‘ ..- _‘ u
a, I I
L5.*1 1111.111 11.4515k15 ‘ 5 -

1

1 ‘ I
‘ ' ' "' .l‘ ‘09- — Ir- 1
‘l‘ "3} “1 L\)5H’1(1k' J.‘ 5 1.5. I

'I‘\' 1. ' D
V‘- A“‘~ ~O ‘. ,h
....5'. .g‘J‘ \ \I‘ \‘ \llt
\ o

I
5 .

 

 

'1 l
1 - r-
‘W. 4 p1 . _
p11,», :11 l
" '1. ‘1
1‘“? . 5‘
. . mgr: r: A“ d“: ‘1
1. t
:‘z: .
”V. 1' 3.;
N- 1 r
5. ‘1 .
11m \‘lll‘y‘, :
I
5;, .
\l““* 1
“"L‘I -.. I
I1“- \I‘ l . I
-_kldal\ r: .15‘ .5
,5. _
VI] 1
‘l -5,‘ QFA‘
‘ \‘lu\ I}! A
~~t “5 n‘ I.
’ IJ ‘ l
5. .\
‘ :~‘ I
;“3‘3 ‘9

.'-<;31. .5}
\ ..
'-qc1v “
SeUl fr. .1
‘.lg
h'kfl’w‘.
. 4‘ _
‘5I‘F'
‘ ‘1 g 1"“

 

Chapter 6: Ideological Influences on Language Policy in Lesotho

In Chapter 6, drawing upon the theoretical framework of language ideologies, I
discuss the ideological influences, largely from national and global levels, which have
helped to shape and maintain the current language in education policy in Lesotho. By
drawing upon interviews with ministry officials, teachers, and parents, I argue that there
are two main macro-level ideological influences which have helped to shape the language
policies in Lesotho as they currently stand. These two influences come from the
continued legacy of colonial language policies and educational practices along with the
global hegemony of English.

As a former colony of Britain, Lesotho is still largely impacted by its colonial
past. In many ways, the education system in Lesotho continues to operate under the
structure that was implemented by the colonial regime. Through interviews and
observations I provide examples of how this colonial legacy continues to influence the
educational practices in Lesotho. Although some policy changes have been made to make
education more relevant to the lives of Basotho, there are still many policies which have
carried over from colonial days that key stakeholders believe should be replaced by more
updated and socially relevant policies. Included amongst these is an examination system
which still sends the matriculation exams of high school students to the United Kingdom
to be marked and sent back to Lesotho for official results. One of the most lasting
legacies which has carried over since colonial times, without much criticism or
resistance, is the use of English as the language of instruction at schools. I discuss how

this has had a strong influence on maintaining current language policies in Lesotho and

I6

 

l 5
.1 , J qffi‘i""\.
'11. 3’ {WWI 35.05““ “‘1

.4 551 H'.

I 5'
...~ "1‘1." 1: ghtx'n l‘ J -

g‘.u\.

“5-,; -
lf‘ddcimll‘. [U .11» U

I ‘ ‘ I .. x;
' ‘1‘ h‘ “‘V
3.} 21‘1‘, ’5‘ 1151‘ hp, 55:
b.. 5:-

, . 1 5
' "nan ‘f‘
’1 “it Trl‘ l} .115 .-\‘L J‘
A...” - ~

 

. . | .
......,.~, \.‘I""‘." .
1.- 1;...1..~;..1..1«.‘ ..J. ‘--
V
...-1.6.1.11...5.."1.' J ‘r
«at-.15.”; .1111u5n55 l 1.
5
”q." .14'"\ “N [,1 5"" 5
151M551a53u‘1n l. o-ln\ ‘1.
“1“... ‘.‘Y 7.“ ;.)H’ . '
"‘5‘-"Ac\5 .111 >§UU\-l§.‘ 5‘! 5“.
- . ',, ' v
‘.‘:u"*‘"’i-‘ ”‘4"."9‘ ‘\'
5 1” f" “‘5 5£=~e1455 J h.
\
..
a o

!‘ nu 5n. 5w-
‘ \ ‘ _\ , .1 .-
~I~L1ti..\i.id..‘.. .

-11

$1.. ‘. 1.

1 .05 1
u‘ 4’12 t 5
. "“‘I5j1'1 IF

ll‘r .5 50
1 51111“\.5\\\ 1.

1..__ ‘ .
’3 ‘1‘ JV.” ‘
«5111.555. My: 'J-l’r‘h5 \'

1 -1 5 1

.- x. ,
’3'.” I

1:11;;

I111.“

‘ w ~15 li:'.‘.

 

has led most educational stakeholders to accept the use of English as a medium of
instruction at schools as a natural and unquestioned practice.

In addition to the colonial legacy of English, there may be an even stronger global
ideology which has helped to maintain the dominant status of English in education in
Lesotho. This is the global hegemony of English. Through interviews and observations
with various educational stakeholders, I show how the global dominance of English has
had a strong influence on how people in Lesotho view the importance of English and its
role in education. In this study, the great majority of people stated that they feel it is
important for students to use English at schools because in the end it is English that will
give people the chance to get a good job. They stated it is important to learn English
because it is an international language and is therefore essential to understand. There are
many different influences in Lesotho society which have reinforced these sentiments and
have caused the majority of people to feel that English should continue to be used as the

official language of instruction at schools.

Chapter 7: Ideological Influences on School Practices

In Chapter 7, I describe and analyze the language attitudes and practices of
teachers and students in their schools. From my observations there was a great difference
between the language practices in the English Medium private schools compared to those
in the government F PE primary schools. The English Medium schools begin from day
one in Standard 1 (and at some schools even earlier in pre-school) by using English as the
language of instruction for all subjects other than Sesotho. At the government schools the

official policy states that Sesotho is to be used as the language of instruction up through

17

 

‘ C
I I | Q . v‘ ‘ v
"“ ‘ Sb)“ .
2.25.1.“- .‘. lib.41‘u5\4a_\.u.

m‘v -°

. . 3
‘\ l h” I kl”
......AVLL. \ .IUMS

. a I L D
. ., ,., o ‘ I ‘ rt 1
I . .
,‘.:.' .L'l 33d. pT-l‘u.s Jr g.
. .

n \‘
”2‘23!- ‘-‘°.1';"'\' \‘ -‘
‘2‘».‘3...\.\sl\ - xi»
.
..J. .— \"" .'s ‘v ‘R ‘
, \ -1 ' V
-....l. L..i‘ L.‘.;x‘. . ...
5 v I -
.. , . I
IQ .
‘4 u-‘v - q. xv" I9-
..ha_._:.._‘na \'si.' 4‘ . 5.

J I \~

1.1-“ « ....

q .A J's-1f v.

‘ k b...5.¥‘“. LIH‘:\\
.f >

I .

,’ *r c'... n _
A... 3h‘.u‘\ .3 ...
. ‘_ .4
~— _- ’.
- "-u-
,, .a. \,‘l,‘l'\ .¥__‘ ..
. "‘ .CIA‘ \
-‘ h

.-’;fl-~ ‘ a
‘V‘ C v
o‘!‘ 4" I.) 7
‘4.“ .~3~h.iv\
‘\¢ Q
\..
"~ .~ -\ H ~
~. L . \r‘ .
‘ 4 . s .
n .SHML\ I ‘
\
‘_
l‘\_ H ‘ .K .
. d. ‘ \ .1" ‘
"\.. \r 3
. \I
(’13-. ‘ y
E C I D
i .I-.‘
‘
;.
.-.

‘
' ‘ .
"'- Q
”-21:45 .
.. \“k‘ k
. k..
‘
.. —
AMA
L‘
s 1.3
H‘ s.|"‘_1—-I
uxd‘AI‘ ..‘v.
.. u,‘
1’-
§ -

”23‘
”\Q Th
. I“: P‘
1‘“ \sr-
.._:':" 7
.' Afr-'3
'
s ‘31", h
._ ..
., H.
-‘\); "
5 ~.':"
.‘~‘ 1‘ ~ ,
- ,.

Standard 3. Then at Standard 4 they are to switch to using English as the language of
instruction. I conducted research in Standard 4 and Standard 7 classrooms, and thus, the
policy for both private and government schools was officially the same. But in practice it
was very different. At each private school I worked with they strictly stuck to the
English-only policy, but in each of the government school classrooms they rarely, if ever,
used English only as the language of instruction. This led to interesting questions of why
the two different types of schools implemented similar policies in very different ways.

In addition to analyzing the daily language practices in private and government
primary schools, this chapter also analyzes the attitudes of different stakeholders towards
the use of Sesotho and English in school and outside of school. Through interviews with
parents and teachers along with focus group interviews with students I analyze the
differing attitudes towards languages and linguistic practices of stakeholders from various
backgrounds and social classes.

Overall there is a prevailing attitude that English should indeed be the language of
education and that proficiency in English is essential to obtaining well paying jobs and
opportunities which will lead to progress and success, both economically and socially.
Therefore, nearly all of the participants in this study favored using English as the
language of instruction at primary schools. The attitudes of students and parents were
complex and varied when it came to using Sesotho versus English in different social
contexts. The majority of students from both private and government schools discussed
how they were embarrassed to use English on the playground or in their neighborhoods

because they would be made fun of by their peers. Parents also commented on how they

18

A |
' vp- ,HV
:1: NSC-“.0 I.“ s -

' ‘
. . ‘ .b '
5' .- “¢' ‘ 9- \H Ara Q . I
..‘TA. 11-533.1'” .1: L4 5 s ‘
".3 "“"V x ‘0 0..
Ah» 1.;JI '\§‘ . _.

v o ‘
7 ~ ‘ VF 3H ‘ v '.
bkfi'y-q*lu ‘.AUA‘iL.J§14\ J.I

. ...;J, ......o .
.Ly‘..'...$ 35 “.5 5.15.; C."

. - . '
I‘J‘T' \'. ..., ‘ .fi" . \
"'-' ~'¥.‘- balk 84A.

' l

‘.. v
:_’.;7 ‘1' 7‘ q ‘3 h 1 ‘~ 1. v

:ud:~ A:M\ua.,.,.

‘. .
s (..«J‘
‘-.§.‘I

.‘;.o- '5 , . ‘ .
-A\-\..\.;3‘€ ‘k‘." ".‘

‘1" .

u «‘5 ' I

\qé‘-.) ‘1‘ 3V .hfly .
— . - \a .H\HT‘..\..

Riggs-u
‘l‘. I"; ..., :.
-\.,,, \ ,
"kkl‘d‘l5rl" '

is

.A ‘r- ~. ..
- ... “3;. I'd"

C
-\;‘\b:. g‘

.w" .
«,1 u .
~\C ‘L Al_’\”"\.\-' .
4- \§ ("'1 vs-

.“\ ‘
, u a
...v_“ f
' -

«l
flu p.d\:\‘\c\ I:

privileged Sesotho over English in most contexts of their lives, but when it came to
formal education and the economic sector of society, English was usually aspired to.

The analyses of these attitudes and practices show that the language practices of
groups and individuals are complex and largely influenced by a number of conflicting
ideologies at the same time. Nearly all of the participants stated that they were proud of
their Sesotho language and felt it was important to continue to teach their children the
local language and culture in school. By exploring the different practices and attitudes
stakeholders have towards languages we are able to move beyond the assumption that
oppressed populations are merely “colonized” in their minds by favoring colonial
languages over their own. They have many legitimate reasons from their own lived
experiences to favor English over Sesotho under certain contexts.

The theoretical concept of language ideologies is helpful in analyzing these issues
because it focuses on the diversity of ideological influences which play into these
attitudes and practices. Both global and local ideologies play a role in the ways local
actors perceive of and utilize language in their lives. By investigating how these different
ideologies work in combination, and sometimes in conflict, with each other we can gain a
better picture of the complexity involved in language choice and language practice at

schools.

Chapter 8: Conclusion
In the concluding chapter I tie together the main points which I feel are
emphasized from this dissertation. The overall argument of the dissertation is that

language policy issues in education, at least in Lesotho, need to be understood within the

19

' I I I ' l
.119}: ‘klll. n.5lll.‘.x.}.
huts-ll; a: If‘ 3. o. 'l '
‘h..‘dl. 1‘ \l ‘L L 0-11:

. l ‘ I
$..»q~ -,...o,¥ ‘
1.1.un md...is\.s\. llr .. .

' Farr“ , . .
y, :\t4bil0 U\CT>.7.?

.h». . b.

- . . y -
A; 'T‘" 14. 9 ~

. ' ¢ ." J J' F
w..::.bm u\.JLb_\ l)‘ 5. il\

l")- “' \‘I '7‘! ~o~ ‘ l .
$3.} " ' ‘ LI- r“ J r ‘
l5 ' \i .b _

"'I -h |s|.\.
.

' Il;l.._.

‘9'” ; .' " \..
-..' '_,_;.\ 12d ‘k-J‘fihs “,._

a]..\..,..\.,.-._.,a .:
," ....Ldtsh ul-U:'\’
m. I '

in "9-.
l- R
; ... I

.4 f'

I

ll .
*3 Ann in:

‘
‘I‘.
l 5"

.. _nv- L‘ .
L... ‘\ 0‘ 7‘ Q "
3i"'*‘ 3..\.l‘ t
“O

‘. I
\ ~F .
--. L "‘ ‘Jr

 

 

. . '
"‘LM‘IJ: "'5‘ '. .
"‘k ‘\L YV
s ‘-

‘o.‘ '
'-' 1 ‘N
“MIR“: ‘Lc"'\ '
\l.‘”'\-\ U.
l l

n...
s...

particular social, historical, economic, and linguistic context of the country, especially at
the local level. If you fail to take into account the complexities and conflicting interests
and needs manifested in the attitudes and realities of local stakeholders’ lives, then it
becomes easy to oversimplify LiEP, or any other educational policy issue, to macro-level
ideological debates over neo-imperialistic interests versus local indigenous interests. By
focusing on micro-level ideological issues, the differing sources of capital available to
individuals and communities, and the role of agency in their decisions, then we can gain a
more sophisticated understanding of the complexities involved in educational, linguistic,
and other policy issues and how they are inherently connected and intertwined with
conflicting pushes and pulls of individuals’ lives and the larger society’s interests. With
such an understanding we may be in a better position to influence policies which will
have a better chance of being effectively implemented and address the educational needs

of students.

20

 

.C- "it“ v . I",

L H'."

”J? .s- ‘

l ‘ . L-
w - .1 -_ u s .
L3H“..-Jls p‘ ..g) . ..

' I I I
ruo.‘-~'-' 'ngv ,7 I ._ -‘_
-.“.'...‘.~. ...» “l. . lb a ...

-1-r-_ "‘7': O O; -0'-|r tv~
.m.-h..u...-.’LA ‘)| 4‘35“ .\

V‘ ‘
-JKI.
‘

a I !
- .‘9;q¢-.“\fl.‘ ,.
.Cfxyku. \UI‘. and. I;

' I
'- 3"}..09-4 u
.- ~ Al‘rJ l" '""\"-
~-.L.-. u n‘ r. . a.:.\.; k
.

I .' = u ..
. -3\9u~.o fin‘l'" u H
.-~-.L_ ....~ 5} \\.AAI\.J-:‘ L -

 

 

. .3'1 t “
.... ¢.u-'\A'. It. mJT-i“ \ .\
-. v
-s " “l M
mu. m‘ bl\;‘ut.\. \‘\ c:
of, " t !
ix '4‘ 5".
whué. ‘ ’ l '
L..:..‘.l.\\r‘q‘ rd
....

‘14.?
“A“ : . .. ~ .. , o
\u‘ ‘\l~\:_\ ll. :- :'\‘ .I
r A‘

.uL 3‘::\1\':‘\. 3rd n .M

its.

Chapter 2: Literature Review/Conceptual Frameworks

Introduction

Language policy has been a highly debated topic in many countries and regions
throughout the world. This is especially true in most African countries which are faced
with a number of factors impacting language policies and practices, including a deep,
persistent colonial legacy, great linguistic diversity, powerful global pressures, and
divergent national interests. The language debate often intensifies when it comes to
policies that specifically pertain to language-in-education (LiEP) policies and practices.
Unfortunately, in many cases this debate, especially in Africa, usually gets reduced to a
dichotomous dispute over whether, and when, schools should use ex-colonial languages,
such as English, versus indigenous, national languages as the medium of instruction. The
prominent voices in this debate have often been academic scholars, educational and
linguistic activists, and national policy makers. The voices of teachers, parents, students,
and other local stakeholders are seldom heard and frequently ignored in these debates,
even though they are the actors most directly impacted by language and education policy
decisions.

The main objective of this study is to gain a more in-depth understanding of the
various social and cultural factors which influence the attitudes and practices of local
stakeholders in response to the language-in-education policies (LiEP) placed upon them
in their schools. Among these factors include: competing language ideologies (local,
national, and global); various social, material, and structural constraints imposed upon

them; and the extent to which agency provides groups and individuals with the ability to

21

“i776“35513'l‘mli‘4lmm
”who, 35d Mn .13;
3.3232361 u'Inspcczrichw
n3t”-- 4,195 ah . . ..
' {fires ll‘. Ol’dtfl' ll‘ d“ V

3\.\\_L1'\ lfipilllnll ‘n "l ‘

3?? c. .. NW“

‘t
Y".
2'34,” ~¥ At“ ,IKKUM'M,‘ 3F .

.33?
'0’
I"

Hi} wand“ ll"‘ '

“Us: -l'

all" ... f\ m \Ol lhit'l" ’l‘ '

"l

we,

‘lluuuuh and ll-Cll

..‘
-.

..., ”4L,“ dlCll\H'l'! {by

l.

 

 

hat are the cut-t"

w '
lira! factors m in
‘5!

l' c, '
ash dim and pm 3.
\ 4X

71!;ng 3"“
\-’\\lllln\ big 1",

\ C

l,\4? A

Wuhud, }~ P

(W,

respond to their particular circumstances in a diversity of ways. In an attempt to better
understand how and why language and educational policies end up being interpreted and
implemented in specific ways in actual practice, it is important to look at the complex

mix of factors which influence local stakeholders’ attitudes, actions, and reactions to
these policies. In order to do so I use an approach which I call “policy as practice”. I will

discuss this approach in more detail later in this chapter. In short, a policy as practice

approach analyzes policies through the ways policies are realized and appropriated in

actual practice by focusing on the local and global factors which influence these

practices.

For this study, I initially set out with the goal of seeking a better understanding of

this complex mix of factors in the lives of local educational stakeholders who are most
directly impacted by language and school policies in actual, everyday practice; namely,
teachers, students, and their families. With this goal in mind, I originally set out to
c30nduct field research with the overriding questions of:
1. What are the extent and variety of local viewpoints about and attitudes
toward language use at primary schools in Lesotho?
2. What factors in local stakeholders’ lives influence these various viewpoints,
attitudes, and practices with regards to language and school practices?

These questions became quite significant to me as I became more familiar with

the research and scholarship on LiEP issues in Africa and eventually noticed what
Se=erned to be a lack of local voices in the literature. Much of the research on LiEP in
Africa has been dominated by prominent voices of scholars and activists with their own

ideas about how and why current policies do not serve the needs of the great majority of

22

 

..'..OL;\;1f\0ll':_\ [U .

..‘l4:: “

u-

r-wi‘s‘i‘ 13"0 3507 .-\"‘-

1.22:“ ic'r 1.1thth ~,’

ii; 3"“ .3131. 3nituh's\

Lu‘iv'V‘-r\1‘!“"‘ ) '
”libs“; i0}. . UM \ I kntlr \-
.‘, ' . :- z

.-':a isxsme thumb mat

.;,,,_.: ,. ' .
il‘a .Ufl‘e kk‘n‘idsrdhtc d3‘un«r

_..1H\

:L‘: 1‘3\fl:1i- F‘

‘4‘

‘i~:J”\J-IJ"U\1L1,1 9

N‘bf-Qixii. 1:0 ~ I
«I C\dmp.c

. :‘hki‘l i. and

Y‘ Viv-4‘1-
le' Kin“

3n. “.1in EU! JkQ' 'I‘

gins ii‘ieiha

1'4. ~|
...ufljf‘. ’ “K" 'r | ‘
1:.\.534\n in hilix

\10 l

.11

mm \ “1'5,"

1.” hula) P5311 arhfinl\|

“LL-ind” hind

4|

U
1".‘Y
niob\x ‘

In I\

P’TLC?

 

Cums.“ A Arm

\l\\i\1n \\|

I
I}. '1",

v \al\‘\'

'r
' \tigfil'

“Mal”;

 

 

Africans. Their arguments often come with recommendations on how to remedy or
change these policies to better serve common Africans. They are usually couched in
language which claims to be speaking for, or on behalf of, the underprivileged and
oppressed populations of Africa, but they rarely have empirical evidence which
documents the attitudes, perceptions, and practices of the local stakeholders they claim to
be speaking for. Most of their claims and recommendations are based on well-established
theories developed through macro-level, comparative international research, but they
often make considerable assumptions about the attitudes, needs, and perceptions of local
actors which are often not accompanied by micro-level empirical evidence on the ground.
In my initial studies on LiEP in Afi‘ica, I found these theories very useful in
explaining the role that language policies play in establishing and perpetuating the
inequalities found in many African societies. But through my own experiences of living
and conducting research in different parts of Africa — especially through my research in
Lesotho — I began to question some of the assumptions upon which these claims have
been made. For example, there are many LiEP scholars who claim (based on linguistic,
cognitive, and educational theories) that it is in the best interest of local African
POPUIations to use a local, indigenous language as the medium of instruction at schools
rather than an outside language, such as English. When I first began my research, I also
felt it was best for students to be instructed in a familiar, indigenous language at school.
But through various conversations over the years with local stakeholders, the prominent
Viewpoint has been that the majority prefer English as the language of instruction at their
SchOols rather than local, indigenous languages. Academic scholars and activists have

often dismissed these local attitudes as a confirmation of their theories of hegemony and

23

i. . H l
remission Ninth l \le t
N‘s—m; 'l; ...l w 1h 1‘ \ x -
Ulla-MAE hlllO midi 3k .1 . ‘J k
98%,. T175 expmstzon sL‘Cl‘Js ’

"(2.".v .11 Th '0’.‘ 1 1 ...-1’ '-
?.m.b.\‘\. . uA‘IL. is” a

.rm penned oi. men a

 

..Jeael In Aim 1r. m ‘-"'

lbs:

‘3'V'rl11 liw 4". .
.-.: .... «dead to com.

g. .l l
4 1 7“ ..'- l 1 l '

l“ “i - A i\ i.\: AAA 1“ "' .
" \ L k \1 d s .\‘\n ‘ u

 

I
‘ v1 ‘ i
in owe: to tier“

I
.. 1
|\ allutf‘i

”\T‘lr a " i
mu“. 11'“. 0“ .3 ,\ 1- . '
. uni-whens ul -
t,_\

Int-Wt: ““5 tnd . ‘
my .‘ d \ 01

ya 'u .
id..'
t...x.l_

1.1ij Ed... .
- “1‘; , " r ‘ a ’
'ldlt bun app

iikff‘li"! ._
.- it. be heading Il-‘x
‘ I\

a leak seztmnx “
u. ‘\

:1 ‘5; e.
-w\. ~“-_‘ Y“ I ..
1.4.} ,e {he CII']
. \l"'

A

H‘ ‘ y
« _ Milli"
.und [7'
'ciltr
I'
an.“ F"
40113“ ..
‘\ud "'
I‘ t 1

4“. .:‘~ L'

“ Mien"

I \:
‘u‘as
1),,
who '1,
t L le tr. ". s‘
-. ..' .u-
‘ firm.”

neo—imperialism (which I will discuss in more detail in the next section) and see it as
evidence that local actors have become “colonized” in their minds (N gugi wa Thiong'o,
1986). This explanation seems to disregard many of the lived realities of people on the
ground level. Therefore, I felt there was a need for more research which documents how
LiEPs are perceived of, received and/or resisted, and implemented in practice on the
ground level in Africa in order to know whether or not these assumptions are justified.
That is why I decided to conduct an ethnographic study of the attitudes, perceptions, and
practices of local stakeholders at a few primary schools in Lesotho.

In order to better understand where this study potentially fits within the literature
on LiEP issues in Africa and how it may contribute to the field, I will first discuss the
history and developments of the many different theories and trends which have
influenced the study of language policy and planning (LPP) in general. I will also discuss

how these ideas have been applied more particularly to Africa and where research in the
field seems to be heading these days. Afier a discussion about the field of LPP, I will then
follow with a few sections discussing the major theoretical frameworks which have been

utilized to analyze the ethnographic data from this study.

Language Policy and Planning

The role of language in society has been debated for centuries. Philosophers
throllghout history have discussed the importance and complexity of language and its role
in SOciety. During the transformations of European society in the 17th and 18th century,
philosophers such as Locke and Herder paid particular attention to language and its role

In the development of modern nation states (Bauman & Briggs, 2000). In the

24

 

w-t—i

3'11 BIB of 3;.1C3l‘. .1; \.

 

. fi‘l '5-
' ' l
|:.§}klUA.\\i;‘AAnL\. AAI'Lo-obat.:.
..3 - . 9 \‘
LI.- 1 \) E‘s? ‘ka'nl- kln\ \

{testis 1.11 o. .1. .'..1.'. p

(1".9‘H .
:u's... linSllLiUUT \\i ”ii“! ‘:

n. .. . ‘
111017.» tht’fill‘ l-' " ” "

RneJé-‘h
o.

3.1.». '. PAH-l Lh 8" c7 )inkc

.v“ _" n l ., n ' I
’«e or Pine or am?

'-“*K|'Pt'lilt3l.t'1‘l\." 111‘.

.is'. '2‘”

“3.3111113“ [) my

35.; -
1.11.11 51:: FICN d111,“. v

“4:111“. \Lu\iUIdl‘\Pl

k... l), mlhtr‘lldlluq ("1k

 

‘Cl'i‘rrwd
, 7p 1..
”m H“ J-“ln‘x 1‘.

:3 31.11.10“ 1 .'
V‘lY‘l d\l\u\\ .\d\!\“

Flight 1 TH ‘n

”In I‘u’f ,

k ‘
Yip) 1‘

I ‘r - ‘
t .l’). Ul illt'w‘ \l 1

 

contemporary era of academic scholarship, language has become a contested topic in a
variety of disciplines, including: anthropology, sociology, political science, education,
and linguistics. Even with this strong tradition of contemplating the role of language in
society, the study of language policy and planning (LPP) was not formally recognized as

an identifiable field of scholarship until the 19603.

Thomas Ricento (2000) helps us to understand the historical developments of LPP
as a field of research ever since World War II by dividing the field into three different
“stages” or “phases” of development. In determining these stages he identifies prevailing
macro sociopolitical, epistemological, and strategic factors which have influenced each
phase in different ways. Drawing upon Ricento (2000), l will label the three stages, with
there accompanying prevailing influences, as follows: (1) T echnocratic state formation —
decolonization, structuralism, and pragmatism, (2) Disillusion and criticism of LPP —
failures of modernization, critical sociolinguistics, and access, and (3) Focus on the local

— postmodernism, linguistic human rights, and attention to local agency. In the sections
that follow I will discuss each of these stages in greater detail.

Phase I : Technocratic state formation

The first of these stages arose during a time of great transition and change in

many parts of the world. With a large number of nations having recently gained
independence from their colonial rulers in the 505 and 605 there was a push to develop
“Scientific” and systematic approaches to assist in the formation of these new states. LPP
Was determined as one of these national development approaches. Das Gupta & Ferguson
(1 977), two of the leading LPP researchers of this first stage, described the field as “a

latecomer to the family of national development planning” while suggesting that

25

 

I
. I ' | _ ‘- ~ .
‘r" ‘tht m 11. 1
:‘C..':1ngida.‘:ml;.s. tLuLd-L

~.r."’”’l1'l35\.\k‘ll‘. 11C ll J11

......t
.' ...11 .. ..' '.'.- ,
1-3:. .PP 51111. .1! o! .. :~ L

:wa 91‘ "VIE," s.) " r- l' v i
....‘..r..l.ll..1usu\\. lid1._.a.1-s
I L ‘ -

11.11.31)" up :M

L". an aim to 1.1.17.1“ 1.1'
31.3e'.231;1p1:gn.1t211n> LPP 1.
3:13:21 1311: ”.x 1.151.; p:. 1.11,. 1';

”I ‘.'\~.
a.“"“‘7‘1.l‘)fi‘ ‘x1, ._ ‘.
.nnl. ill... l\‘La"nl' l”. 'l
u -

b .
.01 7P1:

"1‘11: Mich 111 dl‘F'“

\.1;'.
l1:1'1-T1":""1' 1‘ i " .
4.1114113. .ECIEP‘L‘ ~
1‘ I

.
71.,

I -,F v
'1‘. ‘nfi‘

..‘..‘ ‘1' " . I.
tut. .055 511w“), u

F.

2'11“; I, n
'Isgn )1 l h] ' I
‘9 hi nltkk‘l

l
~ 1;...J‘V'
“Mn. ‘1 71 V. 1
1,"“1&dlarm|
5 ‘lnu
S

"'11 ,
db¥ Fri |"

5121.-
b"-.1“'] "h n
-L .1. l
» lu Klimt! Id" '.
"Ka.
#1.-th .
‘ 7
s and \LJ:H_\ Fl ‘
“ 3.1050 .
11k 1. . l
y ‘- Ilnc.‘ n] l'r .
u .
.Il‘i:1PLll r.
"‘t‘ 115.99»:-
.\LL5 l. LPP ,
_ . (....
..‘)...-
... “11:24":
°‘ i‘Pm. 1km
‘ ‘l I
, ‘ “i
‘:1."~‘"1'n1.
-‘ llCQn
.an
t . d H“ ’C?
:1: and \"N

“developing language, education, communication and the economy needs to be

considered in a systematic way” (p. 4). Joshua F ishman (1974), arguably the most

influential LPP scholar of this early phase, described language planning as “merely an
attempt to influence [language] usage more rapidly, more systematically, and more
massively” (p. 26).

In an effort to address what was perceived as the “language problem” for these
new, developing nations LPP scholars focused on developing typologies, strategies, and
approaches that would promote unification, modernization, efficiency, and
democratization (Ricento, 2000, p. 199). Researchers developed different models and
typologies with which to approach LPP issues. According to Spolsky (2004), much of the
field’ 5 approach at the time was based upon Haugen’s (1966) model for language
planning and Kloss’s (1969) concepts of “corpus planning” and “status planning”.

Haugen’s (1966) model suggests four main areas of focus in language planning:
(1) identifying a language problem and establishing goals, (2) codifying languages
thl'ough grammatical and lexical developments, (3) implementing the plans, and (4)
elaborating and revising language plans and policies. Kloss’s (1969) designation of
COI'pus planning and status planning, on the other hand, influenced the field to specify its
r esmarch along the lines of linguistic (corpus planning) and sociocultural/political (status
planning) aspects of LPP. Corpus planning, under this designation refers to the planning
of the language aspects themselves, meaning the development of an appropriate
orthography, lexicon, and overall language standards. Status planning refers to planning

the role and status that specific languages will have in society.

26

 

lie-1:2: :3“.- :1: mod; ‘ 71‘

.3 - ' , i 9h. .
211.0555633‘130 1.1.1le “1‘

f1‘1“","'1" n v '
mli‘...‘ ..zC llJuL 1'1de '. .

(9:-
3

o I
’1‘.‘ '. ‘
'4: )‘vlLlLJ MCPLCL 31‘ "-1.1

v ‘ l
3...- o. -
\.,_.. m Ins-c- “73‘ "u
..:.‘-.m.z.‘... .doA.UJL \ l“ .1

..‘;I 1 "1"|\1;“" 1.5.11

.14.} 3:11.11 or 1:7" '“

" th\li1 ‘1‘

11:1. ‘173' I

‘1 L.l .l\1\ '1 n
- 1131‘: Jt'N

\

L:1?a‘ '
.' ':Hd\": \I‘K i'rc k: \nku-u.

‘11L31u'1311‘i’g b l

15"
. 1""; l
‘ ‘71:. 11M M17‘IV‘ 1
‘ “:MI 1\.1\

£37; 1'3’11» 1.:
\OL‘JJC1L\\C\EL.WN' 7
' 1| '

I
‘\h

:E‘J‘D“ “ad-111111111 (l ‘“"':V‘ .1

“...‘r , COIUI‘NJI 18“”) .
"3“ 1.1L.\!-

._
..'-

l‘
I

' 33 LL!

 

Viewing their models and approaches as scientific and systematic, LPP
practitioners believed their work was largely apolitical and ideologically neutral. But the
decisions they made had long-term ideological and sociopolitical impacts wherever their

models were adopted and implemented. The common View was that nations needed a
single, unifying language which would lead them to modernization and development.
Ricento (2000) suggests that “a consensus view... was that a major European language

(usually English or French) should be used for formal and specialized domains while
local (indigenous) languages could serve other functions” (p. 198). This was because
European languages were deemed to be the only languages “developed” enough to fillfill
the role of national language. Linguistic diversity was viewed as an obstacle to national
development, while linguistic homogeneity was associated with the ideals of
modernization and Westernization. As a result, these sociolinguists and policy analysts
ended up “facilitating (wittingly or not) the continued dominance (if not domination) of
European colonial languages in high status domains of education, economy, and
technology in developing countries, a situation which persists to the present day” (ibid,
199),

Luke, McHoul, & Mey (1990) describe the work of these LPP scholars as one in
whiCh they saw their task as “ideologically neutral” which simply entailed the description
and formalization of language(s) (corpus planning) and the analysis of the sociocultural
Statuses and prescription of the official uses of language(s) (status planning). They
“tended to avoid directly addressing larger social and political matters within which
Ianguage change, use and development, and indeed language planning itself are

en1bedded” (p. 27). As was common in the larger field of linguistics at the time,

27

 

l .
Im-w‘ 9111.13 '7'!
...-.31 161': 1111.11.11. ..111.

KLH ‘LI Au .

”3'" ~o‘ :‘11 51min." .2:.'
1:551 “mm 1 with;
1122:3161» he .ormat:

.1-3'1‘353jr.:0.r5CL‘n.p IC\.

" ”‘4: 1 F‘ .1913

3L: u ‘ \. “RN“ \.-'1
:3111

TJ\A')‘ Lll1 16.. "c \ndc" :5 \t.‘-.

“:1: TV.” fi' "ann
’E’A-‘Klrlnlu '1‘. ‘T‘ \k'
' ”I ‘ I-I\
5

191C .3311 {0 p133“ \2
n. I

 

’1;

3
“4;" ”YIA'“, 'k) i

. V "
tL n u!\? KC\ri."H ‘\:l\i
:::.1211"‘~
_ ‘.f.11...m1m1h1rc.
'1
3‘ ~ ..‘ ‘1
.511. HIA1.!_|(HI 1‘) 1 1
~11 11011196 W
Il

gem!“ “In! J\ 3'
YDFJF‘ .
éh.“ 1“ .-. ..I
d‘ \\11“ \(I-C"'1‘..
"il;‘\

13112.1 .
1.131.111 “Wk “11L ..‘

AUAHIWI,” (‘

.1111;
_“‘J I“
\ .AUUC‘mI/dh 1?;
\4 ' d

K'Htf' 11 ,,
'EW hcd\1a'.vfl‘l.
[INNS :h
63 appfimkr“

“-55:31 —.
11:11: 8mm
WW

:E‘Ekw :AT

“-1111“ bfi ' 4"]

1(1

languages were abstracted from their sociohistorical and cultural contexts and studied as
an object in solely structural terms. Therefore, there was justification for viewing
language as a “neutral” tool that could be used for “national” interests. The ultimate goal
at the time was the formation of unified and modern nation states, but in the process they
overlooked more complex, yet fundamental, issues such as language choice, individual
and group identities, socioeconomic structures, and hierarchies of inequality (Ricento,
2000)-

Therefore, the early stage of LPP can be viewed as a major sub-field of national
development planning, in which one of the main goals was to develop policies and plans
that would lead to progress, development, and modernization for nation states. Its
endeavor was rather technical in nature with a focus on how to address various kinds of
“language problems” in the most scientific, efficient, and systematic way possible. As

Pennycook (2001) describes the field during this phase,

language planning as an academic area grew up at the same time as the more

general social scientific orientation toward positivism, and thus its practitioners

tended to work with the belief that questions of language policy could be solved

by the application of scientific and technical models. (p. 55)

Phase 2: Disillusion & criticism of LPP

As the modernization and national development projects in post-colonial states

began to be regarded as largely unsuccessful, and even detrimental, by many scholars and
practitioners, the approaches taken towards LPP also began to shift and change. Instead
Of being seen as an endeavor for national development for the good of developing

nations, these efforts began to be criticized for the negative impact they were having on

28

 

, . ‘1' '
23511151155. Rucntu 1-1111111 .
331251150111: 113» m1
Ir‘1r 1’3“.) ‘ ' n l ' ... "
Lt- ....‘n‘l; ..1» LOW..le Lila l ,
:0 ‘-.\~‘.'\'- 3' 1' I x '
111111.11 1111 1111s..
t:.:s..¢010 311m 05.112.
..‘uagszces. or LP f2\:.l.'.l'
61‘6““ f’"" "i
“--t: g1_L§1lfi 1-111 ll
. ' 1'
1, :11 .1 .11
"1‘ ' . J .l I
AlJll}. hJL‘ dl‘U Dc“ ”..'

llamsz. psi-xtmrtum‘:

 

1‘

~

107 example. 01

llfilf 1‘“; -
0 an 1dc1~l1 1:1.

‘1 HIM)! Icrhnw 11

phase. Thcxc rm
333:1“1'
16.13:; \l m. DTHP‘I'

‘3'... Ir»
wfltgluh 11.
11 1d? "Id
\ gig». 1 \
W l! 5\
' ‘1' ")I —
.11. p‘ \xcnul r '
3.. Zulu
\J’. F;‘
"L13:

their societies. Ricento (2000) claims that many “newly independent states found
themselves in some ways more dependent on their former colonial masters than they had
been during the colonial era” (p. 200). This new sense of uneasiness with the field of
LPP, combined with new epistemological approaches to sociolinguistics and other social
sciences, led to a phase of criticism and introspection about the goals, and ultimately the
consequences, of LPP research and practice.

Gibson Ferguson (2006) succinctly describes the state of LPP during this phase:

By the 19803 and early 19905 language planning. . ., as a discipline and an

activity, had also become the object of a battery of criticisms deriving from

Marxist, post-structural and critical sociolinguistic perspectives. It was accused,

for example, of serving the interests and agendas of dominant elites while passing

itself off as an ideologically neutral, objective enterprise; of embracing a

discourse of ‘technist rationality’ that transformed into ‘simple matters of

technical efficiency’ problems that were actually value-laden and ideologically
encumbered; of neglecting the inevitable implications LP enterprises held for

power relations and socioeconomic equality. (p. 3)

Scathing criticisms of LPP and the global linguistic situation have been produced
during this phase. These criticisms are still prominent in a large portion of the LPP
litel‘ature today. Most prominent among these criticisms has been Phillipson’s (1992)
contl‘oversial book Linguistic Imperialism in which he critically analyzes the ways in
Which dominant global languages (especially English) are used and promoted in today’s
glc’bal society by powerful institutions (e. g., the British Council, the UN, World Bank,

IMF, and the US. TESOL industry) along with global corporations (e. g., McDonalds,

29

‘n

1‘1‘.‘ 0

q

a. \lrcmsol‘t. D1912}.

I
V .. , ‘9‘” Ip~

. , -1 '00- ); 'l h 2 \

withinJés ln “Km it u
' . . v i F " I l

l...‘ ~no,y;z‘l‘ 1“ 1 . . 1‘

:1; ..'.fll2Ln Ecvk'iin IJ.1:\AJ:_\

1 . 1 .
" ‘ - n~l1 ' D v.0
....2.1!El‘€.1.1..>m 1!; sf‘. ..1..
‘ ‘ 1 v. - ‘ ‘
‘” ‘ "’ "91‘3” 7‘. \ I
-.'.C‘M ..‘s‘.5.u\.‘..\ lp _ l u

u y. .

11 1
"'2.‘ 1’ ~. ‘7’)" ,3 .u
must. 3L” .1._\0 L.» I\\ J \LU\\
[TE-.-

;;.1::*.11~r1. Ph1.l‘.p\1\n 1 2‘1 -

“Y“.Ja {’11 o - l. ' .
-.m.u.1h 1\J\lllc\.lki;l‘lllh
iii.

..l 7"—

 

". “ v; 1:. ~, . l
5"‘WH‘1-l3‘mmctnkdt \117'
‘fi-P-“I' \-,l

" '“l-‘Il-I-i). Lhillum! .. . Cku‘l‘fi. ‘3‘

T. . ' I
17.372 Nib been a «v.»

c
h-\L11 \1
‘

 

 

:“fi'fl' m ..
“ ‘du)lAl Pcfil:\.'\l\‘k ‘2' l.- “I.

1.4.1 ‘

a. 1.13.9?“ f- v ‘

n U315,.JF‘L‘\ ‘(W a“ N“\\‘" 3.
~ _ ask.

'\

.. 'L. '
~.‘_\ I'Jn-v I
."A-Ms ”‘1,th 11 o. ;
“:nU1333qu
\;~.,, .
-- 1.1“ 11' ‘HHH .
. ~-.U\A.\ml)1tlr‘llly 1‘
I‘:‘4 \\l\

{1.5.1.
..1 ...im Us to u 54' h '
1 l

EELV“‘
_ ..1..~mhj.p111l‘.:~1\

Will

0" ‘ _‘ I
~13)“le It)”;

 

Coca-Cola Microsoft, Disney) to the extent that the speakers of these languages have an
unfair advantage in societies throughout the world. In his argument, Phillipson clalms
that dominant global languages are spread in a similar manner as economic, political and
cultural imperialism are spread. He claims that this has created a global “English
linguistic hegemony” (p. 73) which not only perpetuates the advantages of those in the
cen terl but also creates a sense of inferiority and dependency for those in the periphery

In a later work, Phillipson (1997) describes linguistic imperialism as a “shorthand for a

multitude of activities, ideologies and structural relationships within an overarching

structure of asymmetrical North/South relations, where language interlocks with other
dimensions, cultural economic and political” (p. 239).

There has been a great amount of criticism of Phillipson’s concept of linguistic
imperialism. Pennycook (2000, p. 114) claims the notion “is in many ways too powerful”
in that it attempts to go beyond what it can explain by assuming “that choices to use
English are nothing but an ideological reflex of imperialism.” Ferguson (2006) sums up
the major criticism of linguistic imperialism in the following statement.
this leads us to what is perhaps the greatest single weakness of the linguistic
imperialism hypothesis, one noted by a number of commentators (e. g. Bisong
1995' Pennycook 1994, 2001; Canagarajah 2000; Ridge 2000; Brutt-Griffler
2002), which is that it denies significant agency to speakers in the periphery,
portraying them as passive recipients, or dupes, of imposition from the Centre

]\
The terms‘ "center’ and “periphery” are commonly used in postmodern literature to refer to the ideologies

epistemologies, and strategies used by Western(ized) scholars, policymakers, practitioners, etc. as the
e“ter and those who come from disadvantaged or subordinate cultures and ways of thinking as the
p e1‘lphery The concept entails that scholars from the center have dominated research and policymaking
thl'Oughout the world, which has had a detrimental impact on those from the periphery because their ideas

and worldviews are discredited or overlooked by the center.

30

 

5:111 one-511.11 .1": '"
{01511111131031 1
1“ 33111131103: :11 '.
31:1." 1:231:23111 10.1" '
L's-:11; 3‘Mlhm‘ Lt'n1,,J_l
$1.15.... .:r.,.1.1.\ .1 1:37.:7‘
4.4.”: 11515113111 1"(11
ELK 191 ‘ms 011110. ..11 '3': ‘

_ ~ .
g": "Aug. ;:\1111!“.-
A..t\

w-
.. “

-\‘1\\“F _ ”tn ‘
"“*‘-- éJ...1.

“‘“11 thri‘" vh Y"
t ‘ ‘
This ‘Hr' ‘ "
in L\ ‘v .
“111131111;

fi“€
‘F1L\um'c ‘Ilm n,'

”in-”‘11 -

-.‘ , 151'
1 .

3111.111» ‘P'CJAC'

$10110; 11"1‘ -
I k I 1
‘:4d.".‘.\ I

‘1‘”)
1 1:COI'AH‘I-ILIFJ“K
L\ ‘1'

"Vi-11.231" 011 51k
\ .
32:.
~>1eriVILJ
‘1': 131:)qu 1‘ . .
1‘1l\ (‘2

Q
""1331'1‘»
L
't"‘1m’ \
‘h‘ $231 \'
k
“meted .
\ 0r [rd \\
{91- .
\I‘ (nCc ‘ .
p1 In 11.]

Such one-sided attribution of agency is, however, problematic, indeed erroneous,

for several reasons. (p. 1 17)

In a similar tone to linguistic imperialism, Skutnabb-Kangas (1986) uses the

phras e “linguicism” to describe the effect these language policies have on minority

language speaking communities. Comparable to the concepts of racism, sexism, and

ethni cism, linguicism refers to the discrimination of groups and individuals based on the

languages they speak, or do not speak. By promoting European languages (especially
Engli sh) as the official language of developing nation—states, while advancing them as the
uno ffi cial languages of international politics, media, and commerce, policymakers are, in
a sense, discriminating against the speakers of non-dominant languages and magnifying
inequalities throughout the world.

This concept of linguicism has also received great criticism by other scholars
because it presumes too much power in the dominant languages and those who promote
them while treating speakers of minority languages simply as victims of a unidirectional
doIllination of languages. It is too deterministic in its assumptions and does not explain
Why some communities are able to effectively maintain their local languages while also
incoI‘porating outside languages into their linguistic repertoire. It also does not leave any
r 00m for the possibility of some language speaking groups to utilize their agency and
chOOse a dominant language over their own. This approach assumes too much and does
little to explain the great variety of ways in which dominant languages are incorporated,

aCCepted, rejected, or transformed into different societies.
A key concept in these arguments of linguistic imperialism and linguicism is that

Of hegemony. Gramsci’s (1971) concept of hegemony claims that dominant structures

31

 

n
w ,3 1‘
3.1.: 01953 W In “‘

,1;
‘7“ ....ed. Th\161k‘rc. L1
'- ‘
_,u&..X\J Vs) 1415\-

V ‘ 1 ‘\
.‘2: c‘... Prank-.111 1-

but “1.111)”..1“: \

fiv:d1\1

'h 1'1- .
11:61, 11.511” \IL

" m cm: .11..
In +3?“ 'p ~11) 'hi‘ ' WI '

1111)” [01‘ m0

.A\\*

1 4.
..egemmc.» 1".

Cflfijw

\1 (p 11‘

1111;. 1‘

1
.ntay‘1\1\

lit-£14 50m .
1611' '}~.. .
1 ,\
."é.
..‘ ”'s 1'14
“3931.11"...
1.‘ a:
15. -

93111 'c
. ' 1
Li‘ .
AMT-414 ,'
"111:1: 1.1— ..

.r _
“13.611531“; ‘
1 t {1115 led I

and ideologies gain their power when they become internalized and accepted by the
majority of people. In effect, these structures come to be viewed as “natural” and taken
for granted. Therefore, those who are oppressed under these structures do not question or
resist them because they are seen to be merely “how things are” and how they always
have been. Pennycook (2000) questions the way in which these theories of linguistic
imperialism and linguicism assume the overriding global hegemony of English. He
claims that rather than viewing the global dominance of English “ultimately as an apriori
imperialism” we must understand it “rather as a product of the local hegemonies of
English” (p. 117). He goes on to state that,

Any concept of the global hegemony of English must therefore be understood in

terms of the complex sum of contextualised understandings of local

hegemonies. .. And such hegemonies contribute towards a larger position of

hegemony. But such hegemonies are also filled with complex local contradictions,

with resistances and appropriations that are a crucial part of the postcolonial

context. (p. 117)

Many Africanist scholars have argued that most sub-Saharan African states have
experienced some of the worst effects of linguistic imperialism and linguicism. This topic
has received a great amount of attention by scholars and critics focused on LPP issues in
Afl‘ica. One of the early leading scholars of LPP studies in Africa, Ayo Bamgbose
(1991), claimed that language issues in the region are further complicated by

the fact that not only are most of the countries multilingual, the colonial

experience has led to the importation of foreign official languages which have

taken on the roles of national communication, administration and medium of

32

 

‘ 1
‘ ,‘ . . A '
3111.31301‘1 111m ..1. .

l l _| . _.
.10.‘|q up 'T.| .
mil-H‘MIL-HJA >1.LAJ~.1

l l
np~~ 93.5.1." lbi
“1.1.55 Minna... ux
5
i )1‘ \ I‘M q
"1". r) ,
”.‘iLuibh IU ”15171 i‘
5
§"‘ n'h) i.
. ’ ‘ v‘
. has 1.1.“: [)1 E33...
. H .
Van"... . m 1 .
l 4 n .\ 11.) - ,-
-q....'.....1..\ N\11n\.ass \\\
‘

33?)“. 21111111 H: (3.1:

'ng “ ~.,
..‘.“ -":l V416 won't-«pn’ ‘-
..‘: .m .1 \ .i.l..\1n A

«.1 ...-1 . u. - 1
u) ...s Ui .111a 6113‘ 1‘1“?"

1591,15, ' fi‘ ., ‘
......n 1: 1111.11”. «.1111

a“). l
‘ W)... .1 . , I
“91's....11 .‘tUd‘LN ‘\\ n'

1L:

i V
(‘1‘:
1, 'J" I 1
k1) H .' ‘
...-.1 u. thJI'
.5 I

«i.
\ .H‘ -
i111...“ Il‘:

.11

1...”; - :«L
i1'>L\1ia‘\BJh‘ 1% 1‘
Int“ \'\

r.

“ ~10? KQH" ‘
.-...s m 1211.11

Ch.”

15' p
.. 110.117.2311 1..

14); V21
"-..1 A‘mn 1'. ~
‘ ..uLH I

811111;,
‘§4:~”\ 1?
=* Mama?
“\Jir:‘.\

£11115 h: ' ~
i‘ 511721121.de

\
‘1. ‘
‘-1.i.’:'| ’1
‘ ii 1"
“h‘ ‘dnm ,.
“341135 ‘ “3 ‘
\- Iii}
2y.' .
““1143;
'5‘
n'l
‘m 1111mm
I t (1
‘\
"mini“!
' "W ‘36“"’ -
\fk-Milfl .\
‘ ‘ 5 \L.‘
; 1.1- l
~\'|["r.
11714' . '
l“121".W.’

education from early or late primary to university level. Thus, the existing

multilingual situation is compounded by the addition of imported languages

whose strength does not lie in numbers of speakers, but rather in the superior roles

assigned to them. (p. 1)

At the heart of Bamgbose’s argument is that indigenous languages in Africa have
traditionally been neglected and excluded from the language planning process
(Bamgbose, 2000). He claims this has led to massive language questions and problems
throughout the continent which many nations continue to struggle to address. Bamgbose
was one of the early proponents for the use of children’s mother tongue as the medium of
instruction in African schools (Bamgbose, 1976) and supported a number of quasi-
experimental studies which attempted to show the educational benefits of teaching
children in their mother tongue (F afunwa, Macauley, & Sokoya, 1989). Work from
scholars such as Bamgbose has been influential in developing various critical approaches
to LPP issues in Africa.

Other prominent voices critical of LPP in Africa include Prah (1995), Brock—Utne

( 1999, 2002), Alexander (1989, 1999), Mazrui (2002), Mazrui & Mazrui (1998), and
Ngugi (1986). These scholars argue that the continued practice of using colonial
languages in official realms, especially when it is used as the medium of instruction at
so liools, has benefited the educated elite — who have a strong grasp on and access to the
ex—colonial language — while the majority of African populations continues to be
exc I uded from important political, economic, and social institutions, largely due to
linguistic inequalities. As such, those in power in Africa, along with powerful

intemational institutions, have little incentive to change the current language policies.

33

 

 

.3533 £11311M1‘m‘..“1u'~.1...'.
3:51.". 1... .3 mm :1:
3‘". 3:3‘ 90 a water “d2: w.
I" m 11.." 0“,. 1‘."

... huh 1L. 11. \11

1|“?N'1'J ""3
..\...11‘.1‘:ilr"~1-'CJ'

:.'1.1.\:1 ..an ‘31 Luis.) I.)

1

103101911353 ‘M1l'.1

...“ “I‘Ji‘i5: u fitfi3n,:\ 3‘LI \:h I

‘”J4"\- 1'
I .
...sa. I'K' :3") [' "" ’ '
- \nLt\i .ulli‘iik in ..‘-I
i‘l‘
.' 1
.11? "A?“ v '

.1...“ M111CI'123U“ J'ZC
'u-«sqk'lik ”$1“ 11333

3110:." ‘
«‘ 4.1. K ‘ l“ 9 ‘
. lafuia‘\\):‘u?1bv~\

‘:--1‘ i:'.3 Wmi‘v .

.(\

"th “ ‘ ‘. \ ,
3‘ Shh 103.11-

These scholars contend that changes must be made both in structural and ideological
terms in Africa, meaning that indigenous African languages must begin to be utilized and
privileged to a greater degree in order for African nations to develop along their own
terms and for their own benefit. One set of scholars has even gone as far as to claim “the
use of a foreign language as the medium of instruction is the greatest educational problem
in Africa” (Brock-Utne, Desai, & Qorro, 2003, p. 182).

Most of these scholars base their criticism of current LiEPs upon postcolonial and
structuralist theories which focus on macro-level global dynamics. They are therefore
often too deterministic in their analyses. Their theories possess little explanatory power
for understanding how and why people on the ground level appropriate various African
language policies in diverse and complex ways. Under this approach to LPP issues, the
only real way that solutions can be made is by changing current macro-level language
policies to favor indigenous African languages more than they currently do. I feel this is a
somewhat simplistic response to a much more complex problem because there is little

evidence that such actions of changing policies from the top-down would do much to
change the social and economic inequalities in African societies. It also would do little, if
anything, to change the ways in which local stakeholders interpret, receive, and
implement LiEP policies. Ferguson (2006) claims that such “calls for the revalorisation
of‘ indigenous African languages. . .may draw attention to an inequitable situation but do
not of themselves provide the resources nor create the political will necessary for their
imp lementation” (p. 132).
I have found these postcolonial and structuralist theories regarding LPP in Africa

to be very useful in understanding how powerful macro-level structures and ideologies

34

 

 

11.311 and """
5:71:13 "61 ‘m 1.51:. N
1:115 entrant 01M 1‘:

.e- a bczter urdc'\'1".di
215.11.. .1155: 31 "st '11.. "

Q‘ ‘ ‘ 1v “v

M115 .1501 1.1.. ~

'5‘3!‘ ‘ [F‘Ii‘bd
5 5.11163, 1151C; .II‘. ‘5"

C; I
J51, hJL1uu1H\\ :hL‘Un:\ '

 

(L: .58.:-

IIO IhC C\' C"' "

"7““ ~ m '
......ICS 551313151113 ’1

O
‘\h'.-‘a

One of the mm: 5‘

‘3‘; 4"
...1xIPPrexc1rgh h :‘

~1‘1m.c’}d(xl"1c151¢\'r

1
|_.'

d} T: {if Y' ,1 1 ‘
511C PUTIC 311C

:1;ch “,5” HIE‘” CH

 

'5"
‘ ‘. ‘f‘mmUIl‘k \\ .
3% ‘ 4' Se“
‘ '-' k\‘3 I} I)
‘ LI dL'CTJH -’
“(Hp hg
\\ p" ”up
3' [L
I.» “e: .. -
‘ dndI‘HCK d?
. - . L-

\ I'lr 3'
L
7311'.»
‘r-I‘Ci
-. m I
u ar 1
I ‘ "l‘
11.}

 

 

act to perpetuate and magnify the inequalities inherent in many African societies.
Certainly, they have helped me to make sense of how and why the great majority of
Africans continue to live in subordinate positions within their societies. They help to
provide a better understanding of the role language policies play in contributing to and.
maintaining social inequalities. These theories have led me to question who benefits from
policies which favor English over local languages and the consequences of maintaining
such policies. Indeed, in some of the analyses in this dissertation (see Chapter 6) I utilize
such structuralist theories in order to understand the ideological influences and structural
constraints which are imposed upon local stakeholders in Lesotho. But these theories are
only useful to the extent that they describe the role in which language policies and
practices contribute to structural inequalities in society.
One of the major problems with the critical theories produced during this second
phase of LPP research is that they are too deterministic in nature. Canagarajah (1999)
claims they do little to explain “how linguistic hegemony is experienced in the day-to-
day life of the people and communities in the periphery. How does English compete for
dominance with other languages in the streets, markets, homes, schools, and villages of
periphery communities?” (pp. 41-42). Pennycook (2001) argues that “such a position
lacks a sense of agency, resistance, or appropriation” and does not explain “how English
is taken up, how people use English, why people choose to use English” (p. 62). As a
result, their analyses are too deterministic by presuming that power structures in society
effe ctively decide for groups and individuals which languages are important and for what

purposes. They largely ignore the agency of groups and individuals on the local level and

35

......“-
-v v

. .. , l
. -' 50 1‘) ‘ ..‘. fl. \\ '
1205121111), 1.1.1 .5 .1

11125 05521. rcmrgl‘:

‘ 1
2‘2”“! ‘ a r ',i 1
L~Iil...u‘1.\1\‘t\. Th‘ FXUpl\ L1

5
a: .3.....

.41.. 3 I ‘ - ‘ '
_. 1.1.50.7?) Alix. L‘\I‘..1.'..1.
3. ._ ‘ _ ‘ l I l
::g:“:rtnr-.1?Er.:.1\n 13:5: 5
11., ‘ 1 ' 1 ~ _ ~
t.'l:.1l;1:.;01‘3. torus. l."

M F ’J‘va‘ ‘
I
—'~\-.\.u....b.‘.

2‘1”“ ‘L’l
..tse swam l

"v ‘
~>
I .I F] 3.

' ..fl‘l '
I h an c\.C0}l 'l-Ll

. 5
r

44". may: A
.,|‘.. t
1.11 IU do 55 1.121 :1».
A.‘

\~' .
‘_ nut).
:«5. \ -.-. r. .
b- 1n Pld\zl\c d'

P)“, .
«Ht, 3 I'UL “5 ‘I

.35.
.5 C‘r [T ‘h
I1, .
t ‘ 853(1):}
‘3‘.
..‘
‘-.,H¥'-‘a a- s
“s afar!
& d: ah ‘
u 'IAL
1345'.
-..,q a.
\\ .535. b‘ b
\ 1‘ Ln“
:__~ '
“4135 -.
“h a
“ V (p 1‘ ‘
‘~‘l\" I.
l
1.1-:
uh ;er'.‘”f? a.
s” I
\ t “t ”‘1..[:r‘
J
‘5 \..

 

do not sufficiently acknowledge their power to act and react to what is imposed upon
them.

In my own research I have seen that language policy issues are far from
deterministic. The people and schools I lived and worked with did not seem to fall into
the categories and explanations of these theorists. They did not simply “buy into” the
hegemony of English and were not merely individuals being acted upon by more
dominant global forces. They were active agents making decisions based upon their own
lived realities. Certainly, they had many constraints in their lives which limited their
opportunities and led to their inequalities, but individuals made conscious decisions that
impacted their lives in diverse ways. I wanted to understand the dynamics behind these
local realities, and this second, critical phase of LPP scholarship did not satisfactorily
address those questions. LiEP issues did not seem to entail merely which language -
whether it is an ex-colonial or indigenous one — is declared as the official language. It had
much more to do with the ways in which local actors apprOpriated different languages

and policies in practice and incorporated them into their lives.

Phase 3: Focus on the local

As a result of this growing skepticism and criticism of the value and impact of
I, .PP during the second phase, the field began to approach language policy issues in a
m llch more careful, and in some instances, a reactionary way. Ricento (2000) claims the
third phase was, by the year 2000, “still in its formative stage, and therefore difficult to

characterize” (p. 203). In his analysis, Ricento pointed out some of the major themes that
were emerging at the time. These major themes include: increased attention to language

1088, promotion of linguistic diversity and multilingualism, development of a case for

36

 

 

5333:2121: 1l2'2gUl5IIC humr.
’ ”1.10113 33.118”th I‘I
.t.mt'np..r‘."
IIIRICEI‘I‘ Ll \I :HHHII
“'“KO IPP.’ C~C..1 C.
31:71:11.1. 151:2: the 11ch g

i): :‘tmélt- ‘le ‘20.} Pd)

3,43,... . C 1 L
I".-...\.~...dr'd\ .IIHI. I C'

...j. _‘l ‘

, I.“ ‘3‘ ‘r'h .- v) ~qa Q‘ .

" \:" vl nAA.Lh-igs\ dub ..‘
u x

5". ; ‘1‘ i

...5 l:....~:1'tmc.hc \CC‘I‘.
’11 -— s.

1: 11C most 2121p. 21:?

..‘:- ‘~ ‘ I '
~S.‘T:’t‘ 3| ‘ In t‘ ' ‘
m at .. 5 C5? Ml

. .1 fuf‘ c' i
X“ b, MW 1

5."
71111.5 and Ihcr“:5\'c 1

l w
«1 :IiC

I ‘

’3} \ZII‘nt‘

I.
‘2 :5: 'IAI'R

Ru \nukJI P5 5"

.tv JCS In .hfi W K: \

fitha? “I‘d J‘s" t)?
E; In. I-‘ki.
I II “111} dn‘vwk )r \‘
:3:I;\I.v,i
"h “fan“
' .0394
\L “

establishing linguistic human rights, viewing LPP through an “ecology of languages”
model, and a greater focus on the role of ideology and agency in language policy
formation and implementation.

In Ricento’s (2000) article, he had a difficult time pinning down exactly what the
third phase of LPP research looks like. As mentioned above, he felt the stage was still in
its formation with the field going in a number of potential directions. In his description of
this emerging phase of LPP research Ricento stressed the important impact that work in
postmodern and critical theories in general as well as new theoretical developments in the
ecology of languages and language human rights research specifically in leading this new
phase. In his article, he seemed to believe that the ecology of languages paradigm would
emerge as the most important conceptual framework for future LPP research. Although
this theoretical concept has allowed researchers to look at LPP issues in a new light, as I
will discuss further below, I feel the ecology of languages model makes too many
assumptions and therefore is too limited in its usefulness. In any case, Ricento (2000)

claims that “the key variable which separates the older, positivistic/technicist approaches
from the newer critical/postmodern ones is agency, that is, the role(s) of individuals and
collectivities in the processes of language use, attitudes, and ultimately policies” (p. 208).
He proposes that whatever model emerges as the dominant conceptual framework in this
ne <w phase, it will answer what Ricento (2000, p. 208) refers to as “the most important,
and as yet unanswered question”, which is:
Why do individuals opt to use (or cease to use) particular languages and varieties

for specified functions in different domains, and how do those choices influence —

37

 

 

and he“ are inc. :1
I- -\ I pf ' 0g “0‘ ‘ '
I 1K3: I0 ilJI‘l. shit ‘I
a ‘ ‘l '
5;: IIJPlt'lw’U .
' . . - .. ....
Penis: more us; ..
“...; ..l. J. . ~
““5 .1) “lift. F3453 0i 1
.tzgsruts a: 5n dax 271::

r .
II .
2"1

l 'l
,
..l-.-.l I-
~

I
II'L‘I A) I d:‘\ I:
. Q . ‘

i: I‘M? ‘ c I
..‘..Iswi'aLI 5 trim?“ \‘TLK I
when l- ‘
“stat-I0; 5 i‘t‘mi.‘ to I

Q.
“4‘90"". in .9}. -
- ..t.. ..I i ll) \CCIEII?‘ I

H
i.:;"~l!'..1:\ ~ I
.....Ctnfil‘m mem-

II‘IIV‘; O- ~ I
....C .0 mm lt‘t'llflm "

its?“ ‘
kid'eé‘jn/L‘G VT VI‘ I t

‘l'
lull\

,4: ll 11% .. .
A] a \ ‘
HKUN UP. Crlilt

“‘ ”Illi‘ml Ul' LPP

‘\

QTY“; ‘~ I , ‘
MU Dot l1: \n'I-n I
"II”

'I..__.P .
-.\:d§:r-j .
‘: number m ,t -.. ‘
a II I

l

in“ .
whit"
: .k \ (5

13‘0“" .

umfI-IJIITS I
c 43314:“)

x :\ r

Tn.) f. ,
1.“;

 

 

and how are they influenced by — institutional language policy decision-making

(local to national to supranational)? (p. 208).

Six fi'ameworks of LPP research

Perhaps more useful for understanding the developments which have emerged
during this third phase of LPP research is Pennycook’s (2000) assessment of what he
categorizes as six divergent “frameworks for understanding the global position of
English” (108). As I discuss these six frameworks, I must note that Pennycook did not
use Ricento’s framework of three phases of LPP research in his analysis, so some of these
six frameworks belong to Ricento’s first two phases rather than the final phase under
discussion in this section. It is also important to realize that the emergence of one phase
did not necessarily overtake another. There are many scholars and policymakers who
continue to favor technocratic and prescriptive approaches to LPP today which would
best be categorized in the first phase, while there are others who remain in the second
phase with a focus on critiquing language policies in structuralist terms. I would argue
that the majority of LPP scholars today, especially with regard to lLiEP in Africa,
continue to best fit within the second phase, as described above. But there seems to be an
increasing number of scholars who are beginning to view LPP issues under this third
phase with a larger focus on local dynamics and the role of group and individual agency
in appropriating language policies on the ground.

The first two frameworks which Pennycook describes — colonial-celebration and

laissezfaire liberalism - most closely correspond with the first phase of LPP in that they
take an unabashed view on the favorable role of English in these days of intemationalism

and globalization. The colonial-celebration framework “trumpets the benefits of English

38

 

.r—‘IV—‘v

 

  
  

1"” s"‘\' \L'.'~"'.
airbrush...” :_

. L...
-,‘.. "1 n\.' 'l i' ,.
.. 5.31.13 “Pith it \ h x
" ' .‘l . J I ‘,i i
if. CMI'MDA 3L Kill‘ A An:
'; ° . ‘0.
Walt find ti.» o .1 pm...
I K - ~ 0,” .
manta). Tlilb l) .1 x
”"t ...J..-
1151'. “main. Lb NRC CM

. l ‘ ‘
A may Immcu . "9

Ti" "m y '

313:3. approach to an:

.45.

3

WE”! 13:. w. ..' ,. ,
fr ‘11th rde 5‘. AI us“

.v.
I
\

i‘é'gc‘i ‘v— '
«Aim-ii i'k‘ infill in C‘ it k:

77; 1‘-
}. 'l')ml‘Y "
r s. . ts. .l‘kllvl‘lA\ V‘lt‘u‘u‘l

33.5,}... .
.‘..c....1.'} t‘il‘dfill‘l‘. ’\

\

tl

‘_ a ,1 . .
2mm m \

V‘ a
K. “:3 ‘Lfir .. ‘
-“:‘ “|4l‘.§b\‘\' *t.»
k g I
5:4 '
"3.63." 3,1,7” ' ~
.l:\il\l-J> u? 1“ t

:. ti"? 1‘ ,‘1
.Nua prultlra]

1'“
..1 ‘Qvg,’|

lulu!- “(dc (ll.- U

332‘ "‘7- ‘
. ”$.30: ,- Ah
Mdltn UL}

.
3».
‘_' I".
'\ ,Jl-l
L."'~
» .

 

over other languages, suggesting that English has both intrinsic ...and extrinsic
...qualities superior to other languages” (Pennycook, 2000, p. 108). Although this view
would probably acknowledge there are ideological implications of the spread of English,
it would find this as a positive notion of English because these are seen to be as good
implications. This is still a very popular view in the world today as is seen in the global
TESOL industry, as one example.

A similar framework is laissezfaire liberalism which, rather than explicitly
promoting the spread of English based upon its perceived superiority, claims to take an
apolitical approach to language policies. Instead, this view takes a free-market economic
approach to languages, arguing that people will choose the language that is most
beneficial to their lives. It claims to promote the importance of multilingualism with a
dual relationship between English and vernacular languages, where English takes on the
role of “international intelligibility” and local languages the role of “historical identity”.
This view is promoted by scholars such as Crystal (1997) who attempts to explain the
extraordinary expansion of global English in, what he claims to be, non—ideological
terms. He proposes that when people are free to choose they will choose to use the
language that is best for them. Pennycook (2000) argues that this framework may be the
most dangerous of all because it “suggests that we should not engage in
ideological/political discussions of language and that we should make freedom of choice
our central mode of understanding” (p. 111). By claiming to be neutral this view masks

what cannot be taken out of any language policy issue: the inherent ideological nature of

language.

39

. l‘ .13 .v
The next in. I. .1
r...” . ‘1‘ I 3'14
158.31.. amid \ ..
rigtrn All 13:2.
iii-PP ita‘c d‘}cu_\\‘c
‘ “MVhK‘ um ‘0le en:
iii-“318:7! CWmmgrtii'
L: iii-hf; .Jl 7" ‘1'”

{:3 ”30.; ol arm» '.

 

r5 " ‘

‘....1§.il\i\ Cinch!“ '5 t .1'

yf-yuiy .' T? l ‘

......,.in 5.333221“-
‘ -

‘1‘.” ..‘. ‘ .
h.“ E. ‘E ”Toxknb ' b’rl'lp'l

Io~

1

«1.0.3:

“Nth tllH'

.0 abc .cr texpr.

“J" v- 1

1 y r
. “W"
n. A‘ ' 1‘ ’ ‘ I
: atrium ...Mii'
\

hr-

‘Ktiiu-‘z-h‘hl ( .. l 7
. ‘UULA ‘1 'h.’ '
- k \. 1\ ,a’ \U
\ . .i

 

 

 

 

 

The next three frameworks are similar to each other and come from the same core
ideas, with small variations. These are: language ecology, linguistic imperialism, and
language rights. All three of these frameworks would best fit in Ricento’s second phase
of LPP. I have discussed the framework of linguistic imperialism in the previous section,
so I will address the other two here.

The main thrust for all three of these frameworks is that minority languages and
their speaking communities are under threat by global dominant languages, especially
English. The language ecology view emphasizes the importance of “the cultivation and
preservation of languages” (Phillipson & Skutnabb-Kangas, 1996, p. 441) and “building
on linguistic diversity worldwide, promoting multilingualism and foreign language
learning, and granting linguistic human rights to speakers of all languages” (p. 429). The
concept is borrowed from biological and environmental ecology. In a similar way to the
manner in which environmentalists push for the protection of endangered species and
promote for a better respect and appreciation of the biodiversity of natural ecologies,
viewing languages through a language ecology model is meant to promote an
appreciation of the diversity of languages throughout the world and their structured
relations with each other. This, they claim, justifies — and even calls for — efforts to
preserve lesser spoken languages and promote multilingualism throughout the world. The
weakness of this theoretical framework is in its lack of a broader political, ideological, or

social theory (Pennycook, 2000, p. 112).

A similar framework, which is largely based upon the concept of language

ecology, is that of linguistic human rights. The basic argument for this view is that

language speakers should enjoy the basic human right to use their own language

40

 

 

I ' I ‘- u ) yl‘
iiif‘siflm llfl'u'tul

l

. I V _
rt: “.70 spear 152:! ..13
13.3.1.4? Ctt‘n‘g} mm.

.". ,. l ... .
367.1158? )Ullld 1.1.1....1-
mil»: protected under u:
l-I‘ ‘ O « ‘ 3 ._ \‘ O
“I ‘5 th' lmj‘fdtiltd.’ .l‘ 1

3:2,” . 1 . i

L ur..\cr.~a.:~m Eu
'fi'h‘v“ . . . N
lPt‘nfi...(\\l. _l1‘.‘! '

ThJ :In'l [7.1“ )

\ “lid. “Jh‘L‘. ‘lr

u'w'.‘ y u, ' \
.. inn-Jr. lth’

V ‘ '
“ADC"
“ng I
..lu. 4 3‘ .7" ‘ ‘ ‘
......Mll.‘ l.‘ ENC "'\'
II.

"1;. ‘.'u 1. l '
-.....3. and polztitll " v

in
54'.“
‘Ukugjio ‘— '
.L. m much sift“

“a. ‘
lI-"‘-". l
a. -l' H
~.1.. 1‘" " '
....11..13.1._‘.,:( '0
‘5 L :\\
,5

1,393..
'-‘\. . ll“ P
.. . ».

Ann M» l
s..n.\Ll\lk {2m

..‘"- .
4.3:.le Gib" lg l
5 :‘t‘ Jet/4:.

59".141 ‘H
. “ \ lame“ (lT'K\
. . C

L?“ do so he M
.. ""C

 
     
 
 

fi‘h‘
“Ali?
‘- u or 1]!" .-l
:AUnd] hr”...
t”

5.;;5|~L.,
, .~ I“ _
Wed In 0 ..
:23 a: «—
'U‘ Lulupial
' 'lém Ill

a”.

' ‘ 7%.
.‘Hr
il‘

IJL JSA " 7*
‘ “P'Ctts 0‘

whenever and wherever they would like, especially in education, despite the number of
people who speak their language. Going beyond the ideas of preserving languages under
the language ecology model, scholars go on to argue that as a result of linguistic
imperialism some languages are under direct threat of becoming extinct and therefore
must be protected under universally agreed upon linguistic human rights. This argument
may be too impractical to actually be implemented and it “may be too much a dream of
modernist universalism to continue to have currency and legitimacy in the current global
context” (Pennycook 2000: 116).

The final framework Pennycook discusses is what he calls postcolonial
performativity. This framework, in a sense, is in reaction to the shortcomings of the other
five fiameworks. If the first two views tend to ignore, discredit, or overlook the
ideological and political nature of language issues in society, then the next three views
tend to put too much stress on the macro level politics and hegemony of English and
other dominant languages. In short, they are too deterministic in their assumptions.
Therefore, Pennycook (2000, p. 117) asserts that “we need both a more complex
understanding of globalization and a more complex understanding of language than those
offered by the frameworks above”.

To do so he proposes that we look at the global dominance of English as a product
of “local hegemonies” rather than as a product of an all-encompassing linguistic
imperialism or global hegemony, with its deterministic implications. He goes on to

suggest that we need to get beyond viewing individuals in subordinate societies as “mere
refl exes of colonialism and neocolonialism” but rather as “resistant, hybrid beings” (ibia',

p.11 7) who use aspects of their own indigenous languages in combination with English,

41

 

 

' i L‘ ll,” - |.\
r: 11:: mm. mg ......
firmer approach to LP.
4.... ..C ll”?r Sl'li '»n. In .

49'". rillfig-O: in.“ “‘L

..'«n‘fld

:aO' 'I" '3

I»? 'v AdibL‘l‘i‘a ‘n :U. :1”:

Inhh “I‘m. 1: .L

ul¥

mascaxhat he 0’"

“A:

:7 :13: Eli‘s 1‘ .317: i‘:
parade.» M the pi

”..., . .
..tt‘lflflal Iii-C”

.—

w- 9
..mon ls nu’ '

trl’

p.

Ml tit‘lllt‘tl‘dit l

(ragiragih writ:

1‘)»
k \[

[L #0 tsp! Wink-13“”
...... :SetOIld phaxc 1*
su'fk C
CH. e. 1‘ I. ’7

anatirrga : .1.'

”Jr“. ‘1

.... \ ‘1"
_ u. “U“ dumpn ,v

nut
1‘ HCCliizrm

   

 

"1:1“
. pr -
: “£855 ‘ CU”:
j;k;l]f I_

IPl'lltlt

9?
‘5“ ‘ n.
l \J ’3’!)
1‘3 repllu'
v.3] ‘“
H

 

 

and other global languages, for their own purposes. In other words, Pennycook is calling

for a new approach to LPP which can address the macro-level ideological dynamics of
linguistic imperialism in a globalized world but do so through a more complex
understanding of how these dominant languages and identities have been “taken over,
appropriated, adapted, adopted and reused” (2000, p. 116) by local populations.

In his work on the teaching of English in Sri Lanka, Canagarajah (1999) proposes
that we use what he calls “resistance theories” to better understand how local actors
appropriate English into their lives. As he describes it, a resistance perspective

provides for the possibility that, in everyday life, the powerless in post-colonial

communities may find ways to negotiate, alter and oppose political structures, and

reconstruct their languages, cultures and identities to their advantage. The
intention is not to reject English, but to reconstitute it in more inclusive, ethical
and democratic terms. (p. 2, italics in the original)

Canagarajah contrasts this type of a resistance theoretical perspective to what he
refers to as “reproduction theories”. These reproduction theories would include those in
Ricento’s second phase of LPP such as linguistic imperialism, language ecologies, and
the like. Canagarajah acknowledges that these theories have been extremely important in
showing us how dominant ideologies are passed on to subordinate groups in powerful but
subtle ways. He claims that, “Such a perspective alerts us to interrogate all aspects of the

learning process — curriculum, pedagogy, classroom interactions, school regulations, and
educational policies — with a critical eye” (Canagarajah, 1999, p. 25). But he goes on to
argue that these reproduction models “appear to overstate the case somewhat, by

developing a deterministic and impersonal perspective” (ibid, p. 25). One of the main

42

j’fnbficrl? “I": Al}. in hd”\

nowwevom

{3}!" in: The prL\\:\\ (t:

. .‘. ‘. 1"\:' .\lb

181.\‘.‘."\0.\Cmu....dtmt
MILLS. (am ..'

'73.: ..'.IL‘ dUt‘slltlf. Iflt‘ t1;

T“J;il ”lib hh‘l'l ..‘-\k U.

4.»! .
1.u...e.~lt...d.\l0 If\‘.\'. .1

 

5.1:) ‘Ililtl‘. llll‘fit‘ 31.3".

4.... . . .‘

\ahl. ..‘: >O\id. p‘ .\‘l::‘ i .
J'i‘l’; 'lCl "77‘0""

“‘ 3:31C‘ud‘31‘. wl‘t'a'

erg p. L}. or \\ 21'.

. ‘
..‘\\ ’ -t' ' - .
'\_ )Ld‘r‘ an {iv-

su.n.\
‘

l‘l";

«..i' r

5"."

m x 1.... ... ..

\._ '
.’ a
u, _‘ I

‘ulgl al}n"\ \IV-IJ

. l

.ML‘USH 1:6 UR tbL ‘

Hal-Jinan
§.\‘\'\etn :11 v ‘
LA
:1,
-td.. COT}?.I\9 .
. w
4'3.
1. '3‘ ‘.
‘.‘\IIE‘dI‘l‘1 1
' ' Mllp
in».
‘7:

 

 

problems Canagarajah has with these theories is that they make too many assumptions
about the power of hegemonic forces. He states that “domination is never wholesale or
inexorable. The process of domination and reproduction are even more complex, and
always involve multifaceted forces, responses, and implications” (ibid, p. 25).
Although Canagarajah’s call for a resistance model in analyzing LPP issues
brings into question the deterministic nature of reproductive perspectives, his resistance
approach runs the risk of assuming too much power in the agency of subordinate groups
and individuals to resist and change their circumstances. There have been a number of
studies which have questioned the extent to which groups and individuals can change
their own social position. In an ethnographic study of US. inner-city youth in a low-
income urban neighborhood, MacLoed (1987) provides a bleak outlook of the extent to
which agency can operate in changing people’s situations. Similarly, in his seminal study
Learning to Labor, Willis ( 197 7) shows how supposed acts of resistance by working
class youth against the system actually act to perpetuate their subordinate social
positions. Although these two studies are informed largely by reproduction-oriented
critical theories, they do alert us to the importance of being cautious about placing too
much credence on the influence of agency in these social dynamics. The key is to find a
balance between global forces and local agency. Investigating these dynamics through a
more local, contextualized perspective may lead to a more sophisticated understanding of
their interrelationship. This is what I call a “policy as practice” approach to investigating
language and educational policy issues. I will discuss this approach in more detail later in

this chapter.

43

laereiore. mm 33‘
I5 “3333...» n‘. 33:22.:
3:32. 'zonot' m. 333.-
1331333133133. illl“ ll:
13313633373333,“

5

..3 333 333 mm
X‘:

QM: xi. “iiilEUu—i: h: p‘I‘.‘ ll

3:13: stnools are on:

 

 

3
. ..

:ii- .qed \Ol‘iiefit‘ 5d. 53‘“
JW slur; ~
..3H.3.R.1m3n3:r‘
l' ’ "
mun EYQUL‘ 'L
it}? v.33.‘. _
«mmmiun-uric

... ll
ri. .333} De aitrlfiu’:

"33 .UHLM \{lmc -\+".\L‘ .
:‘n‘ M? .
~ “(31C Ht it)? ”‘1‘” Mn

"'0 l A
l 3‘ \anlurL "I

3111!; 'i l
WIS 31 ”U“ 31‘5“
NI '. .

1:“
. whfiavl
3V“ :1? Id 57‘

l'

 

.31; Stamp'm 33‘

.‘i:“rh‘-:D 1."
333133333335 .
_. l K

 

Therefore, many scholars interested in LPP and its impact on social institutions
are increasingly making a call for more localized research which investigates the complex
interaction of local and global forces in the development of language policies, but even
more importantly, how they play out in actual practice. In response to these calls there
has been a great amount of research which has shifted its focus to more localized,
contextualized analyses of language policies and practices. Much of this research has
focused on language policy in education and, more particularly, in schools. This is
because schools are one of the most powerful places where ideological values are passed
on, reified, contested, and reshaped. Examples of such research include: Canagarajah
(1999, 2005), Ramanathan (2005), Lin & Martin (2005), Wortham & Rymes (2003).

I would argue that much of the LPP and LiEP research in Africa has tended to
take a reproduction—oriented approach rather than a localized, resistance perspective. This
can partially be attributed to the robust colonial history of Africa and an almost obsessive
reaction by some Africanist scholars to blame much of the continent’s problems on the
impacts of colonialism and neo-imperialism. But the scholarship has changed in recent
years to take a more nuanced approach to the complex nature of these dynamics and to
look more at how global ideologies are not just imposed by dominant forces, but also
appropriated and perpetuated in divergent ways by local populations.

An example of such a change in approach is in a recent dissertation where
Holmarsdottir (2005) claimed that:

Despite the abundant literature available on the language-in-education issue in

South Africa the majority of the data is theoretical or policy based as opposed to

ethnographic classroom studies. Few researchers spend time at the grassroots

44

kid. 13:. pointy.

claosroom. paring-T36

MAE} ofsugh chow;
25 35:3. Hoimndomr 3 I“
‘2?f..l“l"”.3l“td int. L.-"\ ,
if; Lemcdxom 3.; l.

537:3 sot-31:3 haw been a

4. '1
E3 3|
.3,

0.1)”). \lt‘t‘iu‘. :“

.3‘. .135; \ 3 mx. 2% 3 '3 3

 

.3 ‘3' M. '
J 3" "
«timid.- 3," ’. l.\l|\a~-h:

\
. 1 '
‘5‘! { '
L' g3 ‘H 9i ‘
t.) L5\..Pu\c in ndturs

ruin in“. die” slid

\\\
.:f 533". o1 ho“ LPP

133mm up his 3

i‘llilé llfildl [(3 bc'hr -

microlm 3‘
‘9 , i . 3 '.
\ \l t\\.dr\:.

Mih macro-1m cl '1‘

L011.“ 3?

“W .1343".

6.7.1} 33313133:

3A FIN} [03,.”va
\\ulcr {Fr

km dive

r1»

ndJllnl

iii-11W T‘
"d. dmlcg 0f ho

:‘ "
"er'i: l"

third

 

 

level, asking participants for their own views and observing the dynamics of the

classroom, particularly in economically oppressed areas. (p. 6)

Many of such ethnographic studies have begun to be conducted in different parts
of Africa. Holmarsdottir (2005), Setati and Adler (2000), and Setati (2002) have focused
on the communicative dynamics in South African schools as teachers attempt to teach
through the medium of English to students who do not have a full grasp of the language.
Similar studies have been conducted in Botswana ((Arthur & Martin, 2006; Kasule &
Mapolelo, 2005; Mooko, 2004), Tanzania (Barrett, 2007; Brock-Utne, Desai, & Qorro,
2004, 2005; Vavrus, 2002), Uganda (Kyeyune, 2003), Kenya and Nigeria (Abd-Kadir &
Hardman, 2007). Although these studies focus on local dynamics, most of them are
largely descriptive in nature and do not take much of a critical or resistance oriented
perspective in their analyses. Nevertheless, their work is important in gaining a better
understanding of how LPP issues play out in actual practice in schools.

In summing up his assessment of the field of LPP, Ricento (2000) proposes that in
order for the field to better address its key issues, he believes that

micro-level research (the sociolinguistics of language) will need to be integrated

with macro-level investigations (the sociolinguistics of society) to provide a more

complete explanation for language behavior — including language change — than is
currently available. ...What is required now is a conceptual framework ...to link

the two together. (pp. 208-209)

In this dissertation I have attempted to conduct such a study which focuses largely
on the local dynamics of how actors appropriate and/or resist language and educational

policies through their attitudes and practices, while also attempting to frame these local

45

 

 

' 0" ' 0 3 J r '
“3:33.25 mm 3hr .33."... .u. ..
3 _*| ‘ ‘ ' ‘ ‘ 4", .
flit vi M31 ilsltllt‘md \
' ~ 333 .
531:1: tacit Mlltlt‘i.‘ .13.. wt

:22; topmost b\ ma :3 ~

'1
\i“‘
.

3 '. ' ‘ I
«5573.. \ . \ "0’1 ' l ‘
Lil'...~:\33 salt“ I5 0: lkmin

~.!"1-‘n 1 in
-..._>-..;.ul;.-.
5

or hoo mm 3-

.13333 re actions ‘tir 237.1 .

“A

‘3..- ~ .3 3n- 3 '
....33sn3 0. 31:12.32: idem
5 \

...... .nn, '

. 33 , . .,
Kt...“31333...\’P(.‘ll‘l‘3 ill Lil
\-

‘we-- .3
. “ ‘
3333’? MI: .3

I
~_ 0
.. .3392. M m the l.

3?? 3d: 3'
- J“ .4 - v ‘
f :3: {)1 ’L‘ZQ"

l

3-
.3 (31.3 d133cmti33n. l

”l“
,

games of 13333,,11. f’

b , "
... ' t':
*“Ii’k§

he dcscnptixc 33:13:

'I‘l“_'~4‘ p ..
"W x PM

1dr 3 Nxhldm.

133:3“ ll“) "‘ ‘
..e .ole oi loud rci'.

p

..l'i‘lhn ~.
«3.5» a‘
: momma“. 3..

1“

«Liza-“ta . A
. g Aimdut‘almn poilt

75:353.. 3" -
n3. A conceptual "

   
   

‘\

 

53615 r‘ .

‘lLI‘

..lgwl
\.

~o
53

l
i

canlhn'tpolo

 

 

 

 

dynamics within the structural constraints and ideological influences imposed from
outside of local stakeholder’s power. Rather than just describing the practices which
occur in their schools and communities, I attempt to take a more socio-culturally situated
cn'tical approach by investigating their actions within the larger historical, social, cultural,
and political contexts of local stakeholders’ lives. In doing so, I hope to gain a better
understanding of how macro-level factors interact with micro-level dynamics in the
choices and actions that individuals make. In the next section I will discuss a theoretical
framework of language ideologies which has been highly influential in the field of
linguistic anthropology in understanding how the dynamics of macro and micro level

forces come together in the language practices of groups and individuals.

Language Ideologies

For this dissertation, I originally set out to provide an ethnographic account of the
local dynamics of language practice and language attitudes in Lesotho primary schools,
much like the descriptive studies in other parts of Africa mentioned above. But I also
wanted to provide a resistance oriented approach, or something like it, that would focus
more on the role of local realities and local agency in appropriating — sometimes
resisting, sometimes accepting, and at other times reconstructing and reconfiguring —
language and education policies through the attitudes and practices of local educational
stakeholders. A conceptual framework which has helped me to better understand these
dynamics is the concept of language ideologies as it has been recently explored within the

field of linguistic anthropology.

46

lie concept 0.1 ..i..-;...

 

. I ' _ ,
..mi 313 m3: attrrh.
. 3 .Im ! ‘ '
LT‘LELEUEEL‘ .ICinicd 2‘.

U 5 '
2.22;: grams and .33: a

. , ....
".‘J‘ 't ‘ 1 9 _ .|!=
“will .Wb. Thk lhcl.‘t'\u‘

:;.:3;'Ic iizfiron‘ilwcal af.’

 

gigs :0: mm on the do. r3

ifilldcx"; '1 "i '
3L.J-.Uill$ienu\ ch‘l’j' '7

I!
‘-
\

 

T» -.‘ ...
.->.l3. 064.;Dl‘tlt‘tl I0 ill:

 

 

i’ifii it“! r‘ ' ' ‘ ' '
"M u Lllliklpkllllg‘t Jlld
“SW“ A i 3'

It. Tat; apprild~n [U rch'

:,\ I_a-p. .
man of culture rd

5.4
d“t

.. I“
”'Q‘l‘dgr

eater applau-

 

3“.\" WI
. .fl. 3“ 1
as, l' 0
u t- in!» rc“.nli 11
ll

5-1
.l.‘ is; n .
~‘\|£5\) luéhfl'

"Hillc d 3

- . um.

'fli'it‘f d .
' fall useful in pm.

ENC“ mix
' U 5, 3 7' \
“limitldilurw

I

|
agile" "'
‘lAOl 1;}an —
“:Uduc 1d,.
\ K

“an alt

~ thCt‘nlu 1:3,

.313}
‘21. PA.-
. 3 “Earth

  
   

“high In.

:75?
3‘5Cl, | l]
'I‘ macro
M
\f“

 

 

The concept of language ideologies as it is currently considered in linguistic
anthropology was first attributed to Silverstein’s (1979) definition as: “sets of beliefs
about language articulated by users as a rationalization or justification of perceived
language structure and use” (p. 193), but the concept has gained more prominence since
the early 19905. The theoretical framework evolved out of dissatisfaction with traditional
linguistic anthropological approaches to studying language practices which were seen to
focus too much on the description of specific aspects and mechanisms of speech events
without sufficiently taking into account the beliefs and perceptions of language speakers.
This can be attributed to the fact that linguistic anthropology developed out of the two
fields of anthropology and linguistics, both of which have historically favored a
descriptive approach to research, with their major focus on the documentation and
explanation of cultures and languages. In recent decades this focus has shifted in both
fields to a greater appreciation of the role that groups and individuals play in
constructing, interpreting, implementing, and reconfiguring cultural and linguistic
practices. Therefore, a concept such as language ideologies came to be seen as both
necessary and useful in pushing the field of linguistic anthropology forward in its
analyses and interpretations. In a similar strain, I believe that using this conceptual
framework of language ideologies will make it more possible to conduct the type of
research which Ricento (2000) claims is greatly needed for a new phase of LPP research,
namely, research which integrates “micro-level research (the sociolinguistics of
language). . .with macro-level investigations (the sociolinguistics of society) to provide a
more complete explanation for language behavior — including language change - than is

currently available” (pp. 208-209).

47

 

 

Prairous‘A. mm 3

. ~, . . V ‘
. .~ — 9 . , 1 . r

. ‘5, ~ '
Ki i‘mes. I" -- H"n‘c"

3L rl~

I
“w; . lei

. 04” ‘i
OCU.‘ 0! Jump
"1'; 5‘ "'i W 'i 7.) yr -'
.\.i. ttletll ix‘sJ.»

—~ ‘~FJ.’

...... t.5."i=."L'T.iPRlCS xx .5.

"."“"1 1"! ‘ n. ..
\ “ .
.........~t-*..4: 56.11.45 t l I
\

.33 ;.'.‘-§.‘1_'\IIC gr“. .9“
I

IA\|J.I \

4.41.3.5} 51$. Slit‘l‘i d\ k.

..'l" 'x ,' ~ ' ~
rl‘l‘ Cinnvzrart‘

39"”? 1 u
a .on3etxam‘ir‘al

-.
.(h

winti'} "TH... r 3 ‘
m‘b p- 3£Il§e\ ll

ln response 10 1;.

..fl- .
.‘.
““:-..‘IIC iv“.
A

‘hr‘1‘l‘i‘lw’1x

::‘I::1‘I’1 ‘ V3 '
\ -Odghl l0 dew”

‘ 3'? v

_ ,t.)~

"N‘~ A'ny-"
“mum

“(1‘ ...
I ‘H‘S‘kdl

:: FICELII 1.31
s lprL\c\\c\
,1. ..., ‘.{ ¥ .-
' ‘xL‘ I ‘9" ‘ .
xi. \\ “‘3
1;.

 

 

 

Previously, much of the work in linguistic anthropology focused on detailed
descriptions iof language practices, such as the ethnography of communication (Gumperz
& Hymes, 1972; Hymes, 1964) and interactional sociolinguistics (Gumperz, 1982), in
which the locus of analysis was within the specific context of a communication event
itself. A common research methodology used in studying these interactions has been
micro-ethnographies where the focus of research is on “particular scenes within key
institutional settings” (Erickson & Mohatt, 1982, p. 137). According to Kroskrity (2004),
most linguistic anthropology studies have been preoccupied with strategies of
microanalysis, such as details of phonetic transcription, complexities of verb
morphology, ethnographic detailing of specific speech events, and sequencing of talk
within a conversational “stn'p” while overlooking the connection of these linguistic
features and practices to “political—economic macroprocesses” (p. 2).

In response to this lack of contextualization within larger social structures
linguistic anthropologists have increasingly pursued the concept of language ideologies
and have sought to develop it into a theoretical framework which can be utilized to
situate anthropological studies of language practices within macro-level social, economic,
and political processes. Influential works in this effort include Kroskrity, Schieffelin, and
Woolard (1992), Woolard and Schieffelin (1994), Gal and Woolard (1995), Schieffelin,
Woolard, and Kroskrity (1998), and Kroskn'ty (2000).

A number of definitions have been offered for language ideologies (Heath, 1977,
p. 53; Irvine, 1989, p. 255; Rumsey, 1990, p. 346; Silverstein, 1979, p. 193). These
definitions together refer to the shared beliefs of group members about language and its

role in society along with their loading of moral and political interests. The concept

48

 

 

BEE.

 
   

' ‘ ' \‘ l. .
1:530:33 the £31.33 m. 3.3
W” “i“ ”mu . ..
“Li-ufiuluyi ptl ..L.‘ P\

37.13.?" rkroslntx. :1 '33 34,

‘ I
,1-

--...- x
....I l) WICI'CA d u‘T..\‘.'

‘ I i‘ ’ ‘
‘ ‘p'tv‘u? r‘ ‘9
‘.u.13.3:tli).ll.i“

, t
I .3. MM

..
t.;...
.

...} ...l ‘ .l
...-3;.ancniirt1:al IITTCT

“Wt ‘5

-. ... of a partial.“

"b.- ‘L .L~.1;

2. \u v ~3 ‘
“ :- sb glk‘i't‘l‘ c‘.
o‘3

'i'i-r) '.
‘ { L11 ”It?“ i

’If‘:\

In 315m en ickx

'é. ’3‘
6‘; l' ‘
..ritept. comm
3: -‘\3. IF
\‘ ‘sznfl Ll ‘.II
44'\.
l
. it ‘ '
3 g mp or in
- multin“
? I} alL :T‘
- a“ "3 ’ I
4 3 LDC“
rue-diam
3. r 1 8“lg ‘
we of jar
l: ‘I-:. .‘ I- \
\\ illlo‘“
.. {I‘m p
s 31
x ‘ d:
>393"
..(‘3
x [0 Pic“ ~
. dl’g‘
3.33

 

 

underscores the ability of language users to be consciously aware of their communication
patterns which “permits speakers to rationalize and otherwise influence a language’s
structure” (Kroskn'ty, 2004, p. 497). This definition goes beyond describing language
ideology as merely a conscious awareness of language use (as in Silverstein’s (1979)
original definition), but also emphasizes the connection of language ideologies to social,
cultural, and political interests. Language ideologies are developed through “the
experience of a particular social position” (Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994, p. 58) and
through shared group membership. They are complex, and often contradictory, because
every individual experiences a different combination of social relations and group
memberships which, in turn, influences their own individual ideologies. As Kroskrity
(2004, p. 503) reminds us, social experience “is never uniformly distributed throughout
polities of any scale”.

Five dimensions of language ideologies

In his overview of language ideologies Kroskrity (2004) refers to the theory as "a
cluster concept, consisting of a number of converging dimensions” (p. 501). He discusses
five overlapping dimensions which make up language ideologies:
group or individual interests
multiplicity of ideologies
awareness of speakers

mediating fimctions of ideologies
role of language ideology in identity construction

9:59P?

In the following paragraphs I will briefly discuss these five dimensions and their
significance to research on language. In doing so, I will also discuss how these

dimensions of ideologies can apply to more general educational and social issues as well.

49

 

 

 

 

 

‘ ‘ ‘ 3. .
1.33:3 .ch .imoursc t.

up Amie-ti. 30314.. p

I ‘ ‘
,—..-— x ,- H . i o
:3-..a:ned. m .r‘33r.-:.. .

“37:: 3.331333} group gt

3.0:. \ >u

...:3..s"3i’";d'. p. 50! l. l

:‘F‘P u“ r- v n- "
‘4»...51'315 #0 t .e lLA|."-
...
3

ET"! "3 11“ #VIV‘. v
-“""“" M‘Mg'1ntpcr\'\-'
\ ‘ \

l

Tirol-... 7..
A...” _ '1‘ I- )0 ‘
m

33,3);1-3‘" .
- “We the\' C1?» t
. ‘ \

 

 

The first dimension states that “language ideologies represent the perception of
language and discourse that is constructed in the interest of a specific social or cultural
group” (Kroskrity, 2004, p. 501). Language ideologies are acquired, developed,
maintained, and changed through social experience, which never happens in isolation, but
within social and group contexts which are “demonstrably tied to political-economic
interests” (ibid, p. 501). This becomes complicated because of the second dimension
which refers to the multiplicity of language ideologies which “have the potential to
produce divergent perspectives” (ibid, p. 503). Therefore, although individuals develop
their language ideologies through group membership, the particular milieu of group
memberships differ for each individual in both kind and scale. For example, although
every citizen of a nation theoretically experiences the same ideological discourses of
national language policies, formalized language standards, and the hierarchization of
language varieties, every individual experiences or interprets these discourses in different
ways because they are filtered through their various experiences as members of divergent
social groups and/or divisions. Thus, the experience of a woman will most surely be
different from that of a man, while a doctor’s interpretation of discourses will differ fiom
that of a street vendor, and so on.

This multiplicity of ideologies is most evident during moments of contestation
and clashes where divergent ideological perspectives are juxtaposed. These offer spaces
where changes may occur, resulting in a variety of outcomes. Woolard & Schieffelin
(1994, p. 71) address this in the following statement:

The new direction in research on linguistic ideology has also moved away from

seeing ideology as a homogeneous cultural template, now treating it as a process

50

 

m\t “W 1‘: \IFU:::J 5 \‘:
magnum 0‘3 3.3.“.
continuum \\ Ill?
33% Slit] Cl Riff: l\ .3"
“"3“.“ “.~. 113.- .3
431.3333} 0i 303313 1.1;.L3...:.'
rrrrrr .. Jlfifl" 3 3 .
335.13“; .113 ti‘nlpzfl
.3... 21332.6 “his: 33:?13'73
é-l?‘ -OllllC\ itlLiJl§ '\\ l
‘I‘“"i3Clml131tlu.3\ It
“‘1‘ ‘h'fl‘ A
\ In 41': ‘uhcn it‘ll
.,_. _
“If?“ 2‘ .
3 "3 lll kUl'illthl. ldCl‘
I: "dim"

30 Ol Lllplc\ldi'll

~,.=...3.Horet3‘33:r.1'/.c ’tc 3

453-13231.
Thefo
loll
nh dlnwlflh
133:3: -

”‘3; IT .
..3 tit) 3313'] fun“.
ll.

l
‘l abfherj Undcr\1m

   

3l0 lllC \Ocml \.

 

involving struggles among multiple conceptualizations and demanding the

recognition of variation and contestation within a community as well as

contradictions within individuals.

The third dimension states that “members may display varying degrees of
awareness of local language ideologies” (Kroskrity, 2004, p. 505). This is important for
understanding the complexity of how some ideologies are effectively internalized and
unquestioned while others may be resisted or reshaped to fit the particular interests of
groups or individuals. As Bourdieu (1977) has argued, the most effective and pervasive
ideologies are those which are unconsciously accepted as “natural” and internalized by
groups and individuals. These ideologies become the most difficult to change or confront
because they are taken for granted and operate below the conscious awareness of their
recipients. In contrast, ideologies which are explicitly acknowledged and understood
become sites of contestation and create spaces for change to occur. Therefore, it is
important to recognize the degree of awareness to which different ideologies are
displayed.

The fourth dimension states that “members’ language ideologies mediate between
social structures and forms of talk” (Kroskrity, 2004, p. 507). In other words, we can
come to a better understanding of the relationship between acts of agency by groups and
individuals to the social structures within which they operate through the concept of
ideology. With regard to language we can better understand the relationship of

individuals’ language practices with those of larger discourses through the language
ideologies which inform these practices. For instance, if the official policy is to teach in

Em glish at school, but the teacher ends up using a local language for the majority of

51

 

 

"l"

. ~‘ '01-"
a»~“"0i1.‘v\€ \an lu~ W"

$25.05»-
‘ ' l u -. 3
‘ ' 9y \_ 3‘ A
""'"'n id ‘- i\.
mid-up: “36 1 \k I r
"l3 1' w 3 3
' ” ma, l
Tililu. Lulil\u.\i.
. ..
" ““‘v' Alt ,xd v .
:ffiQ—kll‘u: UM. .l‘ ..
‘ o
‘ ""h :1! F. l_I
wf~.~.:) 'eg. ndJKxun l l)
s.

I t
"'3"? 4

v 1..

--. rteowiio pm} 1.’
flu": ‘Ji ’li‘i‘o‘ ‘ 3'
fits-S NT\\1\E kl onA5n"\
~- .1' J... . i. l- u

lfad uldi .‘lekh‘ 3;. L1\ -
.1ka ‘iM I‘Ll‘ L.| , . .
....J..3..l. i . .L.. dtt W l‘.
~, .. .. fl ‘ H
“331:3 rtmr poll Cm. 3 \

"2'12“ .3:
.. home: ,3: than

‘1...’ ..l, ‘
«5.3., 4-5'0 Work 1h.)

uk ”.32;
‘r '. l
'1; 5| I“ 1' l
r -P> swirl or may;

\

‘Mw. ‘ A

J,“- " l 7 \

..--~.\‘.0ll 0i certain t'Y‘H‘r‘
‘ :1 in}

’3:w..
nAI-‘v . ‘4
...3 at promulc \ubu

vy'

 

instruction, we can further investigate the possible reasons behind these actions by
exploring the ideologies which inform the teacher’s language and teaching practices.

The fifth dimension listed by Kroskrity (2004) states that, “language ideologies
are productively used in the creation and representation of various social and cultural
identities (e.g., nationality, ethnicity)” (p. 509). This dimension emphasizes the important
role that ideologies play in forming individual and group identities. The ways in which
people perceive of themselves is largely influenced by their ideologies. Bourdieu (1977)
argues that schools act as a powerful institution to instill certain ideologies in subordinate
populations which act to maintain and legitimize their subordinate status in society. This
operates most powerfully when certain ideologies are accepted, internalized, and people
come to believe that their cultural and linguistic practices are inferior to others in society.
This can also work the other way around in which ideologies promote pride in particular
groups’ cultural or linguistic practices. Ideologies can either help to legitimize the
oppression of certain groups, or, in contrast, bring about a new awareness of social
relations and promote subordinate groups to work against the structures imposed upon
them.

In this study I use these five dimensions of language ideologies to inform my
analysis of the extent different ideologies influence the language and educational choices
of local educational stakeholders. More specifically, I will attempt to understand what
influences the language and education practices of teachers and students in the classroom

and communities while also looking at the different ideologies, from various levels,
Which impact the attitudes and perceptions that groups and individuals have towards

language use and language preferences at school, as well as other educational practices.

52

_ 1
333% Ctllfliw‘“
Tn~ I
\
r-"U'F‘mlf': 5 Fur?"
p

d- at :he 531: 01 "-=~ “

‘ 3 n '~ '3
fixi‘ili‘flilliill.‘31433],'\‘\

&

" IV‘
”"TVOTSG Ltd'lt‘ JR: 3‘31
unknnn-
'IC'. 17..”lllt’fl 33.13 3.3 L'.
.~ . .‘~ ‘.- “in.
arm that the mmt

l"!

3-5.1153: 1th pcuhgv

 

‘ r PL
Judi“ mail

:7, is ll‘fifil‘ 3.:3re ll 333‘ '

 

3 EW‘CM. UL mm

L‘\ H,’

i. .D;
5.. \A.

Hf .LSl llllt‘fllfla'.

a: 3:313: .3231 20 uncwt‘di‘

Tilt \C’M‘

.. flux M Egon. pct

ml.
' ‘Mlii d]

Silllt‘llw ldtw

w, ‘ .3. '
3 3.313ng which \Ir.

~33 her:

maul rt3lc3

'I'. ink: 3(-

ll

.Uai 0i magi-3'

be; {h

\ mimpmdlli’t l

 

 

The nature of schooling is complex and ofien contradictory. There are many
competing interests, purposes, and philosophies of education which intersect — and often
collide — at the site of schools. David Labaree (1997) illustrates the contradictory nature
of schooling in his analysis of the American education system, where he claims there are
three major educational goals (democratic equality, social efficiency, and social mobility)
which, in their very nature, are “contradictory and frequently counterproductive” (p. 70).
He argues that the most central problems at American schools are, at their core, political
in nature rather than pedagogical, organizational, social, or cultural — the aspects to which
most educational researchers traditionally attribute the shortcomings and failures of
schools. Therefore, if we are to understand why particular schools are not accomplishing
their expected outcomes, or just to understand how and why they operate the way they
do, then we must investigate the competing and contradictory goals which drive schools
and often lead to unexpected outcomes

These three competing goals of education, which Labaree describes, are derived
from rather distinctive ideological influences. The goal of democratic equality derives
from an ideology which stresses the collective nature of society and the duty of citizens
to take their rightful role in participating in their community or nation, for the good of the
whole. The goal of social efficiency, on the other hand, stems from an ideology which
focuses on the importance of the economy in developing nations, and therefore leads to a

more pragmatic and prescriptive approach to education. The final goal of social mobility
originates largely from an individualistic ideology which focuses on the interests of
individuals and their immediate family and peers. These three operate simultaneously at

the same site of schools and concurrently influence what happens in practice at the

53

 

l ‘ ‘ I. )
3:33.? i’.‘ 31"“ mu .1 \

‘ ‘ l ‘l . 3
tarts. tea a: M33315. u

. l . .' 3.
Mill" TIE: LID-33> dilb 1&3.

My...“ 43 mylll‘x lli

b‘ih‘hksuA-L bl II 1 h.
333.3 3- 33! .3333 ,
um‘mdLUm. 3lLdst n3l\ l

wow-a

‘ .'
.Jhbax3b. llOl ORA dl‘c\ ii

...3,‘3‘,3.,- in, . 1
3.31.0..t3mr .with: 3
k
33‘

3,113: :33 other warms ‘33

..',g 3
3.331133 rated 13

l
.x‘
\ \Ka 3.3x L1

n ff '
Ut_:;""'3/II Hf "

1333 3L}: "3'
h
T33: term :dc33133g‘3
""!|'._3“s ,‘i '
3“,..33323d and Linn/:3

rat-:9 3
3. Moog}. anthrv,’

that. “‘3‘ ~
,_ that nearli as n‘

£317,723 ~r 3
‘.43l..l’1'l.E32iL"l‘ll l ’1"

2‘37 It -
...».qu an tllt‘nsll c

..':rP‘hi
3 3.3333136 U

    

49333.." ' '
, mlzmgldcolugu

....

‘:"m?;‘.0n' a
Mllth Can-A

34.,
'31~3HS 0+...

 

 

schools. They also have a strong influence on which policies are developed and
implemented at schools, which often contradict and counteract each other. This example
of competing goals and ideologies at American schools helps to illustrate how the
converging dimensions of ideologies, as Kroskrity (2004) outlined, work together to
create a complicated mix of differing goals, needs, values, and assumptions at schools.
Therefore, not only does the concept of language ideologies help us to see the complex
mix of forces influencing language attitudes and practices, but it can also be usefully
applied to other contexts which relate less directly to language practice itself, but to other
ideologies related to education and schooling.

Definition of ideology

The term ideology itself can be quite problematic because the concept has been

conceptualized and utilized within such a wide range of disciplines, including political
science, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, and education. The definitions offered for
ideology differ nearly as much as these fields of study differ. In his book Ideology: An
Introduction, Eagleton (1991, pp. 1-2) demonstrates the contested nature of the concept
by providing an extensive list of possible meanings for the term ideology within different
fields of study. Therefore, for this study it is important to be clear about which
perspective of ideology I am utilizing.

In her introduction to Language Ideologies, Woolard (1998) provides a useful
discussion of four recurrent strands, or themes, that are commonly adopted in
conceptualizing ideology. The first strand views ideology as an ideational, mental

phenomenon which comprises of the shared cultural understandings and beliefs of

members of society in general. The second strand views ideology as being “derived from,

54

 

.. l". '93)on
lithium. Abal»&;.'

0:39:03" 1p. (33. l:
iii-Ci?!“ as berg:

P33: 335!“ Oi It

'9. '

.' 'J V I
a. l...~f3.‘3"‘3.302‘..
...,, ‘ ..‘!
b.9353 hill);
- w

i "1‘ . ,3,“ ,, ..
“‘|~ -- ill at} 1‘
knit? OT mdfi‘fiid

"'9: .,. J .
-.zru 53 g 33:13.:

IL‘ \ly‘ ‘ ‘Q r
. ..‘ ‘
b ‘.\:
z. D
3'2"-_
3'. ,J‘“ 1"
3s J‘Lq7\l‘y
l ‘~I\‘\.

.IY’
l_i:.%k‘_l
‘ s ' I
P 4“,Ze ‘C;
‘3‘; _ _
. 'ih- _
\ L...§\\l\_\1 \h‘ ..‘

nfi‘ .

A ‘ "Mn-J's .
A 1‘ \
.I’rl .
u’LFIQI-L

5:5'4‘H-J - ‘
-t am it...“
I“

;.
“\Jéf‘.‘
A.M ‘€ ,r‘
' V
b
-
\':3‘4“L
‘\ §‘_ ‘
L«\:\ Q_
\
‘i‘ I
\"-.‘? .
\~
~- 15 \.
t
A; if“-
\_ *l

 

 

rooted in, reflective of, or responsive to the experience or interests of a particular
position” (p. 6). It differs from the first strand in its emphasis on the individuality of
ideology as being rooted in the experience of a particular position. These first two strands
both perceive of ideology in rather neutral terms with little, if any, reference to power
and/or distortion. The third strand is more critical in nature as it conceptualizes ideology
as having a “direct link to inhabitable positions of power — social, political, economic” (p.
7). It is seen as “ideas, discourses, or signifying practices in the service of the struggle to
acquire or maintain power” (p. 7). The final strand Woolard suggests is quite similar to
the third, but takes ideology’s relationship to social power to another level by viewing
ideology as “distortion, illusion, error, mystification, or rationalization” (p. 7). A well-
known expression representing this fourth strand of ideology is Engel’s description of
ideology as “false consciousness”. These last two strands view ideology as a mechanism
for the acquisition and maintenance of power. They differ from each other in how they
conceptualize ideology to operate, with the third strand placing the site of ideology within
the consciousness of groups and individuals while the fourth strand places ideology
beyond human consciousness, Operating as an overriding social influence.

Woolard contends that anthropologists have traditionally been split between the
second and third strands of ideology. That is to say, some anthropologists utilize the
concept of ideology in neutral terms while others attempt to do so with a more critical
perspective by analyzing the power relations inherent in ideologies. The approach
researchers decide to take has great implications on how social phenomena are studied. If
ideology is viewed as neutral, then the primary role of a researcher is to describe the

ideological practices of social groups and attempt to understand their meanings within

55

 

a“

~ ‘
.pflr. r.‘ '1‘” I
3:315‘331 LL'I'“‘\

l ' .
~3rr~h,) ‘
If @331.ch .‘3

I
”ow-r ‘vf‘uw 'h) a)
?.k‘l,3|~.l3i33" ulL AL‘

\r
1353303335. l1.i‘
F‘-) O. —' I
1.1.2» mdsdi 382.‘

u 1 LA.\

mirror 0'

Q‘v‘.~ 0,. .
.3 n 33. ,3. -~

. 3 4 \ ~71.
“'—'~‘ ‘s‘.dh k'.-l

r
I

E .l V- |C~
all) 0"“ "“

‘- .b\tn‘
3 3‘. 3 .
It. llll.\ ‘:~

._ .-
H

“(on ‘. ‘ .
..........*.EUF‘3 Ol \

7 .w-
‘L‘~:.l v ‘ng. ‘ v-
“ ‘1“ ' t-
\I‘ -
t

a. ‘
m
A "'

‘_
." .
\‘33 3'
‘_ ‘l‘\ a :3 ‘
~ u.\.3\
‘r‘r
~v
“5 ,, _
~ ‘LA 1‘ \ <
I \'
"s.
32,41 ._ ,'
§&“ 5‘“ V\ ‘
KA‘ '1
:43
-f"‘3~3
‘*<l4r"\ .
L‘Al‘rhtl‘
'1
-.‘“- J

is.
x ".
. "' =\ -_ .
‘—
qn.~ .
u“.
3-.'
‘- V
___38‘
~\
g

 

particular contexts. Although this approach is seen by some to be “neutral” it privileges
the researcher’s analytic perspective over others and therefore is ideological by
promoting the researcher’s analyses and interpretations at the cost of other possible
viewpoints. This does not mean that analyzing social and linguistic dynamics through a
more critical lens automatically makes researchers immune to their own biases and the
imposition of their ideological perspectives. Therefore, it is important to be mindful and
upfront about one’s own ideological influences and incorporate a critical introspection of
what is “objective”, “scientific”, or “theoretically sound”.

In this study I utilize a critical approach that views ideology through a
combination of Woolard’s second and third strands. This is to say that I define ideology
as being developed through the experiences and interests of individuals (2nd strand)
which operate within the contestation of power (3rd strand). In doing so, I attempt to be
mindful of my own ideologies which influence and bias my own observations and
interpretations.

In summary, the theory of language ideologies, as has been discussed above,
becomes a useful analytic tool to interpret “the intersection of language and human
beings in the social world” (Woolard, 1998, p. 3). It acts as a “much-needed bridge
between linguistic and social theory, because it relates the microculture and
communicative action to political economic considerations of power and social
inequality, confronting macrosocial constraints on language behavior” (W oolard &
Schieffelin, 1994, p. 72). It can be used to better understand the language practices of

groups and individuals by placing these within the sociocultural context of the larger

society.

56

 

  
  
 

ll'irhm rhe writ.
IOZISIII of language rde.
lithium-311011. bewnej

.3...1t.'des and [113.21. e

l
...-.. I .- .
.3314: 3.313. edutrmn p

 

Ie.’ ages "at In: :er; 3‘ 1
('44-: k :- ‘

.3331115: on 1 I 1 the we

4,1,, . -

...3331_3:1e3 are lIllL‘Illlel/CL

3' dirtomper nv 33133“;
III.l 5.7113‘.’ ms 8} 11I13'1.
2:fr.desa11d pmctreex. l "

IicrIrmI Iloeal at 331

3:33;"? '
3.31 m 3he1r l1‘3 ed 1:.

 

p.

n
1
‘ .

I’m: '
-3. {Ii Cup-lid}

“I“ am 3313331

U“

11 srgnls a mum

0f Cllll‘tlldl firmx

,.
MW :3: eff--
\.

This 3‘.“

Idlen19n! h

 

an» ~
:«IQ ~
. .. x

I
‘31:
:4 gm

1110131331000“

 

Within the context of this study, I borrow from the linguistic anthropological
concept of language ideologies and expand it to apply to larger social contexts, especially
within education, beyond just language practices. In doing so I attempt to make sense of
the attitudes and practices of local stakeholders in Lesotho as they interact with the
language and education policies placed upon them. By analyzing the multiplicity of
ideologies that influence groups and individuals in diverse ways, and, more specifically,
by focusing on (1) the specific interests that ideologies represent, (2) to what degree these
ideologies are internalized or made aware, (3) how they combine with complementary
and/or competing ideologies, and (4) how they influence practice and identity within
social structures. By utilizing the concept of ideologies and their influence on people’s
attitudes and practices, I hope to be able to place the acts of agency (resistance or
complicity) of local actors within the context of their deeper meanings and within the

structures of their lived realities.

F arms of Capital

The term ideology reminds analysts that cultural frames have social histories and

it signals a commitment to address the relevance of power relations to the nature

of cultural forms and ask how essential meanings about language are socially

produced as effective and powerful. (Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994, p. 58)

This statement by Woolard & Schieffelin helps to put into perspective the utility
of language ideologies as an analytic tool. Although the concept can be helpful by
providing a link between local practices and beliefs to more global ideologies and

structures, in order to understand that link we must also understand the nature of the

57

 

 

 

      
 

3311:3330: .303‘33311 333d : '

I‘I 3I131I113l. ln MN
.2031” 33:1 ml .33n1.
1-1.01 'fimld'lg dg'lur‘.’ 3‘1
lllU.lllZl ‘Tlg Luv: U3
«.I... I“ 3"]fo Illa-CT ' '
h...s0113p33..1133
435Iu11l37t1nzr335~

"“3,“

“Iv-ml .LJ 1:13] L”? l “K

El I’ll} Inl'JL ( (rm ..."!

One ofth

 

I
Y
K mm. Pl.”

$151.1"? ~
3 .l3333n333 1133' l33'3
\

3m,
ls a?“ El “w‘c dug

H.
I.’ 9.3 r. F - .
.. ‘V‘Jl‘lOv‘X .\

3'th: r
”11333 331‘ ......

 

 

structures of society and how they constrain, influence, and subject the choices of groups
and individuals. In order to do so, I will draw upon theories of different forms of capital
and how they explain the influences of social structures on groups and individuals by
both constraining and providing opportunities for different actors at various levels and
degrees.

In utilizing these concepts I draw largely upon the theories of Pierre Bourdieu
who defines these different types of capital in much of his work, including his 1986 essay
“The Forms of Capital”. In this section I provide the definition of each form of capital
which I will utilize in the analysis of this study. These include economic (or material)
capital, cultural capital, social capital, and symbolic capital.

Economic capital

One of the most prevailing forms of capital is that of economic capital. Although
Bourdieu’s theories are best known for their contribution to the ideas of cultural and
symbolic capital, these different forms of capital would have little meaning if it were not
for economic, or material, capital. Bourdieu states that “economic capital is at the root of
all the other types of capital” (1986, p. 252). This is because the ultimate goal of
obtaining other forms of capital is to ensure access and power to economic capital.

In this study I define economic capital to mean the economic resources available
to groups or individuals. This is usually in the form of money but can also be manifested
in the form of other resources which hold trading value in the economy, such as
livestock, crops, land, and skills. Therefore, economic capital in modern economies is
usually measured in how much money a family has access to through employment,

savings, and other sources of income. Economic capital has a great influence on the

58

 

 

   

‘ ~" “"- 1;.2;
*Ziéilfifmx them 3\ d

.- '1'};‘ \.‘.‘\‘n
3150110533. waJu

. ' i .“.\ “ .

Wfiufifl 0n Inc “1”,“. .
urn-but:
(Hula/U" Ldf'Wm.‘

r- ‘Yka 1" ‘ 1 (My,
ALUMNJ M but - A

..‘ ~4~ fl" 3‘ I); U? ..l \ Jflk'

..q,‘.£u.u‘.]\. {I :l‘ JP. -I A

..‘;gfl‘fmli‘x LL‘HLJJ] La,"

351E HOE'QCODUW. K r ’C \l ‘

(3-, _ y ' ‘ ' 1 ‘
mnfllf} CLMLN. Polk.

 

I

.3331? Significance. am:
5

 

educational choices available to individuals and families because of the specialized
nature of formal education. It can either act as a constraint or open up opportunities
depending on the family’s particular economic circumstances.

Cultural capital

Another source of capital which plays a significant role in the constraints or
opportunities of groups and individuals is that of cultural capital. Bourdieu
conceptualizes cultural capital through relations of power. Cultural capital is defined as
certain non-economic resources upon which people can draw to gain access to power and
opportunity. Cultural resources differ from economic, or material, resources because they
only gain significance, and thus can be appropriated and utilized, by apprehending their
meanings. Therefore their significance is culturally, or symbolically, determined. In other
words, cultural capital is not merely obtained through ownership and exchange, as
economic capital is typically distributed, but rather must be taught and acquired through
cultural means. In this way cultural capital can be seen to be more subtle in form, but also
more pervasive in impact.

In describing this concept, Bourdieu refers to three different states of cultural
capital: embodied, objectified, and institutionalized. First, cultural capital exists in an
embodied state. This means that it is acquired over time through enculturation, education,
and social experiences. Cultural capital is embodied in what Bourdieu refers to as the
dispositions people develop through their socialization. Due to this nature, cultural
capital, according to Bourdieu, is not something that is consciously learned or developed
but is accumulated and internalized over time. Certain types of cultural capital become

more valued than others within society, which helps to create and maintain social

59

 

 

 

   
 

\
”.... ‘ilVe'S~ I‘\t miil“

{ah—Ii l
tr: infirm it no com-c
l
Alkue‘rkqi r\n- Tr};
7-‘4- it» '9. < } ‘
....fl. tarsal. 0.11 lo If;
‘1‘qu I ' ti
4.4:. 26. none pawn: 1t
ssermd state m
“1”. .k ‘l' _ I ‘
n L-OUM. u um or .1."

I
W Pall-:15Ulhnai Kn\\“\‘l\ i ‘K EL ! :

rgrrec'rj ramxlrc ant. rr.

Ribhl " i 1 "
..-...s mm]: fur (h:

1?: Mama! JUNE! g.

The ihlld

sldlt‘ L‘\l\'

;~Jii"\.' illOd"h ihc Kills 1

.:,".l . I
si-‘J‘h n {Y

M. lieu acmmpm

 

‘Esi‘hh‘fd "
...: ardemials. Tht u
-*- '9 am crcdcnmk I

J\\‘l Uh'

13ml Cap‘. 13‘. u

.z' Nita
mm“ Winn 1r

inequalities. As families gain more valued cultural capital they are able to pass it on to
their children who come to embody this valued capital in their own dispositions and pass
it on to their children. The opposite is true of those families who do not possess valuable
cultural capital. Due to their social position, they have difficulty obtaining such valued
capital, let alone passing it on to their family members.

The second state of cultural capital is the objectified form, which refers to objects,
such as books, works of art, scientific instruments, and other such things that require
certain cultural knowledge to effectively utilize and appreciate. These objects are often
acquired by families and members of more powerful social groups, which make these
resources available for their children to learn to understand, appreciate, and exploit for
their own social advantage.

The third state exists in an institutionalized form. This is most powerfully
operated through the educational credential system. Those who possess valued cultural
capital and their accompanying knowledge and skills are rewarded at schools by
receiving credentials. Those who do not posses such cultural capital have a difficult time
gaining such credentials. This concept is important because it acts to legitimate the
valued cultural capital of more powerful social groups within an institutional form, which
gives extra recognition in an objectified form which can then be exchanged for obtaining
high-status, well paid employment, or other beneficial opportunities. Therefore, the
education system, under Bourdieu’s theory, is seen to act more to legitimate and
reproduce the inequalities of society rather than to provide opportunities for the whole

population to gain the necessary knowledge and skills to succeed in society.

60

‘ ., ‘ ‘ 7,...
A1iesbt.~~
4.‘ *‘t‘elfl'fl”; ‘i
‘3‘ fl\.. I‘L‘g fish. \
cv-riA'. .-"’“‘-“ I
must. tMuU"

- I l
.ffi'” .s‘, h'r I “i
Qs'AiUI \du'snli tar

{sacrificindl

iii ‘

. . v
‘0 s,‘~- -
I; l. x F

* m ' )
.“s‘rL‘u‘u ui u L L:

”
J"; \Oxv '1‘

, ‘H ‘
ma.nflluL£T£Cil

 

.‘ 1...“. it ~
t". ”use 0: .‘i‘ud'sm:

 

r"... -‘ '
fl ; ,n l .
«.4riw3pvuc~~

,\-'\
tgemxnand\‘
. I

PF

4. . ‘
a: “"1““ "' ' l ‘
s .lsssdli'drl) U: it u“

' l
.-.
‘1

~...S IF: the lpnd'
‘ l

Islk

-munaamqm‘
.L.\

‘ n.
V .r..
ll‘l

.4. 0L." iv-
Muff] \\ illl d

11"
.5
'21-.
mid."

1' l4; .
smmit‘l‘; ”l

 

A large benefit of cultural capital for those coming from educated families is that
the knowledge and skills they are raised with are valued within formal education and
rewarded at school. There have been a number of studies which have investigated the
impact of cultural capital on school knowledge and academic performance. In their
studies on white and black families from both middle class and working class
backgrounds in the United States, Lareau (1987, 2002) and Lareau & Horvat (1999)
effectively illustrate how different sources of cultural capital impact the educational
performance of students. They show that the knowledge and skills which middle class
white families possess translates into better relationships with the schools, more
engagement and support in their children’s schoolwork, and a greater understanding of
the expectations of formal education systems. In an ethnographic study of poor white
families in the Appalachia, Purcell—Gates (1995, 2002) illustrates how lower class
families are at a distinct disadvantage when they begin school because they have not
gained the necessary cultural capital needed to succeed at school. An example she gives
is about children who are not raised around books and whose parents seldom, if ever,
read. These children often encounter books in a very real way for the first time when they
enter schools. There are many basic assumptions and knowledge of reading which they
lack (i.e. reading from left to right, turning the pages, tone and pace, etc.) which makes it
much more difficult for them to learn the basics of reading compared to children who are
raised within a reading environment.

Social capital

Social capital is often defined as the access to knowledge and power which

individuals and groups gain through their social networks. In comparing social capital to

61

 

v '1 .- n,
“\‘x‘dl .13» m
i“. .

{(12:31 & H.

'n l 7 a .i‘
l‘ ..’} l. \ {In

.. nib sl :1. A
“:m s. W." .n ‘1
Js."'..-h.‘ 'f‘ _
' 1
31755555. 3!: .3.\

El. "‘1"? af‘; 29 ,-
>.' H

W 5A-~\\ J

B l
"" In!
\‘JIU1\‘

. ,. ‘
”..‘“ " Q.
i r. .1». ‘

.'I...._1,[]L Mir”;

4

4
U

U €3.17 3;th a,

-u

;“I . I
‘HL if; 1‘ ’ 1"”
.5. s 40‘4““

physical and human capital (which come from a capitalist economic theory of capital),
Coleman & Hoeffer describe social capital as “less tangible yet, for it exists in the
relations between persons” (1987, p. 221, italics in original). Lareau (2000) helps to
distinguish social capital from cultural capital by stating that in social capital the “focus is
on the transformation of social position into social advantage, particularly by the use of
networks” (p. 80). Therefore, social capital is not only the social networks people
possess, but also how these networks must be “activated” in order for social capital to be
put into effect and transform people’s social position.

Bourdieu does not explore this form of capital in as much detail as cultural and
symbolic capital, but he does claim that cultural and social capital are much more related
to each other than to economic capital (Swartz, 1997, p. 80). This is partially because
both are obtained through social relations. They differ in the way in which they are
obtained and utilized. In contrast to cultural capital, which entails the embodied
knowledge and dispositions acquired through socialization, social capital entails the
access to knowledge and power which individuals gain through their social networks.
Therefore, if an individual is seeking for an influential position or entrance into a
prestigious school, they gain access to these institutions through their social networks.
But having these social networks is not always enough. In order to be awarded a desired
job or entrance into particular schools, individuals must also display sufficient cultural
capital to be deemed suitable for such recognition.

Symbolic capital

The final form of capital 1 will discuss is symbolic capital. This also is closely

interrelated to cultural capital in that it is a form of capital which gains its significance

62

 

 

through culturally constructed meanings. Symbolic capital can take many different forms,
including, art, religion, science, and language. In each of these forms symbolic capital
operates to structure society as to what knowledge is of value and what is not. Bourdieu
claims that symbolic capital “simultaneously performs three interrelated but distinct
functions: cognition, communication, and social differentiation” (Swartz, 1997, pp. 82-
83). Symbolic capital develops cognition in that it “provides a means for ordering and
understanding the social world” (p. 83). Whichever type of symbolic capital a group
utilizes helps to shape how they see the world and approach social relations. Those with
access to highly valued symbolic capital, therefore, gain the dispositions that help them
approach the world in ways which benefit them socially and economically. Similarly, by
performing communication functions, symbolic capital helps to provide social integration
into positions and relations of power, if individuals possess the properly valued symbolic
capital. The third function serves as an “instrument of domination” (Swartz, 1997, p. 83)
by developing symbolic systems which “provide integration for dominant groups,
distinction and hierarchies for ranking groups, and legitimation of social ranking by
encouraging the dominated to accept the existing hierarchies of social distinction”. Thus
symbolic capital helps to create social integration within social groups and social classes
while also setting up hierarchical divisions between these groups and classes.

The main form of symbolic capital I focus on in this study is that of linguistic
capital. Bourdieu argues that some forms of language are more highly valued than others
and therefore hold greater social value. Most of his studies were largely focused on
French society, therefore when he refers to language differences, these are within a

French language-speaking society, or in other terms, different dialects, registers, and

63

 

‘ H ' u

_ ,. I
fluid". \33 II
“I! ' “H BHL'L
Au:»-:¥
estrous. star.

Ml med it“? ill

SIB: .Ifnca w.
lfci “If Lil‘. mo
Ezglis'n. held it.
‘ tom
..e be .3:
£425 II it
","~ ..lu 'Iffv‘
T1 pm L
“In; plated e
‘Ii Jr: - l

I‘."

; ‘Flfix. I .
‘\ L. . . _
“VI“AHRIL“

.L. !
“..‘h...

"& "\\3U\

. \

I ‘
".13 -
‘ “415 ash
@3115“ kl
«Hague ll-
. L“!

 

especially, varying degrees of command with the standardized form of the French
language. Bourdieu argues that those who have the greatest command over the
prestigious, standardized form of language hold the greatest linguistic capital and are
rewarded for it in society.

This concept becomes even more explicit in multilingual and post-colonial
societies where there are a number of languages spoken in a particular society (such as in
South Africa with 11 official languages), with each language holding varying degrees of
prestige. In most developing countries, especially in Africa, foreign languages, such as
English, hold the greatest prestige. Therefore, the disparity between highly valued
linguistic forms and less valued forms becomes even larger and more difficult to
overcome because this disparity is not only within a particular language but across
languages with very different lexical and grammatical structures. On the other hand, the
dynamics presented in multilingual societies also make the linguistic divide more explicit
and may provide subordinate groups with a more conscious knowledge of the power
values placed on different language forms. The subtlety between differences of forms
within a language (i.e., dialects, standard vs. non-standard, or register) may help to mask
the inequalities inherent in them. It is more obvious when someone is discriminated
against because they cannot even speak English than when they speak a less valued
dialect (e.g., African American Vernacular English) within the same language of English.
In any case, the hegemony of language still holds great power in post-colonial,
multilingual countries where it the hierarchy of languages is often internalized by
individuals who come to believe that foreign, imported languages are more prestigious

and valuable than indigenous ones.

64

 

 

at other. One I
.....1
ram; men.

{13023.I‘LI'LI13)

I “V 4
trig. 3.151411.) pr

IIV"

m net} lndi‘»

I
i‘u- undone».
3.313.“: \‘

. ;

... 5\

b
y‘ ' i .. ‘
"IL; Ct :mpIInIzJ

. I”
F“ in} 3 . \
{1' All sn\ ii

sf\ 1
tactnces to“ mi:
Hr.bi‘II.I
In order I
zdzndual: it IS I
I lféId ‘

’CL‘UIC\ f“;

I
11‘ s. ‘
Libpl'“?

nll'll's “ill.

CF"? ‘a it.
“ewe-Mal ea

in .. '
firm“

It‘ll I! .
“Alum.

'I'I lid e

 

 

 

 

These different forms of capital discussed above are inter-related and feed off of
each other. One form of capital may compensate for another, such as, a family with great
economic capital but little social capital can still afford to send their children to private
schools, but they often complement each other. Those families with greater cultural
capital usually possess more highly valued economic, social, and symbolic capital as
well. Every individual’s situation is different and the different forms of capital play roles
of varying degrees in the constraints or opportunities placed before them. In this study it
will be important to explore the different combination that these various forms of capital
play in the lives of educational stakeholders and how they impact their attitudes and
practices towards language and education.

Habitus

In order to understand how these different forms of capital operate in the lives of
individuals it is important to understand Bourdieu’s concept of habitus. Eagleton (1991,
p. 156) defines habitus as “the inculcation in men and women of a set of durable
dispositions which generate particular practices”. Building upon the discussion above
about cultural capital, this means that individuals are socialized with certain “structured
dispositions” which act to reproduce the social order which is established through the
acquisition and enactment of cultural, social, and symbolic capital. What makes this
concept so powerful in Bourdieu’s theory is that these dispositions become naturalized
and legitimated through social structures and institutions so that individuals in society
internalize their own dispositions as natural, and more importantly, do not question their

social position.

65

k ‘mpo' “all" h

s. '31», Ffiildiik‘il OI

I
:uiIiuud. {WC {the :

-:s1s'i15:h.li ll l.‘ n"

 

[155513 res. and I
i)” £13.: inhututli

gr ex razes the role II

menus and 1m.

 

reuse ll does not «..'I
:vrlr ‘ . A
used In acts or .I '

~ “Kiln LIIC thl-

ittnzte‘I "
drummed

bis-‘4‘!
‘3‘“: 15 d)! s

LWmAinLdL H

L “"3153;
m 10 be euntr';

4 fiflbonthc leI”

It '1 ,
.IIIe habnuu

8111a] pmk's’\.\t~ .

i r: '
mMon of a.

 

{10 l“ '
‘ D-Tddlt‘ltin pr

“Renal ton “I

(.311
”10} Map

clad”a
“ltd. BUUld-li

 

 

—_—_

An important contribution of the concept of habitus in social theory is that it
addresses the divide between social structures and individual agency. Bourdieu’s
conceptualization of agency is that through the dispositions which make up one’s habitus,
individuals exercise their agency. A key point about Bourdieu’s conceptualization of
agency is that it is not seen to be conscious agency, but rather agency is based upon the
interests, values, and dispositions of agents, which have been socialized by the influence
of social institutions. Therefore, although Bourdieu brings into his theory a model that
incorporates the role of individual agency in negotiating social structures, this agency is
unconscious and basically determined by habitus. This notion of agency is problematic
because it does not sufficiently address the complex contradictions that ofien are
displayed in acts of agency. By attributing agency to an unconscious enactment of
interests which are determined by an individual’s dispositions, which in turn, are
ultimately determined by social structures, seems to be a circular way of saying that
agency is determined by social, cultural, and symbolic structures, which could be
interpreted to be contradictory to the concept of agency itself. Swartz (1997, p. 291)
comments on the limitations of such a view:

While habitus calls attention to the dynamics of self-selection in competitive

social processes, the internalization of objective chances into expectations and the

adaptation of aspirations to actual opportunities are often more complex and
contradictory processes than the concept suggests. Moreover, both adaptation to
external constraints and distinction from competing actors are two distinct types
of agency juxtaposed in Bourdieu’s concept without their exact relationship being

clarified. Bourdieu calls upon one or the other dynamic depending on the issue he

66

is addressing it
more prom '22.".
hthlsstuds l L
1:1...esthat .‘u is ii
men or pm 1th o;

931:5 and min was»

 

:31le realztlcs ll‘u

re: :5 11h \\ ht”

i, ll-

 

 

.rs: toms or .11me
lie 71‘ 1 ‘
”th tile main prl'r‘is‘i
Iii-"3"!"- u .
annul..i§ii\y in it) J\‘L
4.5 L '

«1.. ms concept wt"

4.. ‘
.mzmstlc. Thor» ‘

s i ’71
«.5 Ior '» anizluns a:

ras 15 Larselx deter?

Consequently I

Isms \lhlt‘h are m

$
I

”We
«and ilflls‘l"r
Lt.
ifi" .H
‘3‘ i,
-*hxn€€

d 10mm ll

:5 '-
;!'l ”‘13- i

«s. i '
sUtiil‘s‘Un'

 

of ha.
$35-11 "

....I s. Althouah s5

 

 

is addressing and without specifying the conditions in which one assumes the

more prominent role.

In this study I utilize Bourdieu’s different forms of capital to illustrate the various
influences that come together in individuals’ and their families’ lives which act to
constrain or provide opportunities in their lives. These theories are helpful to show that
groups and individuals are limited in the power to act for themselves and change their
own lived realities. They have limited, if any, control over the types of capital they are
endowed with when they are born into their particular family situation and social class.
These forms of capital act to strongly influence the constraints and opportunities in their
lives. The main problem with Bourdieu’s theory of capital is that it is seen to be too
deterministic in its assumptions. Although he attempts to account for acts of agency
through his concept of habitus, his conceptualization of agency is still rather
deterministic. Therefore, there is little space provided in his theories of capital and
habitus for variations and changes to come from the local actors. Instead, their social
status is largely determined by the sources of capital available to them.

Consequently, I will use Bourdieu’s concepts of capital to illustrate the structural
constraints which are imposed by society upon the families and individuals in this study.
This is because structural constraints are very real and extremely influential in their lives.
But I will need to turn to a different definition of agency, in contrast to that provided in
Bourdieu’s theory of habitus, in order to have a theory which is less deterministic as
Bourdieu’s. Although social structures are real and powerful in shaping people’s lives,
they do not determine their lives. Groups and individuals do possess the power, although

limited, through their agency, to change their own situations, but it is important to

67

 

t i .
.. 42'" '11th "
23s.}.liiu .11» “

Bl’llf‘ 5M?

‘
Burns.
\‘Mq‘ ' i
In: ms 1:

n'h

twatlisn nil Lili.‘

in" l, -

imkk. Haiti}: L1
M

in: re 'I an 51

"5' . .
i"- -‘- pm‘I Ede I

This 15 51

“f” n
:il ..‘- -,'
«rs. LI:

‘ BUL‘I’Q;

l... .
L1”?!

“as; . .
Lu 5 ‘hL‘U

I. ...
‘in' ’3"

mm

understand the constraints within which they can operate their own agency, which

Bourdieu’s concept of capital helps to illustrate.

Agency

Bourdieu’s concepts of various forms of capital are helpful in understanding the
complex ways in which societies reproduce their inequalities and why most people are
complicit in this process and thus remain within the social class in which they were
raised, having a difficult time moving into higher levels of society. His theory shows that
there are very strong socializing mechanisms which act to perpetuate the structures of
society and maintain them through the social and cultural practices of members of
society. On the other hand, Bourdieu’s theories have also been criticized for being too
deterministic in nature. They do not sufficiently explain exceptions to the rule when
certain groups or individuals are able to effectively move up the social hierarchy or how
social values and conditions can be changed to close the gap between social classes
and/or provide spaces for societal changes to occur.

This is where the linguistic anthropological theories of language ideologies and
those of Bourdieu, as discussed above, both come together, and collide. On the one hand,
Bourdieu’s theory helps to provide a greater understanding of the societal and cultural
structures which operate in developing, maintaining, and reproducing various ideologies
in society. On the other hand, his theory also limits the power of agency in linking
people’s actions and beliefs to the larger structures and ideologies of society, which has

been the pursuit of the linguistic anthropological theories of language ideologies.

68

 

 

wr—

 

 

“walla m Oldfl l0

1:: ‘33: premised l‘}

Tne definition
ten: 3 \en comm
{Sis ln he: mle "
:wfazenpzzng to unit.
ratcmmr. she ;

par m recent de.

“'I‘ “I! h f1 '

L . 7 v"‘ i

“iii ‘ ‘ '
‘il‘l- lli-li.illk\1i .‘E

n‘A

«will 9“). a db

.‘ ‘ —
I‘fi‘l‘ful 1*

. l
......lufli (fiild' i
‘5‘

In.“ . .
. .. .1ll.’l‘,f§{r Ol \i‘ {:1
ll

‘ .

“’2‘ =1

\b ,

~ ~.|
4

lsaeompiiea'
‘Ir’
4.:513. Alum ll

size that [he [“41

s, i
n‘t III" 3'4 ‘
‘Hhe.\l' .‘
“mun! Hf
\ _

4..

.‘ 2" - \ '

J».\.|E§ 3.33.»)
“lsl GUY]

LPN ‘

'~ Jill-"l. p l} “

3711 '
.4 \

lee .
U;-
's‘» H
"lar‘l‘i ‘5
“dream

Therefore, in order to bridge the two I will need to explore a different concept of agency
than that proposed by Bourdieu within his concept of habitus.

The definition of agency can be quite problematic and difficult to pin down. It has
become a very common component of contemporary theories in a number of different
fields. In her article “Language and Agency”, Aheam (2001) discusses the complexities
of attempting to utilize the notion of agency within particular theoretical frameworks. In
her introduction she asks the question of why the concept of agency has become so
p0pular in recent decades. She claims this has to do with a combination of factors
including historical trends, such as the social upheavals in central and eastern Europe in
the 80s and 903, a dissatisfaction with the deterministic nature of postmodern and
poststructural critiques, and an increased interest in issues of social transformation and
resistance. As a result of this increased interest in agency there has also been an increase
in the number of different definitions and approaches to agency. Therefore, defining
agency is a complicated endeavor but also important in establishing how it can be used
for analysis. Along these lines Aheam (2001, p. 112) argues that “scholars often fail to
recognize that the particular ways in which they conceive of agency have implications for
the understanding of personhood, causality, action, and intention. Agency therefore
deserves ‘deeper consideration and more extensive theoretical elaboration’ (Dobres &
Robb 2000, p. 3).”

There have been a number of different approaches to agency in recent literature,
each of which has its particular advantages and weaknesses. One common theme is to
view agency as “free will”. This approach attributes a rationality to agency, but it seems

to be a bit misleading. Although theoretically individuals have the power to choose to

69

 

 

 

l 9 ~. ‘
76331;: l0 lilt’ll 50s ll

VL'LAA
«.... I e
....'.A‘l,. [.t'fli 3L..‘ “a

s
i y ’

3.. I . 51
memnnn.
‘ ‘ .1 I

r9"_3q-sg L .3 -.
L—L-‘finhlng .ns gr

5

n 9‘
”,3 ~ .
.‘llislnlcr u'n

ill \\‘

smunlom ”’

enmnmacmn

as

6 ... o v
1I1&d]t\t\

2..., 4'
.I\. uih.‘ Li

\¢UEBHEQU'

t I
v

In»$~
.nmnmmno:

new

ELEM? {15 "i C
..uhoHMeu
revs"

.l. " ii. V
h'A‘: dédir‘l‘E

if: ‘L. L .
em Mt'nm the

1;:2‘ l
l H ‘5' The?!“
[Edi’l'c‘II‘ijr !
H's
\LL Th

¥n~j
”'mh’hni

 

 

respond to their social circumstances in whatever way they would like, it is important to
recognize that structural realities nearly always weigh into the choices individuals make
through their acts of agency. Therefore, although agency can be seen as “free will”, this
view does not place enough appreciation on the dynamics between structure and agency
in influencing the choices individuals are faced with in the actual realities of their lives.

Another common approach is to equate agency with resistance. This can be a
useful way to investigate agency because spaces of resistance are often fruitful sites to
see agency in action. But if one goes so far as to equate all acts of agency to resistance it
becomes difficult to explain why individuals ofien choose to comply with social
structures rather than resist them. If resistance is used to define agency, it must be placed
within the context of larger social structures which can incorporate and explain acts of
non-resistance as well. Paul Willis’s (1977) book Learning to Labor helps to show the
complexity of the concept of resistance. Although the lads in his study feel as though they
are resisting against the oppression of society, their acts of agency actually operate to
keep them within their own social class and do not help them change their social
situation. Therefore, attributing agency solely to acts of resistance is not as
straightforward as may be assumed. Individuals often use their agency in different forms
and to varying degrees, whether it is for conscious resistance or complicit acceptance of
social norms. Therefore, agency cannot effectively be equated with resistance, per se.

In developing a definition of agency one needs to keep in mind a number of
issues. These include: where does agency lie (in the individual, collectively, or outside of
the individual)? Is it intentional or conscious? What role does rationality play in agency?

Does any of this matter? In providing a definition for agency I will begin with Aheam’s

70

 

rational. "bare . I
spin?) to act" {Alt

l
Aeenx :le

...‘l'ith' - A a: ‘v
“newt >0tlt‘t...n
6:. ptflellm‘d l‘x

eras-send as :re

1',"w'l' ~
Ath >3allk 'il\ )Il JkI

"en," “ “

.e: .u. neeessaril'

.....m , .
«Lunlns L0 .‘i‘tll

{Pg-«Ch ~1
«blurb [13th U

{N

rinse-(us mr be

‘
..‘?Jen’ 5a
.. -s . o.
|-le_re.-cr71p‘
A is.
C

"i-t“'
fiat», dut-

.t...llt§P13£cd .

sen“ * '
C‘Kulhg 5L“. in k

C No.
£15 -
‘WL-‘l

Cl Slmettr

_v
‘1,

_ l
"N.

FlLLdiS to an a

1“” a. ‘
. . .
s"-~'v ‘ lL~

. ‘v ““1! EL ch

 

provisional, “bare bones” definition: “Agency refers to the socioculturally mediated
capacity to act” (Aheam, 2001, p. 112). But 1 will need to expand upon this definition.
Agency lies within the individual, but only as a social being embedded in a larger,
collective sociocultural context. Therefore, agency may be used for collective action
when performed by groups of individuals with common interests. Although agency could
be considered as free will, it still must be utilized within the constraints of social, cultural,
and symbolic structures placed around the individual. But agency is conscious action
which is not determined by outside structures or institutions. Agency is rational in the
sense that individuals make choices based upon self interest, whether these actions may
seem rational to others or not. Agency can be performed through acts of resistance, but
does not necessarily need to be so. Indeed, many acts of agency are accommodating and
conforming to social norms. Agency is conscious in the sense that individuals make
decisions based upon what they know, although this “knowledge” may be impacted by
unconscious (or below conscious) ideologies imposed upon them by hegemonic forces.
Therefore, referring back to Bourdieu’s concept of habitus, agency is limited within the
constraints placed upon individuals by economic, social, cultural, and symbolic
structures, but, in contrast to Bourdieu, it is not necessarily determined by these
structures. Structures limit the choices available to individuals, but agency allows
individuals to act against, or within, these structures. One of the main points about
agency is that even though individuals can choose how to act, they cannot choose the
consequences of those actions. Therefore, agency allows for individuals to attempt to
make changes to their lives, but individuals do not have control over what their acts of

agency end up producing in actuality.

71

 

..‘
" v-

 

 

lllt't. this mt
firming of :h;
£13,235:ch Cddkii
fislrger 50:15:}. .1:
Marquesas or
Tifi‘i’.‘§68 Web :n'

F'V‘igu.
“‘"~‘.!l\,t

l.
5.3mm,

in:hi_\ grud‘i
....“ ‘34 _
“”31”“; dbfl\e [ll

IT'Ip'n m
i, *«hkl‘XKSIan‘
:

-. l

h

. ”A
“-5

”’5',” ~.
Mumnfiu] dm

.. ire {Up dUh‘fiin

With this multifaceted definition of agency I will attempt to gain a more complex
understanding of the actions and attitudes that local stakeholders in Lesotho take towards
language and education policy. By utilizing Bourdieu’s theory of different forms of
capital, I will analyze the constraints and opportunities placed upon these stakeholders by
the larger society, and attempt to understand how society (from local to global) restricts
the consequences of agency in individuals. At the same time, by investigating the various
ideologies which influence people’s choices and acts of agency, along with the realities
of their lives, I will attempt to illustrate the link between macrosocial structures and

microlevel acts of agency.

Policy as Practice

In this study I incorporate the theories of ideology, capital, and agency, as
discussed above, to utilize a policy as practice approach for analysis. A policy as practice
approach views language and education policy issues from the ground up, placing
policies as only one factor involved in what happens in actual practice. This is in contrast
to the traditional approach to education policy studies, which typically analyze policies
from the top down, starting at the policy itself and investigating its effectiveness as it is
applied on the ground.

In more traditional policy studies scholars analyze the theoretical foundations of
policies, investigate their effectiveness under various contexts, compare findings from
different studies, and then use these findings to try and develop the most practical and
useful policies available to particular contexts. Indeed, the local contexts for which the

policies are intended become an important consideration in the development of policy

72

 

 

' clan
DUI 5115 '

A 1‘ .
hu‘leyu

J “

. i
1111*. 5mm 1..

V l
. t - - -, ..‘
1w. rmrtm

.iitwifi'nil '“ :"J

. Huh“...-
5

..i w l ' t
I: ” “cup-c a:

a.» ,
I

l 1

I V l
‘Qr _} ‘
...: Mimi-.UML‘T‘

.
c
’b

h.
«51: 7“ ‘ -|-

' m gulf CIT

A pl'ili} it:

all“.
9.4;“!
«
.. , Ia. pr,
ilgil
‘ k
“#31“ 9 I

s.‘
L .
‘ ‘d‘ r-‘v , l
‘\p LI.
:1: la" ’1:.
Q‘ “J
I
\

choices, but they are the end point, rather than the beginning. Traditional education
policy studies tend to begin with identifying “problems” that need to be addressed and go
about researching the best ways in which to address those problems. This can be
problematic because local stakeholders are often not involved in the process of
determining what the “problems” are and how they can be addressed, even though they
are the people who are most directly impacted by policy decisions. Even in cases where
local stakeholders are incorporated into the process of determining which problems need
to be addressed and in the formulation of policies, the ultimate decisions are most often
made at the top levels after taking into consideration the voices of local stakeholders and
their particular contexts.

A policy as practice approach, in contrast, takes the actual practice, non-practice,
or counter-practice of policies as the unit of analysis rather than the policy itself. Instead
of trying to determine what problems need to be addressed and which policies are most
likely to appropriately and effectively address them, a policy as practice approach
investigates how policies are appropriated through actual practice on the ground level and
the factors which influence those practices. Therefore, instead of analyzing whether and
why policies work, a policy as practice approach attempts to examine all of the factors
involved in the actual implementation, reconfiguration, and/or rejection, of language and
educational practices, of which the policy itself is only one factor. In other words, it
attempts to understand the extent to which policies play as one of many different factors
influencing language and educational practices on the ground. Under this type of
analysis, language and education policies are viewed as only one of many influences that

play into the actual practices of local educational stakeholders. Other such factors include

73

 

 

 

. ‘ .
. .. , ~ -. - ,1
.305: Lihfl‘u

Q
‘r

ECAJSOI 1:;
$23M 1‘ OHS k
...-ol- 9‘. u
.1: t:7. a. th.

, . .
9 "J ' 7 . -.
.. LA 33m at E

.3
“l5 And
4- i
:r‘ ', Y‘ 'v-
.‘u 3. ll} JAIL:

J '0'... .. $
~ still .'€.Lcr Li

‘9». '
uIn’“ “in 3'75"“
.... ...; ~‘ __u..
g .

s

‘;‘1.'_] . a
‘ \ -.
“......35 ..dz':

F

‘ J? i.‘
" W'JJIIIn

Vii-.3" .
4]". pm":
i-‘[:\‘ and d,

”iffy.
”‘51.”3‘ ‘
'\ I ‘1‘ \
\. “ I‘K
A .
54%.-
\~)

those discussed earlier in this chapter, namely, ideological influences, sources of capital,
and acts of agency. Within this study, language and education policies are analyzed
largely as one of many ideological influences which are imposed at the national level, in
the form of the national language-in-education policy, and implemented at the local level,
in the form of each school’s stated or assumed language policy.

The intent of this study is to understand what role, if any, policies have in the
decisions and practices of local educational stakeholders in Lesotho primary schools. If
we can better understand the role and degree that policies play in educational practices,
from the ground up, then we can gain a more realistic perspective on the influence policy

decisions have on the actual attitudes and practices of local stakeholders.

Conclusion

This chapter has provided a brief overview of the field of language policy and
planning (LPP) with its implications on language in education policies (LiEP) in Africa.
As was discussed earlier, the field of LPP has gone through numerous changes in focus
and perspectives. Many of the theories and models used in the past have been criticized
for being either too prescriptive (as was the case in phase 1 of LPP) or too deterministic
(as was the case in phase 2 of LPP), and therefore, they do not provide sufficient
explanatory power to understand how and why language policies are implemented in a
diversity, and unexpected, ways by local stakeholders in their schools and communities.
In addition, these appraoches have tended to focus more on language policy issues at the
macro-level with a propensity to address issues from the top-down. As a result, the

attitudes, needs, and interests of local stakeholders are often assumed — and sometimes

74

 

' ’ l . .
is: " m or .gnur.
i. .t
2.1.1125. mung \\ 1...

I

an”. 33*“ V.‘ n
«lb->I\“ A.“ .5

l
; gn'lt \

‘ N“ ‘ A v, .‘1 ‘

}b‘i-5l§tlil‘ app: 5\Id

. ‘,
E'hlcyw i‘ \ ’)
«LL-d;e politik.‘ ill

.,....,, d ..
Junlntif: mm"

LEPIssuss m lcwti
tins percent of L:
is} inemcnI. or .i.
mam. As his '5:
atria: 11d pritzigc
11:75 COKE“ 0t; ‘13-!

'Mq.‘ u
l, 1'
‘risi

W ‘ ‘
0?." ”‘1
\ 3 3.4

II.

."h‘

‘H "f. L; ‘

i.‘ .1 h
§ i- ’
7 /“ 4 her.

. V
tgli

disregarded or ignored — within their theories. Consequently, the complexity of local
realities, along with the diversity of ways in which different groups and individuals can
interpret language policies and apply them in practice, is overlooked, or at least not
sufficiently appreciated. Therefore, endeavors to better understand the dynamics of
language policies in Africa and efforts to improve their impact at schools have often been
ineffective and incomplete.

In this study I propose to take a more micro-level, policy as practice approach to
LiEP issues in Lesotho by looking at the ways local stakeholders at various primary
schools perceive of language and education policy issues at their schools along with how
they implement, or do not implement, the policies in practice through their own choices
and actions. As has been discussed above, in order to understand local stakeholders’
attitudes and practices, I will utilize three different theoretical frameworks. These include
(I) the concept of language ideologies and how ideologies from a multiplicity of levels
impact people’s attitudes and actions towards language policy and practice, (2)
Bourdieu’s concepts of economic, cultural, social, and symbolic capital and how they act
to constrain and limit the choices which are available to different stakeholders in a
diversity of ways, and (3) a concept of agency which provides space for individuals to
make choices for their own lives and their families’ lives, but only within the limitations
and constraints imposed upon them by larger societal structures and ideologies. By
utilizing these three theoretical frameworks I hope to come to a better understanding of
how local stakeholders perceive of language policy issues at their schools and why they
decide to implement and act towards these policies in a variety of ways. In doing so, I

hope to gain a better appreciation of the complex mix of factors which contribute to the

75

 

. . !
‘.. ' n I h' ‘
lig‘tfilrl “ARE?

i-vil‘vl‘, l‘7l
H Nd.

lkbb. hiklu1ii‘
.

- .
SWPV'T‘D' ' v
.u-ba lit-Nab. ‘61.!

 

 

 

ways in which policies are put into practice at the ground level. By understanding the
local dynamics involved in policy implementation at the micro-level we will hopefully

better understand the implications of policy decisions which are made at the macro-level.

76

EgfivAIV-‘h 1" T
5.155.4l4‘xs. l

r

li’;v'> l
1.1T? OT; .

fi 1
'PJ Ty)n!
...... Lid. 7i
N

 

 

u'P— ’

I.’ . _ '
"l Id; 'Wb\1.
lyxnbl\_ "‘1’.“

ram-h has {

III. l]. T '
-- "‘ o . .
.. ..sd. :35:

7 v
“r.«l'_ 1

A ,4 ‘ - - ..
‘7‘“ Mike: ‘1

L”; \l‘

I

--~\. In.”
4:“:

 

Chapter 3: Methodology and Research Setting

Introduction

One of the main motivations for this study came from what I saw as a lack of
appreciation for local perspectives and an understanding of micro-level dynamics in the
literature on language in education policy issues in Africa. As was discussed in Chapter
2, the great majority of research on language policy and planning has focused on macro-
level dynamics which make broad assumptions about the implications of language
policies throughout the world and/or at the regional and national level. As a result, this
research has ofien discounted, or even ignored, the perspectives, practices, and attitudes
of local stakeholders. In recent years, there has been an increasing push for research
which takes a greater look at local dynamics and attempts to better understand the
perspectives and realities of those affected directly by policies on the ground level. This
dissertation is intended to contribute to that research endeavor.

In this study I hope to gain a better understanding of the perceptions, attitudes,
constraints, and opportunities which play into the ways that language and education
policies are received and implemented by teachers, students, and their families at the
school level. By doing so, I hope to gain a better appreciation of how and why policies
come to be realized in diverse, and often unexpected, or unintended, ways. With these
research goals in mind, I must also be mindful that in conducting such a study I run the
risk of imposing my own assumptions and prejudices into the study’s research and
analysis. Therefore, I must be careful to acknowledge and clarify my own situated

position within this study while also taking precautions to utilize methods which will help

77

 

 

 

 

I- mv"_"';"

‘U ul...I-3"
-

a: ”-1521.

 

v
"I: R: ’7‘ “

LL‘L . ..Li

. .
“‘P'~ 9

a ' "P
‘n- "‘5

,_
.,

In.
K“

 

V‘“

 

”1‘ 41‘.
.1

to mitigate, or at least account for, my own biases. In this chapter I intend to explain my
own positionality with regards to why I have selected certain methodologies in
approaching this study, what has motivated me to conduct this research, how I view my
role as a researcher, and how this all impacts my relationship with, and understanding of,
the participants from this study. In addition, I will describe the methods I have adopted in
this study for data collection and analysis and give a description of the various sites in

which the research for this study took place.

Epistemological Considerations

Initially for this study I wanted to look at the issues of language policy in
education from a local level. I wanted to see what types of lived realities and every day
decisions play into the attitudes that parents, teachers, and students have towards the use
of language at schools and towards education in general. In doing so, I hoped to gain a
better understanding of the role that agency plays in the ways policies become
implemented in actual practice. I wanted to understand not only what constraints are
placed upon individuals, families, and schools by the structures imposed upon them, but
also what opportunities are presented to them through the systems and resources available
to them. I hoped to be able to portray a situation in which not only limitations, but also
opportunities present themselves to local participants. It is within these limitations and
opportunities that actors make decisions which influence not only their own lives, but
society around them. By conducting an ethnographic study of local actors in Lesotho

schools I hoped to be able to draw out some of the complexities of these lived realities

78

 

~94?
)3.

‘;L \‘L lab

.4~ ..n
.. .

. .
“flunk ...

[r ,-
lA \.

1"- u

:4.
.l‘
"M‘uu' J.
I I

 

"5*; [a way,-

.' , ‘

a.» .\ ‘_,H‘
5

..'-,‘fil-x‘sy.
"‘:-I§\k.§

 

3'.
'l
u- c. ' '
ut\,._‘u\p _
>8 \.
<§ln ..‘

 

 

 

 

and come to a better understanding of how they influence larger policies and practices in
education.

In order to accomplish this type of study, I felt it was best to use a qualitative
approach which incorporated a number of different ethnographic methods. I planned to
be in Lesotho for close to a year, so I would have the time to delve deeper into the
everyday interactions and issues facing the lives of local stakeholders. This would allow
me to gain a more complex understanding of the dynamics involved in language policy
and practice at the school level. As Denzin and Lincoln (2005) point out, qualitative
research has gone through a rather long history of transitions, changes, introspection, and
uncertainty. It has often been questioned on its merits as “scientific” research, and, at
times, qualitative researchers have succumbed to these criticisms by trying to follow the
lead of quantitative “hard” research by incorporating systematic, verifiable methods and
expectations. Although these efforts have helped to develop a variety of approaches to
conducting qualitative research, and have established rigorous standards, the quest for
validity has often overlooked the inherent nature of qualitative research. That is to say
that qualitative research, in its very nature, is an interpretive process. As Geertz (1973)
points out, what ethnographic researchers are actually doing is making interpretations of
interpretations. Therefore, qualitative research is always socially situated from the
perspective of the researcher as he or she attempts to interpret the things he or she comes
across through observations, personal experiences, the accounts of others, and various
artifacts. Denzin and Lincoln (2005) help to elaborate this point in the following passage,

There are no objective observations, only observations socially situated in the

worlds of — and between — the observer and the observed. Subjects, or individuals,

79

 

 

 

 

 

‘
0‘

0.

F“
H5

 

__ v

0|, 1‘9le ‘
-}v‘¥.\ k

.7”!

‘-L. .

 

are seldom able to give full explanations of their actions or intentions; all they can

offer are accounts, or stories, about what they have done and why. No single

method can grasp all the subtle variations in ongoing human experience.

Consequently, qualitative researchers deploy a wide range of interconnected

interpretive methods, always seeking better ways to make more understandable

the worlds of experience they have studied. (p. 21)

Consequently, in this study I do not claim to speak for or fully represent the
schools and participants I worked with, but I have rather attempted to provide as
complete of an account of what I came across in my field research and what study
participants decided to portray to me, keeping in mind that I come from my own socially
situated position which both influences my own approaches and interpretations of the
data, as well as the ways in which individuals positioned themselves and their responses
with respect to me. As such, I can never dispense of the interpretive nature of this
research and the great influence of my own biases and positionality. 1 can only attempt to
account for it and take as many precautions as possible by incorporating what Denzin and
Lincoln (2005) refer to above as “a wide range of interconnected interpretive methods (p.
21).”

Keeping this in mind, along with the initial questions driving this research, I
decided to incorporate a grounded theory approach to this study. Grounded theory was
first introduced as method of research by Glaser and Strauss in 1967. Charmaz (2005)
claims that this method of research was first created in response to positivist criticisms of
qualitative research, claiming it is not founded in valid methodology and is not

sufficiently objective. In response, they claimed to have developed a method which

80

 

 

 

' J ‘9‘!
:filfl. :0:
march F

..g._,_,. s
of} “..uL s‘

”"93 “It; ~.<,
...l. .m s

’ ‘
‘a- 1 f‘ ,0...

dl,.‘; 1‘ H“.

l
0

Evil ID .155

 

 

 

 

derived from inductive rather than deductive processing. Therefore, rather than beginning
a research project with questions and hypotheses that can then be tested through carefully
designed experiments or “objectively” procured statistics, which was regarded as the true
way to understand things, grounded theory proposed to allow the questions to be derived
from the context and findings of the research endeavor itself. Glaser and Strauss(l967),
along with their peers, developed systematic ways to go about this type of research in
order to assure validity and verifiability.

Charmaz (2005) speaks against this type of grounded theory claiming that it is
misguided in its positivistic tendencies. She proposes that researchers interested in
adopting a grounded theory approach to their research should adopt what she refers to as
a constructivist, interpretive grounded theory. She claims, much as I have discussed
above, that it is not possible to perform “objective” qualitative research, because in
claiming to do so researchers do not make their own situated position explicit and
therefore run the risk of “elevat[ing] their own assumptions and interpretations (p. 510)”
as objective and authoritative. She goes on to state that a constructivist approach to
grounded theory acknowledges that “what observers see and hear depends upon their
prior interpretive frames, biographies, and interests as well as the research context, their
relationships with research participants, concrete field experiences, and modes of
generating and recording empirical materials. (p. 509)” Hence, such an approach should
both be explicit about the researcher’s own situated position while also incorporating
solid data collection methods which document the researcher’s observations and

interpretations while conducting research.

81

 

 

. u
..."l
..

J I
1.48 hi5 A:

-;-;:v I."

L».\.‘..s..s

”av-urn“,
..‘-er 5 . b M.

. .
~- a.
’1'", ”a
ytbsiuiu

v

'Sl'j' .37" ‘
-‘-A-‘5 .l.

‘

 

 

.,
‘15--" .
-. .\ ,
' H472.“
‘ \4
..‘
.
L" ‘5.
hlull-.1
‘\
’~‘ ,1”- _
‘1‘ m
: ~12
\F.’F|
w“ . ,
. .1 .,_ 1.
”s.

Grounded theory calls for constant reflection upon the researcher’s experiences
and the findings which are being discovered through the interpretive frameworks the
researcher brings with him. This then leads to further questions which arise from the
interpretation of earlier findings, which can be investigated in greater detail. As such,
grounded theory is a constant process which requires reflection, introspection, and
reinvestigation on the part of the researcher, in consultation and dialogue with the
research participants. Hence, grounded theory has been viewed by many scholars as
inductive reasoning, but as Charmaz (2005, pp. 509-510) points out,

No qualitative method rests on pure induction — the questions we ask of the

empirical world frame what we know of it. In short, we share in constructing what

we define as data. Similarly, our conceptual categories arise through our
interpretations of data rather than emanating from them or from our
methodological practices. Thus, our theoretical analyses are interpretive

renderings of a reality, not objective reportings of it.

Research Questions

Therefore, as I prepared to go to Lesotho to conduct field research for this study, I
did not have any specific questions, or hypotheses, for which I intended to answer or
confirm. Instead, I had overriding issues which I intended to explore and try to
understand better. As such, in consultation with my committee, I felt that this study called
for a more inductive approach where I would be lead initially by a general inquiry, thus
allowing me to develop and explore more specific questions as I came to a better

understanding of the specific context and dynamics of the schools and participants I

82

 

V' ~o'31‘

I‘Li.,\hu \\

 

"
TR“ .3 a
L'~.It‘ii\ r;
‘ L‘."~'\‘
”"7\ "“45.

,.
J.Jl'l.v'.n1'
V~~ '
. " hill...

‘A\\

(\g‘er‘ u
"- . r
k L

3‘1,
L 'K‘li‘l;
Ifii< .x' Q\‘
\ ‘l
A
‘

‘ v
Ajk‘

worked with. The guiding inquiry which I agreed with my dissertation committee to
pursue was stated as follows:

For this study I will be looking for the extent and variety of viewpoints on

language use in schools by seeking as many different views from stakeholders as I

can reasonably find.

With this guiding inquiry in mind I set out to conduct my initial field research.
This helped to guide my initial explorations while keeping the study open to various
possible research questions and to allow the research context to drive more specific
questions. Although the central focus of my field research continued to be on language
policy and practice at the school level, early on I began to realize that I needed to expand
this scope of inquiry to include non-language issues relating to schools and local
stakeholders’ lives.

This was because through my observations, conversations, and questionings,
which were, initially, focused solely on language issues from local stakeholders’
perspectives, I did not seem to be getting anywhere interesting or new. My findings
largely confirmed what I had anticipated; that most local stakeholders preferred to use
English as the language of instruction at schools over Sesotho because English was
viewed to be more important and valuable as an international language and the language
which would lead to greater education and job opportunities. This information did not
seem to explain why people felt this particular way and what motivated them to operate
in certain ways with regard to language practice at school. Therefore, I expanded my

general inquiry to look at larger issues around education and schooling in Lesotho.

83

One of the major issues that seemed to continuously come up in my conversations
and interactions with stakeholders at all different levels (local and national) was the
disparity between the quality of education provided at private English Medium schools
compared to that being provided at government schools. This was usually brought up
within the context of the Free Primary Education (F PE) program which had first been
implemented in 2000. Therefore, I decided to pursue more specific questions regarding
(1) the differences between private and public schools in Lesotho and (2) the perceptions
that people had towards F PE and its impact on primary education in the country, in
addition to my more specific questions on language attitudes and practices at schools.
These additional research questions helped to open up much more fruitful observations,
interactions, and interviews with participants. They helped to put my overriding question
into a more holistic perspective. In other words, I began to see that language policy issues
at schools only gain relevance when they are placed within the larger context of
schooling itself as it is situated in the larger society. I began to recognize that language
issues must not be seen in isolation, but rather as one of many components in a much
more complex system of education.

With these research questions in hand I was able to conduct more directed
research through my participation, observations, interviewing, artifact collection, and
data analysis. Upon returning to the US. from the field, I struggled for quite some time to
make sense of all of these data. I searched for different theoretical frameworks which
could help me to analyze and better understand what I had discovered through my field
research. Eventually, through writing a series of memos, sharing these ideas with

members of my committee and other scholars, and extensive reading of the literature, I

84

 

 

 

i. in...
. .JL

IfQECt’ L

I734; ‘Hh-J
B”-“Ay\

\l

I am

 

decided upon the theoretical frameworks which have been discussed in detail in Chapter

2. These concepts of language ideologies, various forms of capital, and the role of agency
have helped me to connect the larger issues surrounding education in the context of the

study participants’ lives to more specific questions related to education and language

policy and practice at the schools.

After adopting these theoretical frameworks for analyzing the data, I was able to

decide upon the ultimate research questions which have guided this dissertation, which I

described in Chapter 2, namely:
1. What are the extent and variety of local viewpoints about and attitudes toward

language use at primary schools in Lesotho?
2. What factors in local stakeholders’ lives influence these various viewpoints,
attitudes, and practices with regards to language and school practices?
With these research questions in mind, I would like to now explore my own

socially situated pOSition as a researcher and its implications for my relationship with the

Participants of this study.

Ethical Considerations
As I have discussed above the importance of being explicit in portraying one’s

own Situated position as a researcher, I intend to do so in this section.

I am a middle-class, white American man who was born and raised in the
mo‘mtain west region of the United States. I come from a rather well educated (at least in
the WeStern sense of the term) family with a father who has been a law professor for

nearly 3 5 years and a mother who received her bachelor’s degree and taught in

85

elementary education for a few years before becoming a full-time, stay-at-home mother

to raise her six children. As a result, I have come to believe in the importance of formal
education and the opportunities it brings to one’s own life. Indeed, all of my siblings have
received a higher education to differing degrees.

In many ways I was raised in a very homogeneous society, growing up and going
to school with people who looked and acted just like me with the same expectations and
social norms, one of which was to receive a good education and continue on to the
college level. We did not question positions of power and the structure of society because
life seemed to work out quite well. I largely viewed the world as if the reality I lived in
was normal, ideal, and expected.

When I was six years old my family moved to Frankfurt, Germany for two years.
There I attended an international school where in my class of 25 students there were 20
nationalities represented. This was an eye-opening experience for me as a young child,
which helped me to see the cultural diversity of the world in a very real way as I played
and hung out with children from all over the world. In another sense, it gave me a false
Perception of the diversity of the world because all of us came from similar economic
backgrounds, and therefore I did not gain an appreciation of the economic diversity of the
World. In any sense, these two years had a great impact on my life and made me see
things from a slightly different angle than most of my peers back in the US.
My first experience in Africa came in 1995-1997 as a l9-year-old volunteer
missiOnary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a Mormon missionary,
I Spent two years, at my family’s own expense, in South Africa and Lesotho. Most of my

ti . . . . . . .
me 0n misswn was spent in South African townships and in the outskirts of Maseru,

86

 

 

l' .
.3. un— lrl
AT.“ ‘. .1
s
l

 

'[ ‘ q t. -
‘-H-,5 l

tlx

......"

 

 

 

~ .
i 4.. \‘ray
sf
.
.“
.li-f‘.

 

Lesotho proselytizing with families and individuals in their homes. On a daily basis, with
the companionship of a fellow missionary, we would go from home to home in local
neighborhoods and teach our beliefs to anyone who was interested or willing to hear from
us. I spent nearly 11 months of the two years in Maseru, Lesotho, with the majority of the
time spent in the area of the city where I conducted research for this study. Through this
experience I was able to gain a rather immersed experience of the lives of Basotho from
different socio-economic backgrounds as we would discuss family, spiritual,
occupational, and other personal life experiences with those who were willing to talk to
us. In addition, we spent time providing volunteer service at hospitals, schools, and
community centers.

I cannot deny that this experience has greatly shaped my own perceptions and
biases towards Lesotho society. Having said this, though, I cannot effectively reflect
“POD the specific ways in which it has impacted my perceptions and views. I can only
aCkHOWledge that it has influenced my biases and try to be aware of the potential

influence my own history has impacted my interpretations and approaches to this study.
I’m Sure in some ways my missionary experience has given me a false sense of
mnderstanding” the people I came in contact with and their way of life, but on another
level it has given me some valuable insights into the lives of those I worked closely with
in this study. For this dissertation study I worked with two families that I had previously
develOped close relationships with in those missionary years and have kept in constant
ContaCt with ever since. The rest of the participants were people whom I was introduced

to during the year of my dissertation field research.

87

 

 

ll} 0!

... 1‘.DJ{ 30‘
Chuck“. 5 ..

[51753331 I

l

" ‘l
1““‘1H I an)
Aliati. T3“,

l I
1.0).. .. R. ,'
--tmtl..l‘>

7» .-

.'”l ,‘n' \
mu Slot
V

In

aun- treat. 3'

I. .. ‘
TAIQX‘C

5.. ’_,_:u"" ”(kw

‘\.

My other experiences in Afiica include five different field studies in which I
conducted ethnographic research as an undergraduate student between the years 1.998-
2002. Each of these experiences were for extended periods of time from three-five
months each trip where I lived with families and individuals in their homes in villages of

Zanzibar, Tanzania (1998 and 1999), in the capital city of Zanzibar (2000 and 2002), and
in the suburbs of East London and Johannesburg, South Africa (1999, 2000, and 2001).
Through these experiences I gained a more in-depth understanding of different lifestyles
in various parts of Africa as I participated in community activities, played on local soccer
teams, helped teach at the local schools, hung out with fellow peers, etc. while also
conducting research on village kinship, local politics, personal histories, international
development, and language practices.

These experiences were influential in leading me to the initial questions which
eventually drove me to conduct this dissertation research. As I worked with primary
schools — especially in the villages of Tanzania where the children speak Swahili, but the
secondary schools use English for instruction — I began to notice that one of the greatest
barriers to students moving on to higher levels of education was their ability, or inability,

to Speak English. I came across a number of clever students who had a passion for school
leaffling and worked hard to succeed, but ultimately could not move on to high school
becallSe they did not know English well enough. From my View, the schools did a poor
job of teaching English, and there was no supportive environment outside of schools for
Children to learn and practice English. Therefore, the system of using knowledge of
English as a determining factor for students’ progress in school seemed to be an unjust

and LlIlfair practice. Consequently, I eventually decided to study linguistics and education

88

for my graduate degrees so that I could pursue this topic in greater detail and come to a
better understanding of the dynamics involved around language policy issues in Afiica,
with the ultimate goal of somehow contributing to making the system work better for
students who seemed to be disadvantaged under current language and education policy
practices.

As a PhD student at Michigan State University 1 was able to prepare for this
dissertation by receiving language instruction in the Sesotho language both on campus
and in Lesotho through a combination of Foreign Language and Area Studies (F LAS)
fellowships from the African Studies Center and the Center for Advanced Studies in
International Development at MSU. Through this and other funding 1 was able to return
to Lesotho for three months in the summer of 2004, where I studied intensive Sesotho at
the National University of Lesotho (NUL) and lived with a family I have known since
1995 . In the summer of 2005, I returned again to receive further intensive language
instruction at NUL for ten weeks and then conducted a six-week pre-dissertation,
practicum research study at a local government primary school in the outskirts of Maseru.
This school was located in the neighborhood where 1 had been living with my friend’s
family in both 2004 and 2005. For my practicum research I conducted a focused study on
the language practices of two Grade 5 teachers at the government primary school by
Video taping their teaching sessions and analyzing with them the motivations and reasons

behind their actions.
I then returned to Lesotho in February of 2007 to begin data collection for this
dissertation study. For that trip I came with my wife, who is an African from Ghana, and

a 6‘Tnonth old daughter. Due to safety concerns for my family and matters of

89

..'.u

.o '1”

.. t.-.

..- ~—
.1‘ .
yo...

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I .
I

 

convenience we decided to stay in the city limits of Maseru. Therefore, for the majority
of time during the study I was not able to live in the neighborhoods of the students and
teachers of the schools I worked with, as I had in previous years. This created a greater
distance for me fi'om the schools in both geographical and personal terms. On most
occasions I drove my own car to the schools, which situated me in a certain social
position to the teachers and students. It also kept me away from the everyday experiences
and interactions that I could have had outside of the school grounds if we had lived in the
community where the school was located. During the last two months of this study, my
wife and daughter went to Ghana, which allowed me to move back in with my friend’s
family, live in the local community of the schools, and focus on interviews and field
research within the homes and community of the participating students and their families.
The reason I go over this personal history of my experiences and involvement in
Lesotho in such detail is to put into greater perspective where I am coming from as a
researcher and what I brought with me into the interpretations of this study and my
relationship with the study participants. From my point of View, I have spent over five
years living in settings similar to the ones where the schools in this study operated, and
therefore I have some basis of understanding different patterns and trends which are
Common in their communities. On the other hand, I am a white American with my own
cuhllral baggage which can never be unloaded and is often difficult to self-identify. This
also places me in a position of privilege and, to some degree, power with the participants
of the study. I was free to come and go at the schools and could participate closely in the
Classl‘Ooms or sit back and observe. I did not represent the government or Ministry of

Education and Training (MOET), but many participants, especially students and parents,

90

may have been uncertain of where I stood or who I represented. All of these had an
impact on my research findings and the ways in which participants decided to relate and
act towards me.

By the time of the study I had achieved advanced level of proficiency in Sesotho,
which gave me access to conversations, discussions, and lessons which were conducted
in the local languages, but I also had limits to my spoken fluency in the language, which
created barriers to full expression on my part and misinterpretations across
communication. As a result, I utilized research assistants to accompany me during most
Of my interviews with students and their families to provide them with the comfort to use
Whatever language they wanted to. But this also added levels of complexity to the
dynamics of relationships and expectations from study participants.

I have my own preconceptions of how education “should” look and what entails a
quality education. I tried to make these views explicit and evident during interviews and
Conversations with participants, but this was not always possible, and 1 cannot assume
that my messages came across as intended. I am sure the ways I approached interview
clllcstions and field observations influenced the responses and actions of participants, but
I Cannot account for all of these. I can only acknowledge that I came into this study with
my own personal history, my own experiences, my own preconceptions, my own position
0f power, and my own biases. I can only try to account for these in this study.

Having said all of this, I must emphasize again that the findings of this study are
not meant to be representations of the realities of the schools and lives of those I worked
With, They are documentations of my own interpretations and experiences through the

different sources of data collected in this study. Because, as Denzin and Lincoln (2005)

91

remind us, qualitative research is more about the situated interpretations of experiences
and observations than it is about the depictions of a single, traceable reality, I believe this
does not render the research for this study meaningless, but rather situates it within the
interpretive frameworks from which it is derived. This, in turn, should allow the reader to
receive the information of this study not as facts of reality, but as one account of the
dynamics and interactions which are involved around language and educational policy as

it is received and put into practice by local stakeholders at the school level.

Res ear-ch Methods and Design

The data collected for this study is largely ethnographic in nature. There were
three main activities for data collection, namely, participant observation at schools and
S“11‘I‘()unding communities, interviews with teachers, parents, students, and
adIninistrators/education officials, and document analysis of educational materials,
St“dies, and policy statements. Although I was constantly engaged in each of these three

data collection activities, they happened in three major phases.

Phase one

The first phase of data collection was participant observation at selected schools.
The initial purpose of participant observation were to become familiar with the schools
and how they operated on a daily basis, build working relationships with teachers,
Students, and others involved at the school level. In addition, 1 used participant
0bStarvation to specifically observe the language and teaching practices of teachers and
Students in their classrooms. I started first at a government school in one of the major

neighborhoods on the outskirts of Maseru, the capitol city of Lesotho. I specifically

92

selected this school to start out with because it was the school at which I had conducted
pre-dissertation, practicum research two years earlier in 2005. Therefore, I already had a
working relationship with the teachers and staff and was quite familiar with the setting
with in which the school operated. In addition, I was fortunate to be able to work with the
same group of students, who were in Grade 5 at the time and Grade 7 for the dissertation
study, with whom I had conducted my pre-dissertation research. Thus, not only was I
fami liar with them, but they were also familiar with me being in their classroom. During
my previous study I had video taped the students and teachers in their classrooms, which
method I did not use for this study, so, my presence was somewhat less intrusive. I
seemed to be able to fit into the classroom setting much more quickly and rather
seamlessly the second time around. Another advantage for me starting at this school was
that I had a good understanding of the surrounding neighborhoods, because I had
Previously lived with a family nearby in 2004 and 2005. As mentioned before, I was
Originally introduced to the neighborhood when I had worked in the area as a young
missionary ten years earlier. Since the time of my mission 1’ have made constant, almost
yearly visits to friends in the area, so I was able to see how the area has changed, and not
changed, over the period of a decade.

I purposefully started participant observation slowly at the school, focusing on
Working closely with the teachers and students. I spent most of the time helping the
teaCher with their lessons, marking students’ work, eating lunch with the teachers,
hanging out with the kids during breaks, and sometimes standing in and teaching when

the teachers were not present. I took notes when 1 had the opportunity, but participation

1n the classroom was the main priority.

93

vr "$.31"

-.*.. ...».t
.

 

V3

.‘sL.:L._\

 

. . l
A- ’de"
“‘45..
an” r
">~L _‘
5
...;I- ‘;'
-.. 'm‘.
..‘. >
'H: all
\t
,.
5;
w,

 

Through these activities I was able to develop relationships with the teachers and
get their feedback on what they were doing and why, learn more about their personal
histories, attitudes, and motivations, and gain a more personal account of their lived
experiences at the school. To the degree that was possible .1 attempted to do the same with
the students. It was a little more difficult to establish close relationships with the students
because of their greater numbers, their young ages, cultural norms, which expect students
to show deference and respect to adults, and, at times, communication difficulties (due to
my lack of full fluency in Sesotho and their difficulties with English). Nonetheless, by
working closely with them in the classroom, and through conversations with their
teacher, I was able to get a good sense of the students’ backgrounds, their personalities,

and their school performance. These were all important pieces of information which later
helped guide me in deciding which students’ families I would eventually visit and
interview. This familiarity with the students also provided me with a richer understanding
0f the context within which my conversations and group interviews with the students, as
Well as visits and interviews with their parents were situated.

The field notes I took at the schools focused largely on the teaching practices of
the teachers (e. g., methods, strategies, formats), the specific language practices of both
the teachers and students, and the academic performance of the students. Initially I
Wanted to see what the differences in classroom practices were between government and
Private schools. I recorded specific phrases and statements the teachers used and the
respouses students gave to their teachers. I noted different teaching strategies utilized by
the teachers. I also tried to document other influences on the classroom which would

have affected the students and their learning environment. Things like outside

94

 

 

.. .—.ul I"

 

4‘. ‘r'. "1

Hull-oh ..'

 

r-w'v‘r
l
lfih...»- u

.n
.

”mu .‘

. s
ml.l.,i
-.'.

J. "

"3»..u.

P L.

(4-

~x‘.., ‘ _

‘ ..
. |.,
. _.\'

33

h «— ‘H
“butll

 

 

 

 

distractions, teacher’s presence or non-presence, student disobedience, available
materials, classroom objects (desks, posters, chalkboards, chalk), student supplies, etc.
were recorded to provide greater description of each classroom and their differences
within and between schools.

The most significant observations I was able to make occurred when I was
actively involved in the classroom during marking of students’ work, assisting in the
teaching of lessons, trying to help maintain classroom management, and working
individually with students. These instances helped me to see on a more personal,
individualized level how students responded to their instruction in the classroom.
Through this work I could see when students acted as though they understood and
followed along while the teacher taught the class as a whole but were not able to
effectively complete the assignments given to them during individual work. I was able to
see which students who seemed to be disengaged during instruction time were able to
competently show they understood the material being taught on an individualized basis.
In Short, I was able to see how each student reacted and interacted with classroom
inStl’uction and activities in various, individualized ways. I noted these differences
Whenever I could, which helped to later determine which students would be selected for
more focused interviews with them and their parents.

Phase two
The second phase of my data collection was in conducting more focused
interviews with teachers, parents, students, and administrators. These interviews came in

various forms, depending on who was being interviewed.

95

 

 

 

 

-.
-v “d

1...», V ..

' 1:“

 

 

D‘,

l. .
,-_|‘
~., ,
..'” ‘pli
‘3 “ ...
l
"19-
u,_ ’

' v

: v‘
. ., .

..‘
_<. _
,L-‘7‘n
.._'

‘ 2v
‘~~_ u

c .

 

 

 

Because I spent a great amount of time at schools working with teachers in their
classrooms I had many conversations with teachers in a variety of forms. During
participant observation I constantly asked questions and learned from the teachers while
they also asked questions of me. Through these informal conversations I was able to
develop more focused, semi-structured interviews with the teachers. These more formal
interviews usually took place after I had worked with a particular teacher for at least a
couple of weeks to ensure there was already a relationship built and some common
ground to work from. Using open-ended interviews, each went in its own direction, but
there were common questions which I used to guide them all. I usually started with
questions about the teacher’s background and personal history in education and what

motivated them to become a teacher. I would ask about their opinions and attitudes
towards education in general and how they felt about the education system in Lesotho. I
then would ask questions related specifically to language use in school, their attitude
t(W'vard the current language policy, their thoughts on the importance of Sesotho in
education versus that of English and what role each language played at school and in the
larger society. I would also ask questions specifically about their particular school and
Classroom practices which had arisen from my participant observation. The majority of
these interviews were recorded on a digital audio recorded and later transcribed. They
Were all conducted in English with the teachers.

Due to the young age of the students it was difficult to conduct more formal types

0f interviews with them. Beyond casual conversations with the students during school
houl‘s, I conducted a few focus group interviews with groups of 6-12 students. In most

cases, even at the best English Medium schools, language was a problem. My proficiency

96

in Sesotho allowed for me to ask basic questions of the students, but my lack of fluency
inhibited me from delving into any topic at any sort of depth. I tried to use a translator
with a few groups of students, but I found this got in the way of my main purpose of
getting students to express freely their feelings about school and the role of language at
school, so I discontinued using a translator. I found that with another adult in the room
the students seemed to shy away from more spontaneous and open responses. This meant
that my interviews with the students were mainly conducted in English, so the interviews
at the private, English Medium schools were much more involved than at the government
schools. In the end, though, there was very little in specific content and direct quotes that
I was able to use from these student group interviews. On the other hand, they were quite
useful in gauging the students’ proficiency and comfort with English while also giving
me a good sense of their attitudes towards schooling, the English language, the Sesotho
language, and their perceptions of other schools.

The most difficult aspect of the interviews was deciding which parents to
interview and gaining access to them. As mentioned before, through working closely with
teachers and students in the classroom I was able to see which students performed well at
Sehool and which ones seemed to struggle. With the help of their teachers I purposefully
selected students who represented a wide range of academic and linguistic competence
Within each class. Therefore, I tried to select a few of the top performing students, a few
of the bottom performing students, and a few “average” students from each classroom.
After selecting the students I would then gain their permission and try to contact their
Parents for interviews. This proved to be quite difficult and resulted in a rather sporadic

s"‘mpling of the students’ parents. In the end, I interviewed as many parents as I could

97

 

 

 

 

.
l

l,-‘ ’Jf

-... .Vt

2‘37
* l
l‘vi‘h‘lil

5.4"“

.unn'.
5

'7 1.-

vL. «.45

1"“

.
Fr:u,
'r 1‘51”

 

 

f‘w.,‘§

 

 

gain access to. Despite these difficulties, 1 was still able to interview parents of students
that represented a variety of competency levels, based on my observations and their
teachers’ confirmations.

Interviews with the parents lasted between 30-90 minutes. The interviews covered
in formation about the parents’ and family’s backgrounds, including their educational,
employment, and residential background. I then asked them general questions about their
feelings and perceptions towards the purpose of education and why they send their
children to their particular school. I also asked questions about the parents’ involvement
in their children’s education, finding out how often they helped them with their school
Work, how often they read with their child, how often they read on their own, whether
they had reading materials at home, whether they talked to their child about school and
What they learned at school, if they ever talked to their child’s teacher or school principal,
how often they spoke English at home, if ever, and whether they felt they had any rights
01‘ power to intervene in their child’s schooling if they saw any problems. A section of
each interview focused on language issues in education, especially looking into the
Parents’ perceptions and attitudes towards the use of English as the language of
instruction at school, the role of Sesotho at schools, their views of the importance and
1'Oles of both English and Sesotho in society, and hypothetical questions about whether
they thought it would be good, or even possible, to use Sesotho as the language of
inStruction and testing at schools. The final set of questions focused on the parents’ views
about public schools, especially since the implementation of the Free Primary Education
program, their attitudes towards private English Medium schools, and their reasons and

0Plions for sending their child to either a public or private school.

98

 

”um-F”
th y‘l“
l

.1‘
ti.

, lath-lab .

..'_ a
.a l '
59“»:th

..' .1

l. SLIM)
"a: 7 h ~ 7.
d\ .‘\ll\_~k

l

' ~

I“ "1'1 \l‘
2.» K‘I‘ 1
71",}. ‘v-‘o.’
_ .o
""- slug
P "

n.7- ,

H '- r
~":“:l1d\\

gh'.__‘v
. g l) v-P‘,"
7a., 4+
.‘“H
A lit.
W
p

 

.i\;_.
. .
\I \n.”

u.“

 

The final type of interview I conducted at schools was with the principals and/or
vice-principals. These interviews ranged from one to three hours long. In these interviews
I would first ask the principals about their own background, especially focusing on their
educational background and experience. I then would ask them about their particular
school, exploring issues around the school’s history, organization, overall philosophy,
and performance. Along with these were specific questions about the teachers emplyed at
the school, their background and training, their expectations, their compensation and
benefits, their strengths and weaknesses, etc. I then would ask questions about the
students and their parents, especially about the students’ performance and discipline and
the involvement of the parents in the school and its everyday operations. Similar to the
Other interviews, I asked the principals questions about how they felt about the use of

English as the language of instruction and the role of Sesotho at their school. I asked for
them to explain their school’s specific language policy and the reasoning behind their
policy along with how they approached it in practice. I conducted at least one interview

With the principal of each school at which I conducted participant observation and with

about half of the vice-principals.

Phase three

The third phase of research was largely done near the end of my field research. In
this phase I focused more on the administrative and policy level by interviewing ministry
Officials, college officials, and principals from additional schools where I had not
coIlclucted participant observations. Early in the field research I had talked to a few
Offleials in the ministry and at the national university to get a basic overview of the

culTent situation in primary education, especially with regards to language policy and

99

 

 

practice. These later interviews focused on much more specific questions which had been
derived from months of participant observation at schools and interviews with parents,
teachers, and principals. The two main interviews I conducted with ministry officials
were with the heads of the primary and curriculum departments, namely, the chief
executive officer of primary education and the chief executive officer of curriculum and
assessment. Each of these interviews lasted about two hours and covered a great amount
of details. In both interviews I asked questions about the current language policy in
primary education, their particular views about the policy, and what direction they
foresee things going in the future with regards to language policy in education. A large
portion of each interview was dedicated to issues around the Free Primary Education
program and their experiences with it. They explained what they have done so far with
the program and their reasoning behind these action, their perceived accomplishments
and shortfalls, the constraints within which they have had to implement the program, and
their vision and plans for the future of the program.
My interviews with college officials were less formal and less structured. Much of

What I learned was through general conversations with colleagues and friends at the
teacher’s college and national university about education in Lesotho in general along with
more specific conversations about primary education and language issues in particular. I
did conduct one formal, semi-structured interview with an administrator at the Lesotho
College of Education (COE). We discussed issues around teacher training, teachers’
Performance at primary schools, his views on language policy and the role of English

VerSus Sesotho at schools, and areas of focus and concern for the COE. Much of what I

100

 

 

 

in)...

'5‘;

.b.‘-

1'"

9:."

.Bahu.

 

..i.‘.i

"-‘ i‘.
1 i'.
ad“_‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

learned from colleagues and officials at the college and university was accompanied with
research publications and study reports they provided to me.

In addition to the ministry and college officials, I conducted interviews with five
principals from schools at which I had not conducted any participant observations. I
selected these schools because of their particular reputations and histories. Two of the
schools were private schools which had relatively good reputations, but did not perform
quite as well as the private schools at which I conducted research. The other three schools
were public schools which had rather good reputations and performed better on the
national PSLE exam than the public school I had worked closely with. I interviewed with
the two private school principals to gain a better view of the variety of different types of
private schools that are operating in the Maseru area and how their experiences with
parents and students may differ. I selected the three additional public schools because
they had historically had excellent reputations when they were church-run schools before
the government took over their funding and operations under F PE. I wanted to learn from
them what their experiences with and attitudes towards the FPE program were. These

interviews were quite illuminating as to how F PE has impacted schools, both private and

Public and how the principals have responded to it.

Participant observation

As mentioned above, one of the main methods of research utilized for this study
Was participant observation. As has been explained, I incorporated different phases of
Participant observation in this study for a variety of purposes. In her discussion of
Participant observation, Purcell-Gates (2004) explains that there is a continuum of

approaches to participant observation. On one end of the spectrum the researcher largely

101

 

takes the role of an observer who is only theoretically participating by being present at
the research site. On the other end of the spectrum is where the researcher attempts to
fully immerse himself into the context and participate as fully as possible in the research
site. Purcell-Gates explains that the main determining factor for where the researcher
places himself on the continuum is the relationship that the researcher wants to establish
with the study participants. Due to the fact that my purpose of this study was to gain
access to local stakeholders’ lives and come to a better understanding of their lived
realities and the social factors which influence their educational decisions, I placed
myself more on the filll participant end of the spectrum, although not completely.

As mentioned before, I interacted closely with the students and teachers at the
school, often helping the teachers with instruction, marking of students’ work, and
maintaining classroom management. I also interacted closely with the students by helping
them in the classroom, hanging out with them on the playground, and interacting with
them in their communities. Purcell-Gates (2004) claims that it is advisable for researchers
conducting participant observations in cultural settings very different from their own to
try to become as immersed as possible in order “to begin to see and understand a different
cultural Context” (p. 102). By taking such an approach to participant observation I was
able to gain better access to the lives of students and teachers while also gaining a better
understanding and perspective of the social and cultural context of their lives and the
schools they attended.

Interviews
An important source of data for this study came from interviews. There were a

number of different types of interviews I utilized in this study. In this section I will

102

 

 

, ,
.....i 41

.. h. .... . .. ww..§.finn

.¢Q<:J 1

(HF. .

 

briefly describe each of the types of interviews I used. Spradley (1979) provides some
basic categories and explanations of the main types of interviews which are used for
ethnographic research. I will use his designations in my explanations of the different
types of interviews I utilized.

Informal Interviews — Much of the information .I collected was through various
types of informal interviews. These are basically interviews conducted while doing
participant observation fieldwork. Fontana and Frey (2008, p. 129) state that, “Many
qualitative researchers designate between in-depth (ethnographic) interviewing and
participant observation. Yet the two go hand in hand, and much of the data gathered in
participant observation come from informal interviewing in the field.” Any conversation. I
had with teachers, students, or other stakeholders helped me to gain a better
understanding of the participants’ lives and the context within which the schools

operated. Whenever I came across information which I felt was significant through these
informal interviews 1 would document them as soon as possible, either in field jottings, or
later write ups of my field notes.

Unstructured Interviews — As discussed above, after the first phase of research I
was able to identify and formulate more specific questions to pursue with my
participants. In order to do so, I utilized an unstructured interview model where I
prepared a list of questions to ask the informant during a sit-down session (usually
between 30'60 minutes long). The questions were used as a guide to the interview, and

were used for all participants from the same category. So, I had the same set of questions
prepared for teachers, a different set of questions for parents, etc. As an unstructured

mtervrew I allowed the informants the freedom to expand upon my questions, which

103

 

made each interview different. Some interviews addressed more questions than others,
but they were structured in a way so that I, as the interviewer, and the informant both had
the leeway to expand on certain topics, skip some questions, and deviate in other ways.

Group Interviews -— As explained above, I utilized group interviews with the
students due language and maturity barriers. Much like the unstructured interviews, I had
the same prepared set of questions for each group of students I interviewed, but each
interview went in a different direction from the other because there was great leeway
given to the students in their answers and I adjusted the pacing and sequencing of

questions according to the context of the interview and the information I was receiving.

Data Analysis

As an essential component to grounded theory research, data analysis should be a
constant process throughout the research endeavor. In this study, I tried to maintain this
constant analysis, interpretation, and reinterpretation of the data on a consistent basis.
This took the form of three main types of analysis.

The first type of analysis I tried to maintain on a daily basis. As I would conduct
partiCipant observations, interviews, and artifact collection during the day I would expand
upon the field notes and jottings which I had gathered and expand upon them, adding
contextual details, additional findings, and initial interpretation of what the data meant to
me and the StUdy. Periodically, roughly every two or three weeks, I would review these
expanded field notes and assess what seemed to be significant findings and patterns that

were emerging in the data. These assessments would help me redirect the focus of my

observations and guide new questions in my conversations and interactions with various

104

 

 

participants. At about the mid-point of my field research, at the time the schools took
their 6-week winter break in June and July, I conducted a major assessment of the data I
had collected thus far. This was a very useful time for me to get some distance from the
data collection context and look at issues from a broader perspective. I took a minor
“vacation” from the field to allow the information to be processed in my mind and start
afresh. When I returned to interpreting and analyzing the data I found much larger themes
which related between issues around public versus private education, along with the
implications of FPE on government schooling, and language attitudes and practices of
teachers, students, and families. 1 took the next few weeks of the winter break to consult
with scholars, researchers, and practitioners about my findings and ideas. From this mid-
study analysis and consultations with colleagues, 1 was able to design a more directed
study program which helped me to come up with more specific interview questions and
observational priorities as I began to prepare delving into intensive interviewing with
students’ families and with teachers. For the final months of the study I was able to focus
largely on these interviews, which I constantly reviewed and tweaked to fit more
consistently with my overall questions and initial findings.

The second type of data analysis occurred soon after I returned from Lesotho to
the US. At first, my return was a bit overwhelming as I tried to sift through all of the data
I had gathered during an almost year-long field research endeavor. Upon the
recommendation of my committee I drafted a number of memos in an attempt to sift

through and make sense of all of my findings. 1 shared the content of these memos with
my committee members largely through phone conversations and email exchanges. The

mam thing I StrUggled with at the time was making sense of how to connect the two

105

 

ajor themes that I saw coming from the data. These were (1) the similarities and
:“ferences I saw in the language attitudes and practices of government school
ikeholders and private school stakeholders, and (2) the different ways that government
hools Operated and were administrated in comparison to the ways in which private
hools operated. These two issues were equally interesting to me, but I did not know
)w to make sense of them together and whether I could make a connection between
em. With this uncertainty still in my mind, 1 went ahead and transcribed all of the
terviews which I was not able to transcribe in the field and continued to work on these
mnections.

The third phase of analysis entailed delving back into the literature on language
they and planning and becoming updated on current research and scholarship in the
:ld. Returning deeply into the literature after conducting field research helped me to
:w my initial questions in a new light and to begin making connections across the data.
rough consultation with committee members and other faculty with expertise related to
I research I was directed to the three theoretical frameworks which I am using to
alyze the data for this dissertation. These frameworks have helped me to make the
nnections I could not put together when I first returned from Lesotho. Upon
CabliShing these theoretical frameworks I was able to go back through the data with
igh codes to guide my analysis. These codes entailed (1) noting different moments of
:ological influences on the language practices and attitudes of research participants, (2)
entifying different forms of capital which played out in the lives and through interviews
tth participants, and (3) moments where acts of agency are revealed and significant.

90“ going through the data with these rough codes, 1 was able to see different patterns

106

 

arise and exceptions to these patterns. This led to the analysis which is represented in this

dissertation.

Research Sites

The school sites which were selected for this study were purposefully sampled

due to a number of factors. The first factor was to find an area where there was both a
government primary school and a private English Medium primary school in close
proximity to each other. By doing so I hoped to be able to compare stakeholders from
these different types of schools who lived in similar settings to each other. The residential
patterns of Basotho are somewhat unique in comparison to their surrounding neighbor
South Africa. Most of the areas outside of downtown Maseru are sprawling
neighborhoods which have incorporated and overtaken what used to be distinctive
villages. These sprawling neighborhoods and villages have old traditional huts right
alongside crowded lines of one and two-roomed flats with much larger homes dispersed
among them. Therefore, the wealthy and the poor largely live side by side. This made it
DOSStble for me to select an area where both a government school and a well-respected
private SChool were in close proximity to each other.

Another criterion I had was that the schools were viewed to be quite “typical” in
the eyes of most Basotho. I did not intend to find schools which were representative of
others, because I do not think that is completely possible. Every school has its own
unique mixture of students and teachers and other factors which can not be duplicated.

Nevertheless, in trying to identify schools which were viewed as typical, I wanted to

avoid the TiSk of working with schools which were completely out of the ordinary and so

107

 

 

unique as to be incomparable to others. The final criteria, which I developed later on

while in the field was to find private schools which had a different histories,

organizational structures, and overall philosophies than the ones I began working with. I
added this criterion because as I conducted my research I soon found that there were
many different types of private schools, even though most of them referred to themselves
as English Mediums. I wanted to gain a better understanding of their differences and see
if their differences would lead to any significant findings for this study.

Ultimately, I chose five schools at which to conduct field research. I started with
two schools, one government and one private, where I spent nearly half of the year
conducting research, visiting each school on alternating day. This helped to keep the
contrasts between the two schools fresh on my mind as I saw differences nearly every
day. It also helped me to refine my observation and interview criteria as I saw differing

patterns and contrasts emerge. The other three primary schools were later added to the
study to see how different private primary schools approached their organizational
structures, pedagogical practices, and policy implementation. In this section I will briefly
describe each school to provide a better context of where the research was conducted.

At each school I worked with Standard 4 and Standard 7 classes. The reason I
selected Standard 4 classes is because the official language policy for government
schools was that Sesotho is to be the language of instruction for all subjects (other than
English) from Standard 1-3, then they are to switch to using English as the language of
instruction f1'om Standard 4 onwards. Therefore, I wanted to observe the differences

between government schools in this grade where the language transition is made and

private SChools, which use English as the language of instruction from the beginning Of

108

schooling in Standard 1. The reason for selecting Standard 7 classes is because it is the
terminal grade for primary school, and at the end of the school year the Standard 7
students write the Primary School Leaving Exam (PSLE) which determines whether they
can move on to secondary school or not, while also ranking students according to
different classes, lst Class being the highest and 3rd Class the lowest passing score.
There is also a failing category which means the student must repeat Standard 7. I felt
that these two Standards would be the most interesting and fruitfirl for looking at issues
of language use and teaching practices because they are both such crucial transitional
years for the students.
The following is a description of each of the schools where I conducted
participant observations and worked closely with the teachers, students, and families. The
names provided in this study for the schools and participants are pseudonyms, so as to
preserve their anonymity. Therefore, any correlation with the names of other schools
and/or names of people in Lesotho is a mere coincidence and does not reflect the actual
names of those who participated in this study.
Morena Primary School
Morena Primary School was the only government school in which I spent
Significant time conducting research at the school and with its teachers, students, and
families. I did visit other government schools on various occasions, which helped to put
into perspective how “typical” Morena Primary school really was in comparison to
others. From my own observations, and through confirmation from a number of different
stakeholders at both the local and national level, Morena Primary seemed to be a rather

typical government primary school.

109

 

 

Morena Primary School was originally built in 1954 by one of the three major
churches in the Lesotho. The school began with two church-built classrooms and slowly
grew to where it now has 25 classrooms. All of the subsequent classrooms were built by
the government. The church officially operated the school and charged small school fees
up until 2000, when it opted into participating in the F PE program during its first year of

implementation. As a result, the school was suddenly required to accept all students from
the area who wanted to attend school. The numbers of student enrollment increased
tremendously. When I first conducted research for my practicum in 2005 the school
enrollment was 1,052. This was because the number of students in Standard 6, the class
which began with F PE, was nearly double the enrollments in any other grade. The
principal said the increase in numbers caused problems for the first few years, but in
subsequent years the government was able to provide additional teachers to balance it
out. The enrollment numbers in 2007 at Morena Primary were 782 students throughout
the school. The average number of student-to-teacher ratio was 31.28zl. 1n the Standard 4
and Standard 7 classes, where I conducted my research, the student-to-teacher ratio was
26.2521 and 29:] respectively. Out of the 782 students 235 (30%) were orphans, meaning
that at least one of their parents was dead. 46 of these orphans had lost both of their
parents, There were 39 orphans (37%) in Standard 4 and 37 orphans (43%) in Standard 7.
Nearly all Of the students came from the nearby area and walked to school. There are 26
teachers at Morena Primary. All of the teachers have some sort of teacher training and
qualifications, two of which received professional training after being hired as teachers,

Whlle all Of the others attended teacher training institutions to some degree.

110

The school had 25 classrooms, of which the government had built 23. The
classrooms I worked in were in relatively good shape, with cement floors, functioning
windows, and adequate desks for all students. The classrooms had minor damages, such
as cracks in the floors and ceilings, but overall they were quite comfortable and
fimctional. The classrooms were supplied with old, but useable chalkboards, closets to
store books and other equipment, and a teacher’s desk. The school reported that every
student had a desk to sit at. As part of the FPE program students were provided with a
free lunch every day. The students wore uniforms, but the school was quite relaxed in
their requirements for tidiness and completeness of uniforms. Many students had tattered
uniforms or uniforms which were either too small or too large. The only fee expected of
all students was a M1.50 (about 20 cents) sports fee. In the last three grades there was an
additional “joint scheming and testing fee” that the students had to pay, M10 (~$1.25) for
Standards 5 and 6 and M20 (~82.50) for Standard 7. From my understanding, the school
could not require the students to pay these fees, but they could deny them the sports and
testing privileges if they did not pay. Otherwise, the only real expenses that students were
required to cover was paying for their uniforms which one parent said costs a total of just
over M300 (“$45) if you buy the whole set of skirt, jersey (sweater), shirt, and tie, and
any other accessories they preferred, such as school bags, extra pencils, pens, or other
materials, etc. Through FPE the school was supposed to be given enough supplies, such
as pencils, pens, and workbooks so that the students would not have to buy them
themselves.

The PrinCipal and teachers complained about not receiving textbooks and other

materials on time and claimed they always had shortages. In my observations at the

111

 

 

 

different schools, it seemed as though the government school was nearly as well supplied
with textbooks as the private schools. The major difference was how they took care of the
textbooks. At Morena Primary many of the books were tattered with torn out pages, and
therefore were largely unusable. As a result two or three students often had to share
textbooks. But each classroom had enough textbooks to distribute throughout the class.
At the private schools I worked with, they usually owned less textbooks but were more
prudent in the ways they used them. They would often own enough books for one full
class and then coordinate between the different classes within the same grade to use them
at different times. They also took much better care of the books. I think this is because
the private schools had to pay for their own textbooks while the government schools were
provided them for free, although often late. In addition, all of the private schools I
worked with had photocopying machines in the main office, which they used frequently,
especially in preparation for the PSLE for the Standard 7 classes. This allowed the
teachers to supplement textbooks in many ways. At Morena Primary they had no such
photocopying access. When I asked the principal, she said that was one of their greatest
needs.

Dayspring English Medium Primary School

Dayspring English Medium was the private school located in the same area as
Morena Primary . The schools were about 1 kilometer away from each other. The school
was quite acceSSible as it was a few hundred meters away from the main road with a large
dirt road that Passed by. The school had gone through a rather tumultuous history in the
beginning, It Was originally part of one of the first English Medium primary schools

established in the city, which was located down town in the beginning. This school began

112

 

 

4.
.33. .... I
.4 .

in 1984. According to the principal, during the early years the original private school
went through a series of battles between the founding owner of the school and many of
the parents. As a result, a group of parents split off from the original school and
established their own private school, asking the current principal of Dayspring to be their
principal. This offshoot school started small in 1994 and battled for years to find a
sufficient location and buildings for the school. It also went through some internal
turmoil and split up once again. There are now three English Medium primary schools
successfully operating which came out'of the original school. Dayspring is one of the
most successful and prestigious of these. Eventually, after moving around to a number of
locations in town, the school was able to secure a large plot of land on the outer edge of
the larger Maseru urban area, where the school moved permanently in 1998. During
heavy traffic hours it takes at least 30 minutes to drive there from downtown. There are
many students who come from all over the city to attend Dayspring. Many of them come
in crowded vans and minibuses that the parents have pooled together for their children’s
transportation. At the end of school each day there are usually up to 20 vehicles waiting
to pick up various groups of children. The school is probably the most popular choice for
families in the area who can afford to send their children to a private school. I would
estimate that nearly half of the students at Dayspring come from the nearby area and live
close enough to Walk to school. The rest of the students have to take some form of
transportation.

The Student enrollment at Dayspring English Medium was 972 students in 2007.
During that year the school was in the process of building a large building for new

classrooms, 50 they only had 12 functioning classrooms, plus two classrooms held in a

113

 

tent rented from the government. The previous buildings they were using were temporary
structures made out of prefabricated materials. These temporary buildings had become so
old and worn down that it became necessary to replace them. As a result, during 2007
there was a great shortage of classrooms, so much that the Standard 4 classes, with three
different classes and 137 total students, had to meet all together in the large assembly hall
throughout the year. The new building was being built throughout the year and looked as
though it would be ready for the following year, thus providing 12 more classrooms for
the school. Consequently, in 2007 many teachers had to share classrooms and be creative
in coordinating with their fellow teachers from the same grade. Officially the student-to-
teacher ratio was 40.521 throughout the school. In Standard 4 the ratio was 45 .6721 and in
Standard 7 it was 46.67: 1. Therefore, the student-to-teacher ratio at Dayspring was close
to ten more students per teacher. This is an interesting statistic because many parents and
teachers claimed that one of the main reasons government schools performed so low in
comparison to private schools was because they have a much higher student-to-teacher
ratio. This was not true in my study, and according to the MOET, they have effectively
reduced this ratio in most of the government schools, at least in the urban areas. At
DeySPfihg there were reported 135 ( 14%) total orphans, 17 of which had lost both
parents. hi Standard 4 there were 17 (12%) orphans, and in Standard 7 there were 24
(l 7%)- All Of the 24 teachers had received teacher training and certificates, with over half
having received at least a diploma.

The School was located on a very large plot of land, which was mainly an open
field for the Students to play on. There was a small garden behind one of the classroom

buildings. As mentioned before, the school had previously used temporary structures for

114

 

 

 

a number of their classrooms. These structures were still around but were no longer in
use. The new structure being built will be two stories high and hold up to 12 new
classrooms. During 2007, Standard 2 with 133 students, Standard 3 with 122 students,
and Standard 4 with 147 students, each had one classroom for all of their students,
therefore the three teachers in each grade would team teach as they tried to maintain
order with so many children in one classroom together. The school reported that out of
the 972 students, 90 students did not have a desk to sit at and 31 had only seats. The
classrooms that were built were in rather good condition being somewhat new, but they
were basic with cement floors, small windows, a closet for storing books and supplies,
and a teacher’s desk. The classrooms were about the same size as at Morena Primary, but
they fit in at least 10 more students, so they were much more crowded. There was very
little room to walk around in most of the classrooms. They literally used every inch of
space they possibly could.

I was not able to get accurate totals for all of the school fees required of the
students, but the parents reported that it cost M500 (~$75) per quarter. Plus the students
were required to buy school uniforms, of which there were two different sets. The school
was very strict about the students being in the proper uniform on the correct day and
made sure that the students’ uniforms were very tidy and in order. They also were strict
With the Students ’ grooming standards. I remember one day witnessing a set of teachers
scolding a Standard 7 girl for not doing her hair properly. They threatened to send her
home if she Came to school like that again. On top of the school fees and uniforms,
students were l‘equired to pay for their own supplies, such as pencils, pens, and

Workbooks. They brought their own lunches, because the school did not provide

115

anything. They were also charged a book fee of M100 (~$14) and registration fee of M70
(~310). Therefore there was a lot of demand from the students’ families.

Meridian English Medium Primary School

Meridian English Medium is a relatively new private school, which began in
2000, but it has been very successful and has a gained a good reputation for the results its
students achieve on the PSLE. It is unique because it is the only boarding primary school
in the city. The principal and proprietor of the school is also the founder of the school.
She is a very dynamic and energetic woman with an entrepreneurial spirit. She is
constantly thinking of how to expand and build upon the school. Currently the school
runs from pre-school up to Standard 7, but the school has purchased more land to build
new buildings for more boarding space and to expand into a high school. The principal
decided to start the school because she saw the need for a boarding school in town for
primary school students. She came up with this idea because she owned and operated a
boarding house in South Africa for students who would come from all over the country.
She thought the same would be useful in Lesotho. The school is largely run like a
business, with efficiency and making the most out of every dollar a priority.

The school began with 5 classrooms and has expanded every year by adding a few
new classrooms. It now has 21 classrooms. The student enrollment at Meridian English
Medium is 896 with 143 students in Standard 4 and 75 students in Standard 7. The
official student-to-teacher ratio is 42.67:1 with the ratio in Standard 4 being 47.67:] and
in Standard 7 being 37.5: 1. The number of orphans at the school is reported to be 138
(15%) with 13 students without both parents. In Standard 4 there are 18 (13%) orphans,

and in Standard 7 there are 13 (17%) orphans. There are 21 teachers at the school, two of

116

 

 

 

which have only received a high school degree. The others have completed teacher
training and received different levels of certificates and degrees. Overall, the
qualifications of the teachers at Meridian are a little lower than at Morena Primary, the
government school.

The school is crowded into a somewhat small plot on the edge of downtown
Maseru. It has very little room for the students to play, but they still manage to find
enough space. The classrooms are very small in comparison to the two schools described
above, so they are even more crowded than at Dayspring. As I mentioned before, the
school seems to be run more like a business as they try to get use out of every last inch of
space available. This may also be due to the fact that the school is located more tightly
into a residential area and, thus, has less room to spread out. Nevertheless, the school
reported that every student had a desk to sit at. In addition, the school has a computer
room, where all of the classes take turns using for computer subject each week. The
computers they have are all second-hand computers, and only five of the 15 or so
computers worked while I was there. There are also two large boarding facilities on the
school ground, where 259 of the students stay. The rest of the students are day school
students, so they return home after school is over. The day school students pay M480
(~$70) per quarter while the boarders pay an additional M800 (~$110) on top of that.

I spent nearly 6 weeks conducting observations at Meridan English Medium.
Most of the time was spent in the Standard 4 classrooms because the Standard 7 students
were busy preparing for the PSLE which was coming up the following month. I did spend
some time with the Standard 7 students and teachers, but most of their time was spent

taking practice exams and cramming for the test. 1 was not able to work with any of the

117

 

students’ families from Meridian because they were so dispersed all over the city and I
did not have access to the boarding school students’ parents. Therefore, most of the data I
collected at this school was used to compare and confirm the observations at Dayspring
English Medium.

Divine Private Primary School

Divine Primary School was the only private school in the area that was run by a
church. During the build up to the implementation of F PE in 2000, church owned schools
had to decide whether they would participate in the program, and thus receive funding
from the government or opt out and try to go it on their own without any government
assistance. Nearly all-of the major churches in Lesotho decided to participate in F PE, but
this particular church decided not to. The principal and teachers reported to me that they
were very pleased with that decision because they have been able to maintain, if not
increase, their quality of education. They prided themselves in receiving the top scores on
the PSLE out of all of the competing private schools in the area. The school was directed
by a very strict and religious principal, who demanded a lot from her teachers. There
seemed to be an extremely close, collegial atmosphere amongst the teachers. The .
principal credited this to the fact that they all are committed to the same religious
principals and met each morning to pray together before school started.

The total enrollments at Divine Primary are 698. There are 14 teachers at the
school, so the student-to-teacher ratio is 49.85: 1. In Standard 4 the ratio is 55:1 while in
Standard 7 it is 45.5: 1. Therefore, out of all of the schools I worked with, Divine Primary

had the highest student-to-teacher ratio, but they also performed the best on the PSLE the

118

 

previous year. All but one of the 14 teachers had good qualifications, with the one only
completing high school.

The school is located on a very large plot of land, isolated from other areas of
town. There is a full soccer field, a very large garden, and plenty of other space for the
children to play. The classrooms at the school are quite large and kept quite well. They
are also basic like the other schools. The school reported that every student has a desk to
sit in. The students are required to pay between M1,3OO (~$185) to Ml,500 (~$215) per
year, which includes the school fees, lunch fees (which are required of all students), and
book fees. Therefore, it is nearly the same price as the two private schools described
above.

I spent about 4 weeks at this school, but was not able to spend as much time as I
had wanted because it was at the end of the school year and I ran out of time. I was
interested to see how differently a church-run private school operated in comparison to
other private schools. In many ways they operated in the same manner, with regards to
teaching practices and everyday procedures, but there was a different level of collegiality
and school pride compared to the other schools which, from my observations, seemed to
drive the teachers and students to work a little harder than the others.

Khotso Community Center

Khotso Community Center was a different type of private school. They insisted
that they were not an English Medium school, even though most people in the
community referred to it as such. They prided themselves in teaching English well, but
not at the sacrifice of Sesotho language and Basotho culture. The school was based on a

student-centered philosophy and therefore they limited their number of enrollments. They

119

also believed in inclusive education, so the school had a large number of students with
disabilities compared to other schools who were integrated right along with the other
students in each class. The school was founded and run by a very dynamic and
philosophical principal who had studied in Canada and returned with a vision of a
different type of primary school. She was very hands on with her students and teachers.
The school also was different in that it only had classes from Standards 1-6. Instead of
continuing on to Standard 7, the students at Khotso would take the PSLE a year earlier.
Their students usually did quite well on the PSLE, but the school did not rank among the
highest performing private schools. According to the principal, their students usually did
very well in high school, even though they finished primary school one year earlier.

The total enrollments at the school were 202, with a student-to-teacher ratio of
14.43: 1. There were 14 teachers who worked as a team to teach different subjects to each
class. Therefore, it was difficult to determine the real student-to-teacher ratio in each
grade. The school was built on a large plot of land with very nice and well-kept
landscaping. The buildings were built to look like traditional huts with thatched roofing.
The school had a very large library with state-of-the-art computers and other materials.
Khotso was the only school which did not have school uniforms. The principal said this
was because they wanted the children to express their individuality. The school ran on a
different calendar than the rest of the country, based on the American school calendar. As
can be seen, this school ran in a very different manner to the other schools I worked with

in this study.

120

I spent nearly three weeks at the school. It was a fascinating place to conduct
observations and learn about, but I decided not to include it in the analysis of this study

because it is so different from the others.

Historical, Linguistic, and Social Background to Lesotho

In order to understand the linguistic and educational issues of this study it is
important to have a basic understanding of the historical, linguistic, and social context
within which the schools and students operated. Therefore, in this section I provide a
brief overview of the history of Lesotho, including the formation of the nation, its years
under colonial rule, and its transition after gaining independence in 1966. The most
important information from this history is the history and development of formal
education in Lesotho. Christian missions were the first institutions to establish formal
education in Lesotho and have largely enjoyed ownership of educational institutions
throughout most of the country’s history. It was only until recent decades that the
government began to play a larger role in education. This was, in part, because
international donors, such as World Bank, IMF, USAID, etc., began to increase their
funding for educational projects and thus have greater influence on educational policies
in Lesotho. As the funding increased, the government began to gain more influence over
education, and over time necessitated more control. This created great tension between
the government and the churches which had been running the schools. This led to
compromises and changes in the laws and structures controlling education.

Up until the mid-1990’s, nearly all primary schools were still officially owned

and run by the churches, which charged school fees to their students. But in 2000, under

121

 

pressure from international donors, and in conformity with the ambitions of Education for
All and the Millennium Development Goals, the government implemented the Free
Primary Education (F PE) program in Lesotho. Churches were officially allowed to
choose whether or not to participate in this program, but nearly all of them did because of
the funding which accompanied it. Ever since 2000, the government has made great
efforts and strides to build schools throughout the country in order to provide access to
education for all children of Lesotho. The country has been rather successful in providing
access to everyone through FPE, but many teachers and parents are disappointed and
upset with the program because they feel the quality of education at government primary
schools has declined significantly since its implementation. As a result, a number of
private “English Medium” primary schools have cropped up in the country and continue
to grow in popularity and support. Many families who once sent their children to low fee
paying church schools are now sending their children to private schools as an alternative
to the free government primary schools.

A significant linguistic fact about Lesotho is that it is one of the few Afiican
countries which is basically monolingual. There are a few patches of other linguistic
groups on the outskirts of Lesotho, but nearly all of them speak Sesotho as a second
language. Thus, for all intents and purposes, Lesotho is a monolingual country, which
helps to limit some of the complexities which face other African nations with regards to
language policies.

Lesotho is also in an interesting position in terms of the current global economy
and international relations. Throughout its history Lesotho has relied heavily upon its

powerful neighbor South Africa, especially economically. In its height of economic

122

prosperity Lesotho’s economy relied heavily upon trade with South Africa, especially
through its thriving agricultural activities. But as Lesotho became more populated and the
land began to deteriorate through ill-informed agricultural practices and overpopulation,
more and more Basotho turned to South Africa’s enormous mining industry for
employment opportunities. At its height, over half of the men in Lesotho worked in the
mines of South Afiica as migrant laborers and sent home remittances. This, in many
ways, broke up the traditional social, family, and community structures which had
previously maintained communities and provided economic sustenance for their
members. As a result, Lesotho’s traditional institutions were under threat and the country
had become dependent upon outside economies. This has worsened in recent years as
South Afiica’s economy has declined and it has turned inward for employment. As a
result, Lesotho has been left in a condition where it has few natural resources and a weak
economy, but must try to compete in the increasingly important global economy. This
will require great investment in developing social institutions which can provide for
economic growth and national development. One of the crucial institutions in the
endeavor is education. The government has made great strides to improve the nation’s
education and is continuing to make progressive changes. It will be important in the
coming years for Lesotho to find ways to develop institutions that will help the country
effectively enter the global economy in a way that is beneficial to its own country and
people. Because language issues are an important part in these global developments, the
way in which language is used for education and other purposes will have significant

consequences.

123

 

,limitlztt’lltm

In this ch:
experiences of fa
nah—ring speci f1. .
Lisss families ant.
iizsh act to corn
1
55.0 in\ estigatm :
particular circuni
as though inter
Ei"~‘emmsnt sch»
insure and 3g,-
Iv their socioscv:
insured to theri

iii t

airlCll-ls {Om S

 

ldmlllesl and ‘nc

13.733 .
0f Caplta‘.

Chapter 4: Government School Families

Introduction

In this chapter I will take a policy as practice approach to the educational
experiences of families who send their children to government schools. Instead of
analyzing specifically how the language and education policies of their schools impact
these families and their children’s education, 1 will rather explore the structural factors
which act to constrain and limit the opportunities of students and their families, while
also investigating the diverse ways in which actors use their agency to respond to their
particular circumstances. By looking into the stories and lived realities, as expressed to
me through interviews and observations, of families who send their children to
government schools we can come to a deeper understanding of the dynamics between

structure and agency, between the ways in which choices become limited for people due
to their socioeconomic and cultural positions and how people act upon the choices
presented to them, limited as they may be. In order to do so, l will draw upon the concept
0f various forms of capital, as described by Bourdieu, to show the varied ways in which
families’ and individuals’ lives are situated within the larger structures of society.

As was discussed in Chapter 2, Bourdieu’s theory of capital explores four main
forms of capital which are possessed by groups and individuals in society. These forms of
capital are: economic, cultural, social, and symbolic. In this chapter I will discuss each
form separately and provide examples from the lives of a number of students and their
families whiCh illustrate how these forms of capital apply to their particular situations and

how they influence the educational choices available to them. Although every individual

124

possesses each of these different forms of capital to one extent or another, some types of
capital are more highly valued by society than others, which provides some individuals
with more choices to utilize their agency for their own family’s good. Most of the
families who send their children to government schools lack the types of capital which
are valued by society and therefore find themselves in less powerful positions to benefit
their own lives and change their social standing.

With this in mind we must remember that the underprivileged of society are not a
monolithic group, with the same set of structures acting upon them in the exact same
ways. Each group or individual has a different mix of structures operating on their lives.
By looking deeper into the particular combinations of structural influences on
individuals’ and families’ lives we can see how each situation is unique, presenting itself
with distinct constraints and opportunities to operate within. One similarity in the
students’ and their families’ lives is that they all have the same language and education
policies placed upon them from the national and school levels. Therefore, it can be
assumed that the differing ways they respond to these policies is due to their own
particular combination of structural circumstances along with their individual acts of
agency and decisions which they make. In the following sections I will focus particularly
on the various forms of capital and how they influence the decisions of government
school families and attempt to place the language and education policies within these

contexts.

Economic Capital

125

 

 

The first k'.

 

Rapier 3. the co:
tie material puss .
alas in society.

sexism societies.

sad- to economic

 

skills which ma‘:
ln traditit
great amount of:
ass-all} increase
'47.”? 0“ ’
Luk L:.‘i patrond
image. \x'ete.
itsstock. Not (

3'7“.

The first of these forms of capital is economic capital. As was discussed in
Chapter 2, the concept of economic capital is quite straightforward. It basically refers to
the material possessions that a group or individual possesses which has direct economic
value in society. The most prevalent form of economic capital is money, especially in
modern societies, but there are a number of other forms of economic capital which may
lead to economic wealth or market value. These include land, livestock, investments, and
skills which may be traded in the market or used for economic collateral.

In traditional Basotho society livestock, such as cattle, goats, and sheep, held a
great amount of economic worth, and along with them, social status and power. Chiefs
usually increased their power and influence by accumulating and distributing livestock
through patronage and other forms of reciprocity. Important ceremonies, such as
marriage, were, and continue to be, integrally tied to the exchange of cattle and other
livestock. Not only did these material possessions hold economic value, but they also
entailed great cultural and symbolic significance. For example, many of the proverbs in
Sesotho refer to the significance of cattle in social exchanges. A traditional greeting
among elderly men in Sesotho is “Likhomo!”, directly translated as “cattle”, but referring
to asking about how the cattle at home are keeping, or in other words, “I hope life is
being prosperous for you.”

The reason I provide this discussion is that the modern concept of economic
capital is not universal and may not be as readily accessible or understood of a concept to
some populations as may be assumed. Many people who move into the towns and cities
of the Lesotho lowlands from traditional rural areas, especially the mountains, are

confronted with this reality. Although they already know the important value money

126

 

holds in the mOdiI
not understand tl‘\
tie urban areas. \
today's modern c
sissgthtng: food.
land and must ll?
necessity. but the
tnlify for those

soon. This is the

 

mercemt‘zatt’on. I

is least opporm

Some xx t"

i‘ducational opp,

.«4‘ V
mic them to 0

503:0

mm capita

holds in the modern economy before ever moving from their rural homes, they often do
not understand the extent to which the economic value of money rules people’s lives in
the urban areas. Without access to money there is little that one can do to survive in
today’s modern economy. Some of these newcomers soon find that they need money for
everything: food, shelter, transportation, and education. They can no longer live off of the
land and must find ways to acquire needed money. Therefore obtaining a job becomes a
necessity, but there are limited jobs in town, so people must gain skills and education to
qualify for those jobs, but to get a good education you must have money, and so on and
so on. This is the cycle that ofien occurs with the phenomenon of urbanization and
modernization. Those with the least amount of economic capital, especially money, have
the least opportunities to compete and survive in the larger economy.

Some will argue that what economically deprived people need most are
educational opportunities which will provide them with the knowledge and skills that will
enable them to get a job. A steady job will, in turn, provide them with the necessary
economic capital to succeed and effectively contribute to society. This train of reasoning
is basically the driving force behind the Free Primary Education program in Lesotho.
Before F PE was implemented in 2000, students had to pay school fees to go to school.
Although most of the church-run and government schools had very low school fees, there
were still some families who could not afford to send their children to school. Therefore,
the idea behind F PE was that if Lesotho could provide education for free it would allow
more families to (1) send their children to school and thus, (2) benefit from education by
becoming employable. The first part of this goal has largely come true. Since the

implementation of FPE, many more families have been able to send their children to

127

  
  
  
   
 

inmary schools.
massed by 60" -
hatlta great nuts.
ices. ani has l“?

cities question

students at the g
heil’E goal. l
their children I
to pay for sch!
complained t‘
schools since

Ufished SCho

primary schools. The CEO of primary education claimed that student enrollment has
increased by 60% since 2000 (interview, July 19, 2007). The MOET has successfully
built a great number of schools throughout the country, especially in the remote rural
areas, and has provided free access to schooling for the majority of the country. But many
critics question whether or not the second aspect of this goal — that families will benefit
from the education they receive under FPE — is happening.

In my interviews and interactions with parents and family members of the
students at the government school, I received sentiments about both of these aspects of
the F PE goal. The majority of families were happy to finally have the opportunity to send
their children to school under F PE, because they did not think they would have been able
to pay for school fees, even minimal ones, without it. But many of these same families
complained that they felt the quality of education has decreased significantly at primary
schools since the implementation of FPE. One parent even went to the extent to say she
wished school fees were reintroduced at government schools.

In the following section I will describe the lived realities of a few of the students I
worked with and their families to demonstrate how their economic situation has greatly
constrained the choices available to them for the education of their children. I will frame
this discussion within the context of F PE and discuss how family members talked about
F PE in both a positive and negative light. For each student I will provide a brief
description of their individual personality and performance at school (including their
PSLE results if they were in Standard 7) in an attempt to make a connection between
their educational experiences and their particular family’s background, home

environment, and economic situation. Then I will discuss their family’s lived realities, as

128

 

expressed 13} th 9!

 

he FPE progranti
parents and othe'
otssihle to pom.-
gsemment sch.
Mort/Ute)

Oat of a'.

 

 

ties: economic
economic situatt

2 1'. ‘ ‘
as sachets one

“"4 n ‘-
~..aents home:
IW\‘I~V

cashing orpha
are. So 1 am no'
\100kht

‘iiailh‘ Quiet ir.

expressed by them, and how they relate to educational opportunities or constraints within
the FPE program. Throughout these cases 1 will try to utilize direct quotes from the
parents and other family members and specific observations from the field as often as
possible to portray how they spoke about their experiences with sending their child to a
government school under F PE.

Mookho

Out of all the students’ families I visited, Mookho’s family was probably in the
direst economic situation of all. This is not to say their case represented the worst
economic situation of all the students at Morena government school. The school principal
and teachers often alluded that there were other students whose lives reflected theirs and
some which may have been even worse. I had a difficult time gaining access to many
students’ homes, especially those who were the most impoverished and underprivileged,
including orphans and others who did not have parents available or willing to visit with
me. So I am not able to confirm whether this is true or not.

Mookho is in class 4. She seemed to me to be a somewhat introverted girl who is
usually quiet in class. She sits in the back corner of the classroom and is often rather
disengaged. She is 12 years old, so she is about three years older than most of her
classmates. She is consistently near the bottom of the class in test scores. According to
my observations, she seems to enjoy being with her classmates and playing in the
schoolyard but has a hard time with class work.

Mookho lives with her two sisters in a small, one room (8 ft. x 12 ft.) apartment.
The apartment has a cement floor with no furniture inside. There is a cloth sheet hanging

in the middle of the room to create two separate rooms. The far side, acting as the

129

bedroom, has a mattress on the floor and clothing stuffed into suitcases or hanging on a
line strung across the wall. The near side acts as the entrance, kitchen, and family room
and has a few essential items for cooking and other basic household activities.

Mookho’s family is originally from a small town up north in the mountains. Their
mother still lives in their home village. Their father passed away in 1995. They have
lived in their current apartment located on the outskirts of Maseru since Mookho first
came to live with them three years ago. When she came she enrolled in class 2 at Morena
government primary school. Mookho lives quite far from school, where it takes between
30-45 minutes to walk, each way. Her sister is 14 years old who goes to class 6 at a
different government primary school, which is about a 30 minute walk in a different
direction from Mookho’s school.

I conducted an interview (September 22, 2007) with Mookho’s oldest sister who
is 32 years old and assumes the role of mother and caregiver in their home. She has very
little formal education, having completed only Standard 4. She first moved to the city in
1998 to find work. For the past six years she has been working at the factories in town,
where she makes less than M700 per month (less than $100). Her mother does not work,
and therefore she is the only source of income for the entire family. She both supports her
sisters and sends money home to her mother with the little money she makes at the
factories. She claims they do not have any family or relatives upon whom they can turn to
for support when needed or in an emergency.

Mookho’s older sister said she does not know much about Mookho’s school
because she has never visited the school and does not know any of the teachers. She

values her sisters getting an education and hopes they will do well because, “to get a job

130

you need to be educated.” She said she tries to be involved in their education but doesn’t
feel like there is much she can do to help because she did not go far in school herself. She
encourages Mookho to study, but she claims that’s about as much as she can do. As she
explains, “Sometimes we fight about her not reading and going to play but she does read
and does her school work. She reads a lot when she is going to write exams.” Mookho’s
sister stated that due to her lack of educational background and her long, tiring hours of
working at the factories, it is difficult for her to be involved in her education and give her
the support she needs.

When I asked how she felt about F PE she replied, “I like it because it helps me
because most of us have little.” She continued, “Without free primary education they
would not be able to go to school because we get paid little at the factories.” She
expressed her gratitude for the FPE program because otherwise her sisters wouldn’t be
getting any education at all. When I asked her whether she thought her sisters would be
able to go to high school, she replied, “I don’t know. Maybe if I’ll still be working, they
may go.” She expressed that she was just happy that they were able to go to school at the
present time and hoped they would be able to address those concerns when they came
across them in the future.

For Mookho’s family, without F PE there was probably no other way the children
could attend any school. They were just grateful for the chance to do so. It could be
debated whether their education will do them any good if they will not be able to
continue on to high school. As the older sister indicated, you need to have a good
education to get a job in Lesotho. Otherwise the only options for employment are

working low paying jobs like hers, which do not require any education, and pay very

131

little for long hours and hard work. On the other hand, Mookho’s sister had little
experience with schooling herself, so she could not say much about the quality of
education the government school was providing Mookho. She just wished Mookho could
work a little harder on her homework, although there was little she herself could do to
help other than push her to do the work.

Although Mookho’s family was very limited in the educational choices available
to them because of their lack of economic capital, they were still able to use their agency
to some extent. This is manifest through the fact that Mookho’s 14-year-od sister decided
to attend a different school from Mookho. Although they did not have the choice to go to
private schools, they did have the choice between government schools within walking
distance from their home. I did not explore the reasons why the two sisters went to
different schools in much detail in the interview. Their older sister just said it was
because that’s what the two sisters decided on their own. In any case, even under such
limiting constraints we can see how individuals are able to utilize their agency.

Papali

Papali is in class 7. She is a low performing student who seems to be less engaged
in her classwork. She sits in the back and likes to play with the other girls. She often
teases other students and seems to enjoy getting into mischief. She does not speak much
English in public but seems to follow along quite well in class. She received a third class
pass on the PSLE (Sesothozl, English:2, Mathematics: Fail).

Papali lives with her aunt in a small, rectangular, two-room (8 ft. x 8 ft. rooms)
home. They live close to the school on a narrow dirt road lined with identical

government-built, cinder block homes. She lives with her aunt because her mother moved

132

l0 U5

..
é:
Cr
\\'
g

.f‘e.
.with

..s; j

tn

aunt. l
”abx'
t-:'
n
as.
5‘.

.

Til”

l

to Gauteng (Johannesburg, South Africa) seventh months ago to find employment as a
domestic worker. Her mother has only been back to visit the family once since leaving
for work Gauteng and has been supporting her children as well as her sister’s family
through the money she makes in South Africa. Papali’s aunt moved into their home when
their mother left for work. Eight people live in the small home, seven children and the
aunt. Papali has four siblings. Her older brother is going to high school in Form B (9th
grade), and the others are too young to go to school. Papali’s father died long ago in
1993, so they rely solely on their mother’s wages for income.

Papali’s aunt has four children of her own, ages 13, 8, 4, and 1. Her two older
children remained in their home village, about 30 minutes from town, living with their
father, her husband. Neither she nor her husband work, so they also rely upon Papali’s
mother for their maintenance. I asked the aunt questions (interview, September 13, 2007)
about both Papali’s school and the village school where her children are attending. Both
schools are government F PE schools.

When asked about Papali’s school her aunt said she did not know much about it
because she has never visited the school and does not know the teachers. In her own
words she said, “I don’t know much but from what I’ve seen, her school teaches and I am
satisfied by her work.” In comparing Papali’s school to her children’s school in the
village she commented, “The education seems better than the one there. They are serious
in teaching children. It would only depend on the children.”

As for her own children, she knew much more about their school and seemed
quite dissatisfied with the way it operated. She explained, “The education isn’t that good

but the school is nearby and I don’t know where to take them, so they attend it. But the

133

l ,s.
etusal
, _ .g' t
.casfl l
teaszzr
:. :-

erlii

. .

C.gr y“

us.’.i15
-

“lie

”’5

c
stilts"

..'L'fi lll

~ .
13"“
“'t‘ \

0‘" .
.1 i.‘
“gran

education is bad. The teachers are not satisfactory to me.” She went on, “They don’t
teach well, maybe it’s because we can see them all the time and know they’re not
teaching, no interest.” When asked what she thought she could do about it she said she
didn’t know. She knows her children’s teachers in the village well because they are her
neighbors, but she doesn’t feel she can do anything to influence the school to improve.
“We go to school to talk to them but the teachers don’t pay any attention even when our
children fail, there’s nothing we can do even when the children try. They sometimes fail
three times in a row. They really don’t care.”

Since both schools are part of the F PE program I asked her how she felt about free
primary education. Her response was, “If I could afford it I would have taken them
elsewhere, but because I can’t I let them stay there. If you don’t see progress in children
you can’t see their future, they just do like children are being taught and they keep failing
because they don’t pay, they‘re not taught with effort.” I asked her what she thought were
the biggest problems at the village school and she responded, “There are few teachers and
they teach big classes and several of them, late arrival of books, and teachers who are not
serious. There are only three teachers from class one to seven and another one we have to
pay R20 for her to be paid her monthly salary because the government didn’t hire her.”
When asked what she thought could be done to improve the school she responded, “More
teachers to relieve the pressure on the other teachers.”

From the aunt’s point of view, Papali’s urban school was much better than her
children’s rural school because it seemed to have better teachers who put in the effort to
teach. Although she had not been to the school herself, she made this assessment from the

school work she has seen Papali bring home and from what she hears from neighbors.

134

saga-,1 <9
'\-L.\‘.A l-'\
I
b
.

4
a
3 J
a. ‘t t.
Ir.4 ..‘
Orgy“:

V
.‘t.
‘R,\ _
s. md‘
.r9.
Lt, r

She said she is not satisfied with the way government schools are run, especially her
children’s school, but expressed that she has no other options. She expressed that if she
had the means she would prefer to send her children to another school. But under her
circumstances, she doesn’t see that as a possibility.

As for Papali, she has very little assistance or support from home with her school
work. The aunt said that her brother tries to help her with her studies at times, but he is
only two grades above her. The aunt does not feel she can help at all because of her lack
of education and knowledge of English, and her mother is not present to help. Her mother
finished Grade 7 in primary school, but never went on to high school. She did go to a
school for sewing, but that was as far as she was able to go. At least Papali’s brother is
able to currently pay for his high school fees through his mother’s income, so there seems
to be the potential that Papali might be able to continue on to high school afier this year,
but that will stretch her mother’s budget even further. In addition, although Papali did
pass her PSLE, she had a low scoring pass and failed the math portion, which will make
it more difficult for her to gain acceptance into a high school. But at least Papali does
have the prospect of furthering her education if she wants to and if her family can
somehow afford it.

In Papali’s family’s case, they were constrained by their lack of economic capital,
so her mother used her agency in deciding to go to South Africa to find work. She was
able to do this because she was able to draw upon her social capital within her family by
having her sister, Papali’s aunt, take care of the children while she was away. Although
this may not have been the ideal situation for their family, it made it possible for them to

pay for Papali’s older brother’s high school fees and to maintain both her mother’s and

135

“"7371 H.
a‘-¥LA[A

'- ,7 1"
£51.45,
5
31311 as
i ”a 1- _
Ekls leg

fai'

71;
(.2.

(In?

aunt’s families. Therefore, although Papali’s mother’s choices were limited, in
comparison to families with greater economic capital, she was able to use her agency to
find a way to increase their economic capital, thus opening up further opportunities in her
children’s education.

Khotso

Khotso is in class 7. She is a low performing student who is very quiet and mostly
attentive in the classroom. She struggles with mathematics and does not speak much
English, although she seems to follow along in class just fine. She has troubles doing her
own assignments in class and relies heavily upon her classmates to help with her work.
She received a third class pass on the PSLE (Sesotho: 1, English: 2, and Mathematics:
Failed).

Khotso lives in a one room (8 ft. x 8 ft.) apartment with her mother. It takes her
about 10 minutes to walk to school from her home. The apartment is one in a line of four
one-room apartments in an old building built out of stone and mud. There is a medium
sized garden in the yard which appears to be shared among the residents. I interviewed
Khotso’s mother (September 22, 2007) with the assistance of a translator while she was
washing clothing outside in the yard.

Khotso’s mother grew up in the village where they presently live and close to
where Morena government primary school is located. As Maseru expanded the village
came to be recognized as part of the larger Maseru urban area. She completed Form C
(10th grade) at a lower secondary school and now works at the factories in town. She

sometimes works seven days a week and at other times five days. She said that she

136

~.‘.M ‘
L ... j
.Ln. A

h. i
5.3 .Ot

‘r‘m‘vv-l
h‘. aislgA

sans p
Iv -. ”we .

fl. ‘- t. ‘11

A15: \ ,,
HauLa'“

realit l

-L
LC i’Cl‘.

usually comes home tired and wants to go right to bed after eating dinner. She
commented that we were fortunate to catch her for an interview.

Khotso’s mother has three children. Her first child, a daughter, completed Form C
at a local high school and is now married. The second child finished class 7 and did not
continue with his education. Khotso is her last born. All of her children have attended the
same primary school, Morena Primary, but when her firstborn went there the F PE
program had not yet started, so she had to pay school fees throughout her first child’s
education.

When asked how she felt about Khotso’s school her mother responded, “I don’t
really like it, but I can’t afford other schools.” When asked why she didn’t like the school
she replied, “They don’t teach well. . .There’s a teacher that usually insults kids and it
seems the teachers spend more time insulting the children than teaching them.” When
asked if she had ever gone to the school to talk about these issues she said she hadn’t
recently, but she used to go and complain and felt like in the past they would respond to
her concerns.

When asked about the F PE program Khotso’s mother replied, “I think it is still
fine but if I could afford I would take her somewhere else. I don’t really like it much.”
She went on to comment that she felt things were better in the past at the school when her
firstborn was attending and had to pay school fees. She explained, “There’s not a big
difference, but there is a difference. The one thing I hate most is teachers making some
kids miserable and uncomfortable by belittling them in front of others and that causes
problems in their studies.” She expressed that she feels the teachers treat the students

somehow worse now that they didn’t have to pay school fees. I asked whether she would

137

prefer

differs

CW”

L.¢Al‘

514'"

J

prefer it to go back to having school fees, and she replied, “I don’t think so. I think it was
different with my firstborn, but now I wouldn’t. Now that I’m used to this system [of
FPE] it would be hard for me to take them to the same school [and have to pay school
fees].” She suggested that if she were to pay school fees now she would prefer to send her
child to a private school instead, but she cannot afford to do so at the moment.

I also asked her how she felt Khotso would do on the PSLE. She felt quite
confident that she would do well because she thought Khotso was working hard, but she
was worried about her performance in math. She was hoping to get some tutors to help
Khotso, but I don’t know if she ever did. Her mother also expressed hopes that Khotso
would be able to get into one of the-top high schools in the area. I asked her how she
would be able to afford that, and she commented that she would have to ask for help from
her family, but she seemed confident that they would be able to help.

When asked what type of dreams she had for Khotso she replied, “I would like for
her to get good education and not be like me. I would like for her to be an accomplished
person in life. . .so that she will be able to take care of herself independently.” She seemed
to have a lot of hope for people who get an education in Lesotho which is indicated by
the following statement about the Lesotho economy. “It’s still fine. Those who get a good
education don’t go looking for greener pastures elsewhere, they stay here in the country,
and they stay home with their qualifications.” This is an interesting comment because it is
in contrast to what most Basotho with higher education qualifications have expressed to
me. They often complained that there are not near enough employment opportunities for
those with a good education and lamented over the great number of highly educated

people who leave to South Africa for better jobs. But from the perspective of Khotso’s

138

IDOIEC

here:

0
f

E:
I t-

r g :11

mother there were much greater opportunities for people with a good education — at least
better than working at the factories.

For Khotso it seems as though, at the moment, the only option for her is to go to
the government school because her mother cannot afford to pay the school fees at a
private school. But when considering the possibility of her going to high school her
mother said she will do all that she can, including turning to her family, in order to pay
the high school fees. From my observation it seems that by having the option of sending
her child to a free government primary school under FPE it has made it easier for her to
do so without having to add to their current economic struggles. Indeed, when her
firstborn had to pay school fees she was willing and found a way to do so. So, although
she expressed that she is not satisfied with the direction of education and teaching at the
school since the implementation of FPE, her actions seem to imply something else.
Sending her child to a seemingly lower quality school for free outweighs the other option
of having to struggle to find the money to pay for school fees at a better performing
primary school. In addition, the fees which are charged at private schools are much
higher than what she had to pay for her first child when the local primary school charged
fees. This choice of paying school fees for her child now becomes even further
complicated when the prospect of paying for high school fees is unavoidable in the
future. From what Khotso’s mother expressed in her interview, any money which can be
saved now is better for her daughter’s future, as long as she is confident that her daughter
will still be able pass the PSLE by going to the government school, even if it means a
potentially lower passing grade.

Reabetsoe

139

pass

asset

-.‘ .
z .‘1
aw.
~l

Reabetsoe is in class 7. She has repeated the class this year because she did not
pass the PSLE last year. She is one of the older girls in her class and acts very self-
assured. She seems to enjoy being with her friends and sometimes can be a little rowdy in
class. She sits in the back and easily gets distracted, but overall she pays attention and
works pretty hard in class. She received a third class pass on the PSLE (Sesotho: 1,
English: 1, Mathematics: Failed).

Reabetsoe is the lastbom of five children. All of the children still live with their
parents in the same home. Their home was built by their parents nine years ago. It has a
medium sized yard with a small garden. The home has two buildings, a larger building
with three rooms and a second one, which appeared to have two small bedrooms. It is
about a 5-10 minute walk from their home to Morena government primary school. All of
the children in the family attended the same primary school.

I interviewed both of Reabetsoe’s parents together with the assistance of a
translator (September 22, 2007). Neither of her parents had gone very far in their
education, her father completed Standard 6 and her mother completed Standard 4. They
both grew up in villages in the mountains, where they met and were married. They
moved down to Maseru in 1988 when the father began to work at the large
slaughterhouse in the area. They alluded that he had worked there for a number of years,
which is how they were able to build their home and enroll their children in high school.
But none of their children were able to finish high school because their father lost his job
and, thus, they were not able to continue paying their school fees. As a result of this, the
oldest three children, the oldest being 27 years old, are no longer in school. The first two

finished Form B (9th grade) while the third only made it to Form A (8th grade).

140

he; at:
seats

:1 ,
Fl‘ 1
1L..§i-it

The parents claimed their children’s education has done nothing for them because
they are now unqualified to get any jobs in town. The oldest child tried to go to
vocational school for sewing, but was not able to pay her fees, so she had to stop before
finishing the program. No one in the family is employed at the moment. The second-born
son does training in taekwondo and goes to tournaments representing the military, but the
parents claim he cannot enter the military because he does not have the educational
qualifications by not finishing high school. The fourth child is currently attending the
local high school in Form B. They are paying for her fees through the father working odd
jobs whenever he can find them. They claim they don’t have any relatives or others who
can give them financial support, so if they don’t find work there’s nothing they can do.

When I asked about Reabetsoe’s education the mother responded, “She is
encouraging. Even though she’s not brilliant, she works hard. When she reads you can
hear that she is improving. She is not as good as the others, but she is very encouraging in
her efforts. Those who weren’t able to finish high school would have finished at the
university if they had continued.” They were hopeful that she would pass the PSLE this
year because it is her second time around. They said if she did they would like her to
continue on to high school, but they would have to figure out how to pay for her fees on
top of her sister’s. The mother said they have recently heard about a cheap high school,
so they plan on looking into that.

When asked how they felt about Reabetsoe’s school the mother replied, “I think
they teach children well because my other children did pass, and I think those children
who don’t pass would be because of their abilities as individuals. It’s also good for us

who can’t afford for the transportation to send our kids to other schools, so we are stuck

141

‘3-

.._4 .

o I '

Ofi-s- ‘7'!

. llll .

the “-111
5

able to g

fl)r ‘
b- O
L .1

'“33 H
...‘s' .x
.

055076

,1
1.-

with it, as it is close to home. Some of our children wanted to go to other schools
though.” She said that children who go to schools far from home brag about it and are
able to get into better high schools.

When asked whether they felt the school has changed since the implementation of
F PE they said, “In my mind 1 think there’s a difference between then and now. I think
they used to teach harder back then than now. Right now they’re not as committed as
before and I think it’s because of the free education. It’s up to a child on their own to
work hard.” They continued, “If we weren’t poor we would take her to another school
and pay for her, but that’s impossible because we can’t afford it. Even if you complained
at the school where you pay fees, you find that you have a leg to stand on because you
pay fees.” The parents expressed disappointment about the way the government primary
school has changed since the implementation of FPE, but they felt powerless to do
anything about it because they were too poor to pay for school fees and therefore felt they
had little right to complain to the school about it.

When asked about their feelings towards FPE, the father said he thinks “free
education is important because it helps us — those who struggle for money — because the
children go to school. That’s what I think is good about it.” But later in the interview,
after discussing their struggles to pay for their children’s high school fees, the mother
explained, “In truth it’s not helping. If high school was free instead of primary, it would
help because primary is cheap, we would afford to pay for it. Right now, after Standard 7,
children would love to continue but they stay home because parents can’t afford the fees.
Standard 7 is useless these days!” This was an interesting point which 1 had heard from a

number of other parents who were in similar circumstances. They were grateful to have

142

free education but did not think it made much sense to have it only for primary education
if families could not afford to pay for their children to continue on through high school.
They did not see much value in a primary education alone. On this note the father
commented, “The others did learn to read and write but that’s not much help as things
are. It would have been better for them to be shepherds back in Mokhotlong [his home
village in the mountains] than having paid so much money for them, and now I can’t
even take them firrther to Form 5 ( 12th grade) because it’s very expensive and they can’t
find jobs with what education they have.”

These parents expressed great frustration because they had invested a great deal of
resources into their children’s education, but none of it seems to be paying any dividends.
Although they acknowledged that their children effectively learned the basics, they didn’t
feel that a basic education amounted to much in the realities of their lives in today’s
modern economy. From their experience, without the qualifications of a high school
degree you cannot find a steady job in the city.

For Reabetsoe’s family they expressed that their children’s education went well as
long as their father had steady employment. All of the children passed the PSLE and
moved on to high school. But the moment their father lost his job the children were not
able to continue paying their high school fees and were not able to graduate. On the other
hand, because of F PE, Reabetsoe was able to continue to get an education at the
government primary school, even though her parents were no longer employed. The
question now is whether her family will be able to find a way to pay for her to continue
on to high school or whether she will follow in her older siblings’ footsteps and fall short

of graduating from high school.

143

35 011011”.

es'asattt

SEC-Oi a

1

it‘lnll’ r

wee. F
S

in
§
,
an‘i‘ “
» .,.1“hlt

a" w
t, ,
'x
.
m
"11.)
§~ '; H

Discussion

These four examples of students’ lives help to show the diverse ways that
economic capital can limit families’ opportunities as they try to provide a quality
education for their children. They also show how the F PE program has had some positive
and negative effects in these families’ lives. While they all expressed gratitude in being
able to now send their children to school for free, their gratitude was tempered by the
perception that the quality of education has decreased at the school since the
implementation of FPE. Some of the parents also felt they had lost their voice at the
school and their ability to complain if they were not satisfied with things because they no
longer paid school fees. An additional grievance was that a primary education alone did
very little to improve people’s lives these days, and therefore F PE was inadequate at best.
If high schools are allowed to continue to charge high fees, then poor families will
continue to fall short of gaining what they perceive to be a useful education. According to
one of these families, primary education alone is seen to be insufficient, if not useless.

Some of these families, as well as others I interviewed, displayed the potential
ability to pay for school fees when necessary, but decided to send their children to a free
government school. Many teachers complained this was part of the problem with FPE.
Since its implementation, schools have been forced to admit students from families who
invest little time, effort, or interest into their children’s education, which has made the
burden of teaching even harder than before. Some teachers are resentfirl because they
have not received any additional compensation, but they feel the workload and burden

has increased tremendously. They expressed how they wished that families had to pay at

144

 

‘i’i‘gn.
Laws. 5‘

 

 

 

.23.
"nut

,_.
.M

 

least a small amount so they would have something invested in their children’s education.
But if that happened, many children would probably never go to school.

Therefore, using a policy as practice analysis we can see that the lack of economic
capital can create enormous constraints on families’ educational choices. Although the
policy of F PE has made it possible for some children to attend school who would have
otherwise been unable, and therefore increasing their opportunities, it has not adequately
addressed some of the larger issues which prevent poor families from providing their
children with the quality of education that will benefit them in the current economy. On
the other hand, F PE has allowed some families to save the money which would have been
used for school fees to pay for other necessities, such as high school fees for other
children, and therefore has created new possibilities and opportunities for some. If we
analyze the F PE policy in isolation from the economic realities in local stakeholders’
lives and the diversity of ways economic capital impacts their lives, then we do not gain a
full understanding of the actual impact the policy has in providing them with a better
education. Using a policy as practice analysis helps to draw out some of these
complexities and diversities to see that F PE impacts stakeholders, even at the same

school, in very different ways.

Cultural Capital

As was discussed in Chapter 2, Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital entails non-
economic resources which gain significance and social currency through culturally
mediated systems. Therefore cultural capital is acquired through enculturation within

families and socialization amongst peers within a similar social class. Some forms

145

‘h f
:UlVJrs

531.". 0.

is

1“-
1“\

» x

(i?

cultural capital are more valued than others within society and therefore, some people
gain or maintain positions of power and influence through the cultural capital they
possess. Bourdieu argues that one of the main purposes of the institution of schooling is
to maintain and legitimate the inequalities produced by the uneven distribution of cultural
capital in society. This is contrary to the popular belief (at least in America) that the
purpose of schools is to teach and educate students with the knowledge necessary to
succeed in society, regardless of their social class. Schools are commonly seen to be a
place where students can work hard and pick themselves up from their proverbial
bootstraps by gaining the knowledge and skills needed to move up in social and
economic status. In Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, this illusion of the emancipating
power of schools is what makes schools such a powerful social institution in perpetuating
the status quo. When students from lower class backgrounds do not succeed in school,
instead of blaming the schooling system, or the structure of society, they blame
themselves for not being smart enough and not possessing what it takes to succeed.
Instead of seeing the inherent inequalities of society, they see themselves as lacking in
cultural capital, and thus help to perpetuate and legitimate the system.

A critique of Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital and the role of schooling in
perpetuating and legitimating inequality is that his theories and studies were developed in
the context of highly stratified western societies like his native country France. The
cultural capital that he refers to in such countries has been developed and reified over
numerous generations and thus embedded integrally into the social institutions which

developed along with them. The social context of post-colonial societies is very different,

146

and therefore, Bourdieu’s theory may not operate with regards to cultural capital and
schooling in quite the same way.

In other words, much of the cultural capital which ends up being valued in post-
colonial countries, such as Lesotho, was initially introduced, especially through formal
education, from the outside by a society (Britain) with cultural values very different from
traditional Basotho culture. Therefore, most of the cultural capital valued at schools (such
as English) was, at first, new and unusual to nearly everyone in the society. This means
that initially a very small minority (the educated elite) were able to gain such valued
cultural capital in Lesotho through formal social institutions such as schooling (which
was introduced by the colonial powers) in a rather quick and explicit way. This process of
obtaining cultural capital differs greatly from the way in which the same cultural capital
may have been obtained and internalized by members of its originating society in Britain.
In Britain, this cultural capital has been passed on through families over generations and
is therefore more pervasive and more deeply embedded into the institutions of society. In
a rather new, post—colonial, modern society like Lesotho, the cultural capital which has
been introduced or borrowed from former colonial powers is often what becomes most
valued in society. But this type of cultural capital acts in a different way because it is
never as subtle and deeply embedded as it was in the original society where the cultural
capital gained its value. For example, in British society there are different forms, or
dialects, of spoken English. Some forms, like proper standard English, are highly valued
and those who speak it naturally are at an advantage. Those who speak other forms, like
the Cockney accent spoken in My Fair Lady, are less valued and looked down upon. The

differences between these accents can be very subtle and difficult for an outsider, or non-

147

 

 

 

V‘s

(IL:
r' 1

(A
n

native speaker to recognize, but their cultural significance are great. This is often not the
case in places where English has been introduced, at least not to the same degree. In
Lesotho, someone who can speak English is seen to be at an advantage to those who
cannot, largely regardless of his or her accent. This is not to say that English speakers in
Lesotho do not value some forms and accents of English over others, but these
differences are not as imbedded and deep—rooted as they are in Britain. The main point
from this discussion is that these types of cultural capital, which have been borrowed
from colonial powers, can be more consciously pursued and acquired in societies where
they have been borrowed than in the societies where they originally gained their cultural
significance.

This is an important difference to distinguish because it infers that some forms of
cultural capital may be acquired more consciously and through direct effort than other,
more culturally embedded forms of cultural capital. Consequently, this type of imposed
cultural capital may not necessarily be acquired only through long term socialization,
such as enculturation within one’s family or social class, as Bourdieu’s theory suggests,
but also through more conscious means of socialization such as schooling. If this is the
case, then the role of schools as an institution takes on a different role in a place like
Lesotho than Bourdieu has proposed. Not only do schools play the role of maintaining
and legitimizing the inequalities of society through valuing certain cultural capital, but
they also play the role of being a major vehicle, or mechanism, in which to consciously
gain such valued cultural capital, such as knowledge of English, and provide individuals

with the potential to move up more quickly in social power and status.

148

all
St]

L: s s u
i L ‘lk

In Lesotho this can be seen in the difference between private and government
schools. Those who attend private schools learn the type of knowledge, skills, and
cultural capital which is valued in post-colonial Lesotho. Those who are privileged to
attend such private schools are able to, in a way, consciously move themselves out of one
social class into another, if they navigate their educational experience properly. On the
other hand, government schools are meant to teach the same knowledge for their
students, but they lack the capacity, oversight, funding, training, or whatever else it takes
(see Chapter 7) to successfully pass on such valued cultural capital to their students.
Some families in Lesotho possess greater cultural capital than others, and are thus able to
pass it on to their children. This is especially true of families with parents or siblings who
have obtained a good formal education. Others may not possess the cultural capital
themselves but find a way to get their children into good private schools and other
relevant institutions which teach and socialize them with valuable cultural capital. Or
they rely on relatives or others from their social networks, who possess the necessary
cultural capital, to pass it on to their children.

This is not to say that schools do not play a significant role in maintaining and
legitimizing unequal social structures in Lesotho. Indeed, this is one of the major
functions of schooling. In practical terms, there are only a limited number of high schools
compared to primary schools in Lesotho, so under current structural realities there must
be a weeding out system to legitimize who can move on to high school and who cannot.
This is most effectively operated through the national examination system administering
the PSLE at the end of Standard 7 (see Chapter 6). Those who attend private schools, by

and large, are expected to pass the PSLE with high marks and move on to high school

149

Pvt}!-
. 1‘

.

education. When they do they are legitimized by the credentials they receive, which
qualifies them to move on to good high schools. At government schools the pass rates are
much lower and many people come to accept this as an unfortunate fact of society. When
students from government schools do not pass the PSLE or receive low marks on the
exam, their families blame it on their own individual lack of academic ability or their
inability to get their children into the best schools. Rather than questioning the whole
system as unequal and unfair, they accept the results as legitimate and unfortunate.
According to Bourdieu, their inferiority becomes internalized and they come to accept
their position in society.

The same process is manifested at the university level, but more explicitly related
to the English language itself. For the matriculation exam, the COSC, there are a number
of different subjects examined. But when it comes to being accepted into different
university programs, students’ scores on the English portion of the exam are valued much
more highly than the other subjects. For example, if a student passes every subject on the
COSC with high marks but gets a low score on the English portion, then they will not be
accepted into the most competitive programs, such as in the sciences and business fields.
This is done even if the student receives a very high score in the science subjects (which
are also written in English. On the other hand, if a student scores very high on the English
portion of the exam and fails one, two, or sometimes more of the other subjects, he or she
is often admitted into the competitive university programs. This shows an explicit favor
of the English subject over other subjects, or in other words, a greater cultural capital

value of knowledge of English over other forms of academic knowledge. This is a very

150

tangible example of how some cultural knowledge is valued over other knowledge, even
within the education system itself.

With regards to constraints and opportunities derived from cultural capital, those
families who possessed the cultural capital which is valued and rewarded in the education
system were at an advantage. In this section, by utilizing a policy as practice approach, 1
will provide some examples from the lives of two students and their families to show
how the type of cultural capital possessed at home has had an influence on the
educational experience of these students. In these analyses 1 will also investigate to what
extent the language and education policies of the education system have on the families’
educational practices and experiences.

Katleho

Katleho is in class 7. She is a shy, but seemingly bright girl who is very attentive
in class and works very hard on her school work. She sits up front and is known as a good
student by her teacher and peers. She understands English quite well but speaks it
haltingly. She struggles with mathematics. Katleho received a third class pass on the
PSLE (Sesotho: 1, English: 1, Mathematics: Failed).

Katleho lives with her mother and younger brother in a partially built, one-room
(10 ft. x 10 ft.) home. There is no furniture in the home, just a cement floor and a plastic
tarp which acts as the temporary roof. The house is located in a large plot which includes
Katleho’s grandmother’s home. They have a good sized garden, a dog, and a few
chickens. The grandmother’s home is completed, furnished, and appears to be a little
larger. They said that they share nearly everything with the grandmother. The home is

just down the road from the government primary school.

151

C01

he:

51K

......
~\.

«\tc

.th

....3

Katleho’s mother was born and raised in the same place where they now live. She
has two children and is not married. Katleho is her firstborn and the second child is a 9-
year-old boy who also attends Morena government primary school. Katleho’s mother
completed class 7 at the same primary school as her children and did not continue on with
her education. She has worked at the factories in town since 2002. She currently works
six or seven days a week, nine hours a day, and makes M650 (less than $100) a month.
She expressed that life was very difficult for them because her income brings in just
enough money for food and the essentials for her family. I interviewed Katleho’s mother
outside of their home with the help of a translator (interview, September 8, 2007).

When I asked her about Katleho’s performance at school she was very pleased.
She stated, “She does well in school. Sometimes she gets position two and other times
position seven, but there is no stage I can say she is steady at. But generally she does
well.” She went on to explain that Katleho seems to love school “very much. She goes to
school even when she is ill sometimes. She loves school so much that she will go to any
cheaper high school even if she gets first class, because I won’t be able to afford any high
paying school. She is happy as long as it is school, she will work hard herself.” She
continued, “Sometimes her grandmother does all the chores so she gets a lot of time with
her books, sometimes she plays with the other kids and reads in the evening. Since we
use candles, I’ve advised to do her school work during the day to avoid damage to her
eyes. She can play when she has time afterwards.”

She said that she tries to help Katleho with her school work, but then added, “1 do
sometimes, but she is a stubborn person. She says our standards are the same [because

she only completed Grade 7, the same class Katleho is currently attending] so there isn’t

152

 

I
~ ..3 '
.‘.l\. i

‘.
9*!
mil 1'

(on

w

[J]
y

much I can help her with. She prefers her grandmother to help her because she did a
higher standard. There’s a television in there so maybe she goes there to watch television
and not read. Her cousins also help her out.” Katleho’s mother was concerned because
she was not able to adequately help her child with her schoolwork. She had only gone as
far in her education as her child’s current grade, so she didn’t think her help would make
much of a difference. She said that even when she wanted to help, her child would ofien
dismiss it claiming that they were at the same level of education.

When I asked how she felt about Katleho’s primary school she responded,
“Morena Primary is trying but things are difficult now, the teachers sometimes don’t
come to school once or twice a week. Sometimes teachers don’t attend all the classes, so
some of the students don’t get to be taught. Other times they’re short-tempered with
students if they explain but they didn’t understand. Katleho has been shouted at for
telling the teacher she didn’t understand and was accused of not listening. That’s some of
the problems we’re facing.” She also expressed that she is not pleased with Katleho’s
current teacher. She feels that Katleho was doing much better in her previous years, but
this year’s teacher does not have the time or patience to work with Katleho and answer
her questions. In her own words she explains, “I was prepared to pay extra for afternoon
classes, thinking that Katleho needed more help. But she explained that it wasn’t that but
the fact that her teacher doesn’t like to explain things more than once and shouts at them
if they don’t understand things at first. So I realized it was the teacher’s problem.” When
I asked her what she thought she could do about this situation she said she has talked to
Katleho’s previous teachers about it, but she is afraid to approach the current teacher. “I

can go there, but I think maybe if I do that it could cause problems for the child with her

153

teacher. It’s a good thing to do but it could also be bad by causing problems for the
child.” So she is currently afraid of approaching the teacher and doesn’t know what to do.
I then asked her whether she felt like she could address the problem by speaking to the
principal. Her response was, “Maybe it can help because if these are taken to the teacher
by someone it can be handled better than me going straight to the teacher.” In addition,
she claimed she never had time to go to the school because she always has to work. Her
educational, economic, and social standing played a strong role in establishing how much
she felt she could intervene in her child’s education.

The biggest concern expressed by Katleho’s mother was what they were going to
do when she passes her PSLE and wants to move on to high school. She expressed great
appreciation for FPE because it has provided an opportunity for all children to gain a
foundational education, but she wished it would extend on through to high school. She
felt it didn’t make much sense to help students get through primary school if there was no
program to help them move on to high school. She said she didn’t know what they were
going to do for Katleho’s high school fees, but she was determined to make it happen.
She explained that she has been looking around for more affordable high schools. She
stated, “Yes, there are two I’ve found even though they’re newly established and 1 don’t
know yet of their results, but Katleho said I should take her there and she’ll use her head
and work hard.” These upstart high schools are becoming common in Lesotho because so
many families cannot afford to pay for a regular high school. From a few informal
conversations with former students of such high schools I have been told that these high
schools have very poor quality and very few of their students do well on the COSC

matriculation exam. There are also rumors that many of these schools are scams used to

154

get people’s money. I do not know the truth of all of this, but it does show that the lack of
high schools in Lesotho is an increasing problem.

For Katleho’s mother, she expressed that education was the most important thing
for her children. She viewed it as the way for them to get out of their current situation of
poverty. She said she did not like the life she was living and wanted better for her
children. She stated that she was willing to sacrifice everything that she had so her
children could get a good education. She also expressed her ignorance of the situation
because she hadn’t been through high school herself, but she wasn’t going to allow that to
deter her efforts. “I haven’t been to high school but I think as she goes firrther the fees
become more. But I’m going to try and pay all the way because I want her to be educated.
I don’t want her to work where I do. That place is for slaves and no money.”

Palesa

Palesa is in class 7. She is a friendly girl who seems to enjoy playing with the
other girls in her class. She is quite bright and is very attentive in class. She works hard in
school and seems to understand things well. She can speak English okay, but lacks
vocabulary and confidence. She had a bad injury the year I was there when a
neighborhood boy hit her in the eye with a small stone, shot from a sling shot. She had to
go to the hospital to have surgery to put an artificial lens in her eye. Her mother claims
this took her away from school for a few weeks and made it difficult for her to see well
and concentrate in the classroom. She continues to get headaches very easily and cannot
concentrate for long periods of time. After her injury I often saw her resting her head on
her desk while the teacher was teaching. She ended up getting a second pass class on the

PSLE (Sesotho: 1, English: 2, Mathematics: 2).

155

Palesa lives with her mother and three siblings. Her father died in 2005 in a
serious car accident. They live in a four-room home with nice furniture inside. They have
a very small yard with a small garden. Their home is about a five minute walk from the
school. Palesa’s brother, the oldest, completed his COSC (the 12th grade matriculation
exam) and graduated from high school. He is now at the technical college doing an
automotive degree. The second oldest is in her final year of high school and is preparing
for the COSC. The third child is in Form B (9th grade). Palesa is the youngest. Their
mother is a high school graduate. She is currently a clerical assistant at the government
agricultural headquarters. She makes M1,300 (just under $200) a month at her job. Her
husband was a truck driver for the Lesotho Highlands Water Project. Her sister passed
away in 2001 so she now has the responsibility of taking care of her sister’s four children
as well. Her sister’s children stay with their grandmother, but she supports them
financially. Therefore her budget is stretched very thin. She said that this year she has had
to pay high school fees for her two daughters, examination fees for COSC, her son’s
college fees until the government compensates them, as well as for uniforms and books
for all of the children. I interviewed Palesa’s mother in their home with the assistance of
a translator. She understood all of my questions in English and was able to answer in
English, but she said she preferred to use Sesotho so that her thoughts could flow more
clearly.

All of the children in the family went to the same government primary school and
the mother seems quite pleased with the school. She describes the school as follows, “It’s
a good primary school. I can say I like it because I’ve seen the kids being able to cope,

not unless it’s my kids that do so because I have an interest in their education. But there

156

are so many kids there, maybe most parents like it like me. And secondly, besides liking
the school, it also had low school fees before free primary education. That’s why I think
most parents were able to afford taking their kids there. And also I saw that it produced
good results. Unless maybe my children have done well because I took interests in
helping my kids, and they came with good results.”

Overall she said she has been very satisfied with the school because her children
have always done well there. From her perspective she does not think there has been
much of a difference at the school since the implementation of FPE. When asked about
the school after F PE, she replied, “It’s still the same. I say so because when you talk
about free education, in other schools the teachers don’t do their work because they have
taken political sides and don’t teach anymore. And also there are a lot of kids in the
classrooms. I don’t see any difference at Morena Primary, before and after free primary
education. Even the results are still good so it’s different from other schools.” She said
she has heard about the negative changes that FPE has made at other government schools,
but from her experience she has not seen these negative changes at her children’s school.

When I asked her about private English Medium primary schools and why she
didn’t send her children there, she gave a passionate response. “No, I never did like
English Mediums because there were things I learned from observing my neighbors’
kids, and I found no difference between them and my kids from a lower standard. Since
from the pre-school, if you compare them there was no difference. That’s why I left mine
at Morena Primary. And of course it was also financial, but I found no difference. [Her

older daughter] was at Morena Primary and all of them. When they reached high school

157

 

they even topped some of those from English Mediums. I told myself not to take my kids
there, whether I was influenced by financial reasons or not.”

From this mother’s experience she did not see it necessary to pay extra to have
her children go to an English Medium school. According to her, they always seemed to
do well and get good results on the PSLE, so it didn’t make sense for her to send them to
an expensive primary school. Once again, she acknowledged that it may have been
because of the great interest she took in her children’s schooling, but in any case, they
always seemed to do well enough at the government school.

Palesa’s mother said she is very engaged with her children’s education and often
talks to their teachers. She is not afraid to speak to the teachers about problems that arise
or to tell them what she wants for her children. In the following passage she describes
how she approaches teachers and deals with her children:

“Maybe there is a time when I help Palesa and she says that her teacher didn’t
teach them that way. So, I go to the teacher and talk to her and show her how I’ve helped
her and ask for her input, even though the answer may be right by different methods. I
think it’s because our kids never think that we know anything about the things they do at
school. I also talk to the teachers just to hear progress about Palesa. Palesa never reads
her notes, she is a care-free child, but I think she listens better than reading. When she has
listened in class that’s enough and she goes to play, but I tell her she will have a difficult
time in high school if she doesn’t get into the habit of reading. Even when I tell her I’m
afraid for her in the coming exams, she assures me not to worry.”

Palesa’s mother said she is involved in her children’s education on nearly every

level. This type of help has given her children the opportunity to succeed at the

158

 

government primary school and move on to succeed in high school. Contrary to the
thinking of many parents, her children did not need to go to an English Medium private
school to be successful.

Considering her family’s situation Palesa’s mother found it was more important to
use her limited income for more important and unavoidable educational needs, such as
high school and college tuition, books, and uniforms, rather than send her children to a
private primary school. Unlike most other parents, she did not see much of a difference at
their school since the implementation of F PE. From my interpretation of Palesa’s family
situation, it seems as though the children’s success at the government school had a lot to
do with their mother’s active involvement in their education as a parent on top of
whatever the government school did. I cannot prove this connection between their
mother’s involvement and their success at school, but from the data I was able to collect
for this study, their family possessed a much greater amount of cultural capital which is
valued at school than most government school families. Nevertheless, this example
shows that with sufficient support and cultural capital from home, students can succeed
by attending government schools. Students’ success or failure is not determined solely by
the school they attend. There are a number of different factors which play into
educational success. The availability of valuable cultural capital at the home is indeed
one of these factors.

Discussion

These two examples help to illustrate the different ways the cultural capital
families possess or do not possess can impact the education of their children, regardless

of the education policies placed upon them. In the first example, Katleho’s mother did not

159

possess the necessary cultural capital to help her child to do well at school. Her child
even acknowledged this by pointing out to her mother that she had only reached the same
level of education as herself. Even though she wanted her child to do well at school she
felt there was little she could do about it because of her own lack of cultural capital.
Katleho’s grandmother had a little more educational background, so she was able to help
at times, but not to the extent that was needed. In the end, Katleho did not do as well on
her PSLE exam as her mother had expected. I cannot say whether this was a direct result
from their family’s lack of cultural capital, but it seems to have had an impact. Indeed,
there could have been a number of other factors which contributed to this fact. In any
case, her poor results will reduce the options she will have to go to high school. Without
the necessary cultural capital available at home it becomes much more difficult for
individuals to succeed in their education. Ultimately, even if she had done better on the
PSLE exam it may not have made a difference for Katleho in the end because her family
will still have troubles being able to afford to pay for high school fees due to their lack of
economic capital. Therefore, these different sources of capital can build upon each other
and make people’s situations even more constricted with fewer and fewer opportunities.
Palesa’s story, on the other hand, shows an example where a family’s abundance
of cultural capital can compensate for a seeming lack of economic capital. As a combined
result of their father’s death, having to pay for a number of children’s school fees, and
other family burdens, Palesa’s family’s budget was stretched thin, making it difficult for
them to send Palesa to a private school which required school fees. But in her mother’s
mind it was not important to send her to a private school because in her experience with

the government school her children had always performed highly, where many other

160

 

 

students struggled to do well. This helps to illustrate the ways in which having access to
important cultural capital can open up opportunities and choices for families and
individuals even if they do not have sufficient economic capital.

Using the concept of cultural capital within a policy as practice analysis helps to
show the extent to which language and education policies play in the educational
experiences of students and their families. In the two examples discussed above, it
probably would have made little difference what the policy was at the school because it
would have done little, if anything, to change the amount of cultural capital these families
possess. On the other hand, the types of policies which are implemented and emphasized
do make a difference on what-types of cultural capital is deemed to be valuable at
schools. If English is the official policy at schools, then families who can speak English
and use it often at home are at an advantage over those who do not. Therefore, policies
can have a great impact on how, and if, families can draw upon the cultural capital they
possess. But in the end, these policies are usually largely determined by the prevailing
attitudes and values of society rather than the policies themselves reshaping these
attitudes and values. In the end, the actual practices of students and families at schools
are influenced more by their social standing than by the policies implemented at their

schools.

Social Capital
The third form of capital which is influential in the educational experience of
students is in the social capital that is available to them. As discussed in Chapter 2, social

capital refers to the access to knowledge and opportunities that people gain through their

161

 

social networks and social relations. Laureau (2000, p.80) describes it as the
“transformation of social position into social advantage.” Therefore, people use their
social capital, whether it is through a social position of influence or through social
networks, to create opportunities for themselves and their families, for their own
advantage.

At the government school I worked with, this often played out in the degree to
which parents and family members felt they had a say in their children’s education or
whether they felt their voices would be heard and responded to by the school
administration and teachers. It was also manifest in the amount of information that was
available to families to-make informed decisions about their children’s education. The
examples that follow illustrate how different families felt about this question of the
responsiveness of schools and how much of a voice they possessed in their own
children’s education. The experiences of families differed greatly even though their
children attended the same school with the same teachers. Using a policy as practice
approach, I will explore these differences in the types of social capital available to each
family and how it impacts their educational experiences. I will do this within the context
of the policies placed at schools and try to determine the extent to which policies play a
role in their experiences.

Neo

Neo is in class 4. She is a small, somewhat quiet girl, but is very playful and has a
lot of fi'iends. She is near the bottom of her class in test scores and seems to struggle to

follow along in class and understand the concepts. She keeps quiet and well behaved in

162

class, but often seems disengaged. When it comes time to do assignments in class she
often does very little work and gets distracted by others in the classroom.

Neo lives with her grandmother and two uncles, one 23 years old, the other 20
years old. They live in a small two bedroom (8 ft. x 8 ft. rooms) home about 5-10 minutes
walk from school. They have been living in their current home since 2004, so they are
quite new to the area. Neo has lived with her grandmother since she was 14 months old.
Neo’s mother works in the factories in a city about an hour north and has lived there for
the past five years. The older uncle is currently attending the agricultural college in the
city while the younger one works odd jobs and is trying to find employment in the South
African mines, where he is having no luck. Neo’s mother sends money home, so they
seem to manage okay. I interviewed Neo’s grandmother in their home with the assistance
of a translator (September 19, 2007).

Neo’s grandmother received a Form B (9th grade) education while her two sons
made it up to Form C (10th grade). When I asked how she felt Neo was doing at school
she said, “She tries very hard but she is lazy to read, but when she has homework she
does it. She is a bright girl because she retains things she learned in her mind because she
repeats them to me.” She continued, “Instead of reading when she has time, she goes to
play and then in the evening she reads when she is tired and sleepy. So I’ve realized
laziness is there, but with homework she does finish in time.” She said that she and her
sons try to help Neo with her school work and they speak to her often in English to help
her practice.

Her grandmother was not very pleased with Neo’s school. She complained

excessively about how she felt the teachers did not teach well nor care about their

163

students. She complained, “It is not a satisfactory school, but because we can’t afford to
send her to a private school she has to go there. I don’t think it’s suitable for the
development of children. The teachers there don’t have an interest in teaching children
that much. They don’t take care of the children. . .. I’ve seen that happen because I would
go and see how they handle things and find them lacking, unlike back in my day when
teachers took good care of children and parents didn’t worry. . ..They don’t teach well. I
look at the results of Standard 7 examinations every year and they’re always bad.”

She stated that she’s been involved in Neo’s education from the beginning. “I’ve
always talked to her teachers from Standard 1 and talked about how things are going with
them and her.” But she expressed that does not feel like they listen to her concerns, or
any parent for that matter. “Since I’ve been here I’ve never heard the school call a parents
meeting for us to air our concerns. I’ve tried to ask for that and no one has responded. In
the rural areas every month-end or year-end they call parents’ meeting and beginning of
the year also, to be brought up to speed on the curriculum and other things like school
rules and regulations. Here I’ve asked but haven’t gotten anything in that respect.”

She expressed that she wished they would have sent Neo to a different school, but
when they moved into the area they were new and did not know the place or people
around. Therefore they decided to send her to the closest primary school “because I felt
she was still small to be sent to a far school and since we’re relatively new here we didn’t
know anyone to accompany her to any other school. It’s only this year I’ve realized a few
that had sent their kids to [a nearby government] primary school, so next year she will go

there too.”

164

Commenting on Neo’s current school she said, “I’ve wondered why their standard
7 [PSLE] results are bad when they have seven years to teach them. [The nearby
government] primary school has better results than Morena Primary every year. That’s
how I’ve realized that these teachers have no interest in the students. They don’t even
care when children arrive late for school, they don’t enforce any kind of discipline so that
the kids will come early to school. At [the nearby school] they have that. Sometimes I
just walk by Morena Primary to find teachers standing outside talking instead of being in
class teaching the children.”

When I asked her about private schools she commented, “I like them, but it’s
difficult for our children to attend them because they need to have gone through their pre-
schools first to get admission. When we first got here I wanted to take her to Dayspring
English Medium, but they give children who have attended their pre-school first priority.
I wasn’t aware of others as we were new here, and also fees are very expensive.”

Therefore, although they wanted to send Neo to a better school, her family, being
new to the area, lacked the social networks and knowledge of how to go about getting
into certain private schools. Instead, in the grandmother’s words, they were “stuck” with
having to send Neo to the local government primary school, even though she didn’t like
the way the school performed. She tried to do what she could to talk with and complain to
the school, but they did not seem to care much about her concerns, nor feel the need to
address them. Eventually, after living in the area for a few years, the grandmother was
able to discover other options available for Neo’s education, so she is planning to send

Neo to a different government school that is a little farther away. As the family was able

165

to develop more social networks and learn more about the schools in the area they have
decided to change schools for Neo in the upcoming year.

Throughout this process Neo’s mother was using her agency to try to get involved.
in her education. When she saw problems in Neo’s education she would go to the school
to see what was happening and tried to complain to the school. But she felt they did not
take any of her concerns into account. She also showed her use of agency by doing what
she could to obtain information about other schools in the area. She expressed that she
had decided to send Neo to a different government school next year. Although her
options were limited, especially when they first arrived in the area, Neo’s grandmother
used her agency to find out what she was able to and make the most informed decision
she thought she could make.

Lebo

Lebo is in class 4. She is an average student who ranks right in the middle of her
class’s scores. She is playful and curious and seems to enjoy being with her fi'iends. She
is a small girl who sits in the front of the class near the teacher’s desk. She is quite
attentive in class and participates in all of the class work. She seems interested and
involved in her education but does not stand out in comparison to her classmates.

Lebo lives with her mother and younger brother, who is also attending Morena
government primary school. They live in a two bedroom apartment (10 ft. x 12 fl. rooms)
in an apartment lot with eight similar apartments. Lebo’s father works in Rustenburg,
South Africa in the mines and comes home on the last weekend of every month, which is
common for mineworkers from Lesotho. Their apartment is quite far from the school. It

probably takes the children around 20-30 minutes to walk to school each day. There are

166

other government schools closer by, but the mother has decided to send them to this
particular one. I interviewed Lebo’s mother in their home with the assistance of a
translator. Although she could understand my English and answer a few questions in
English, she often needed the assistance of a translator.

Lebo’s mother had completed Form C (10th grade) in secondary school but was
not able to finish high school because her family did not have the money to continue. Her
husband did not go beyond Standard 6 and began working in the mines before they got
married. She had previously lived with her husband in South Africa until they had their
second child. Then she decided to move back to Lesotho for their children’s education.

She explained the reason why she sent her children to a farther away school was
because when Lebo began primary school they lived in a different home, closer to
Morena Primary. When they moved a few miles away she decided to continue to send her
to Morena Primary because she was satisfied with her education and progress. With her
second child, she decided to send him to the closer government school at the beginning of
the year, but she was not satisfied with his progress. She explained, “I like to see progress
in my children’s education. . .from January to April there was no difference. I couldn’t see
progress in his writing. I like to take action with my children and sit with them with their
books. He didn’t do well at school, he didn’t get marked. So I went and confronted the
teacher but nothing was done. So I thought it better to remove him before things were
made difficult for him by his teachers.” Afler taking him out of the school she registered
him at the same school as Lebo.

When asked how she felt about Lebo’s education she replied, “I’m satisfied with

Lebo’s progress, even though she doesn’t improve here and there, her problem is spelling

167

because she doesn’t read. But she is bright. . .She loves to play too much. She is still a
child, but she will get there and slowly walk in my footsteps.” Lebo’s mother said that
she herself loves to read story books, history, and many other things in both English and
Sesotho. She tries to get Lebo to read, but says she likes to play too much. When I asked
why she pushes Lebo to get a good education she said, “Because 1 want her to be
educated and do things herself. My reason I‘m not educated and also life is not our own
so I ‘m hoping she will help her siblings when I ‘m gone.”

Lebo’s mother’s decisions show that she felt like she had different options
available for her children’s education, even within the FPE government schools. She used
her agency when she saw that she could send her children to another school if she was
not satisfied with their current school and still not have to pay school fees. Lebo’s mother
was very engaged in her children’s education and felt confident in being able to help
them with their schoolwork. Although she did not complete high school she was able to
get an education beyond the primary level and she said that she felt that as an asset for
her children. In addition, she developed a cultural environment in the home which
stressed reading and other things that promoted the development of valuable cultural
capital in their home. Therefore, Lebo’s mother seemed quite optimistic about her
children’s educational opportunities and felt like she had options to provide them with a
good education without having to send them to a private school.

Pulani and Malepa

Pulani is in class 7. She is a somewhat shy, but friendly and playful girl. She is
one of the better students in her class and is attentive and well behaved. She works hard

and seems to understand things quite well. She was able to communicate most of her

168

thoughts in English, although sometimes in broken sentences with a limited vocabulary.
Pulani said she wants to be a teacher when she grows up. She received a second class
pass on the PSLE (Sesotho: 1, English: 1, Mathematics: 2)

Her brother, Malepa, is three years older than her, but he is also in class 7 in a
different teacher’s class. He is quite a wild boy who gets into a lot mischief with the other
boys and doesn’t seem to take school very seriously. Malepa wants to be a soldier when
he grows up. He received a third class pass on the PSLE (Sesotho: 1, English: 2,
Mathematics: Failed).

Pulani and her brother live with their mother on a dirt road lined with
government-built, two room (8 ft. x 8 ft.) cinder block homes. They live about a five-
minute walk from school. They have a small yard with a small garden. The home has
very basic furniture with the kitchen also acting as a second bedroom. They live just two
houses down from their uncle, who has built a much larger home and seems to be doing
rather well financially. Their uncle spoke to us for a few minutes before interviewing
their mother. He seemed quite educated and spoke very good English. It sounded like he
had lived in South Afi'ica for quite some time. I interviewed the mother in their home
with the assistance of a translator (September 18, 2007).

Pulani and Malepa’s mother had completed Form B (9th grade) in her education.
She moved into the area in 1995, but her husband died in 1998. She has another child
who is 19 years old and is attending a high school in South Africa. She said her extended
family (I assume the uncle) is helping to pay for his high school fees. The mother works
at a local restaurant where she makes M722 (approximately $100) a month, but she will

soon be out of work because the restaurant will be closing due to the building being

169

scheduled to be demolished in January. She works many hours and arrives home very
tired. She said she tries to help her children with their schoolwork but often can’t because
she is too tired. She said that their uncle helps them often with their schoolwork.

When I asked how she felt about her children’s progress at school, she said she
was pleased with Pulani but did not know what to do about her son. She explained that he
doesn’t do as well “because he is very playful. It was his fault because even when you try
to help him he just says he understands things so that you can let go and he rushes off to
play. With Pulani she is serious about school work and does it well.” She said she has
talked to their teachers often about her children’s progress, especially her son. She feels
that his current teacher “is a nice person and he tries.” She does not blame the school for
his lack of progress, she just says, “Malepa is clever, it’s just that he is not serious about
anything.” She hoped for both of them to continue on to high school, but especially for
Pulani because she is more serious about school. She said it is a concern for her to be able
to pay for their high school fees because she will no longer have a job next year. But she
said that she will find a way to get the money to pay from month to month, if need be,
probably from her extended family.

She claimed to not have any major problems with the government school, but
when I asked her about F PE she responded, “I don’t really like it. I think the teachers
don’t care for the children unlike before when we used to pay fees, that’s what I don’t
like.” She continued, “We used to have parent meetings, but not any more. So we can’t
give them our concerns.” She said she felt like the school used to listen to their problems,
but not any more. When I asked whether she would prefer to pay school fees again she

replied, “Yes, because if they don’t teach I have a right to go, I can complain about my

170

money but in this one they can argue that we pay nothing.” Therefore, although they did
not have much money to pay school fees, she said she would have preferred it that way so
she could have more say in her children’s education and be heard by the school. She said
she didn’t send her children to a private school because she cannot afford to pay such
high fees. But before F PE, the government schools fees were very low, and many
families like theirs could afford to pay. By eliminating the school fees she felt as though
they also took away her voice as a parent at the school.

This mother claimed that she was not able to take care of her children’s
educational needs herself, but she was able to use her agency by drawing upon the social
networks available to her. Due to their proximity to Pulani and Malepa’s uncle, who
possessed both economic and cultural capital, they were able to draw upon him as a
resource, both for helping to pay for her oldest son’s high school education, and also to
help her children, especially Pulani with her schoolwork. On the other hand, she felt like
she was limited in her ability to use her agency to approach the school if she had
problems because she felt that now that they do not pay school fees they no longer have
the right to complain. This perspective differs from other parents whom I interviewed,
who felt they had the right to approach their children’s school and felt like their
complaints were heard. I don’t know what causes these parents to view their relationship
with the school in different ways, but their perceptions effect how they use their agency
in deciding to approach the school with problems or not.

Discussion

The examples from these three families’ lives help to show different ways social

capital can influence the options available to them. Neo’s grandmother lacked social

171

networks when she moved into the area and thus was not able to make informed
decisions for her granddaughter. Over time she gained some social capital and was able
to change her situation. On the other hand, she tried to be as involved as possible in
Neo’s education, but she felt the school did not listen to any of her concerns. Her social
position did not allow her to have the type of influence she hoped to have. Now that she
has found a different school for Neo she said she is hoping things will change.

Lebo’s situation was similar to Neo’s, but her mother was able to take quicker
action and control over her children’s education. This is partially due to her familiarity
with the area and an understanding of how to negotiate things with different schools, but
it also has to do with how she used her agency in a different way. She did not hesitate to
criticize her son’s school and pull him out of the school halfway through the school year.
She was not willing to see the school determine the type of education her son received.
She was able to utilize her agency for the benefit of her children.

The final example of Pulani and Malepa’s family shows the importance of having
a social network to turn to for assistance, especially in times of need. In many people’s
cases in Lesotho this largely entails a network of relatives who have economic capital or
other sources of power and access to opportunities in society. Although Pulani and
Malepa’s mother was not able to afford to pay the school fees by herself for their older
brother and for their potential enrollment in high school, she was assured that she could
turn to her social network for the needed support to make these things happen. In
addition, these relatives, especially the uncle, were able to help out with providing

cultural capital in the form of help with school work while the mother was unable.

172

r";

 

 

.’(
Wilt:
~\

‘1‘.)I“ t“
«an
‘.

 

These are just a few examples of how social capital helps to produce different
choices and opportunities for those who have a social network to turn to and for those
who are in a position to make their influence felt in their own children’s education.
Looking at these families’ different situations through a policy as practice approach we
can see that there are many factors outside of policies themselves which influence how
families and individuals choose to respond to their educational experiences and
opportunities. These include the sources of social capital available to local stakeholders
and how they draw upon their social resources. We will see other examples of social
capital in practice when we discuss how private school families utilize their social capital

for their advantage in the next chapter.

Symbolic/Linguistic Capital

In this section, rather than illustrating the types of symbolic and linguistic capital
available to government school students through the stories of particular families, I will
take a more comprehensive look at the general trends that I found among the different
government school families I worked with in this study. As discussed in Chapter 2,
symbolic capital is a little more difficult to define and specify than the other forms of
capital. This is because it can be found in many different manifestations. Among the
various types of symbolic capital in Bourdieu’s theories include art, religion, science, and
language. In this section I will focus mainly on linguistic capital, which is one form of
symbolic capital. One reason symbolic capital is difficult to define is because it is so
closely interrelated with cultural capital. In order for someone to effectively understand

and know how to utilize symbolic capital which is deemed valuable in society, they must

173

first possess the necessary cultural capital in order to sufficiently appreciate and
operationalize their symbolic capital.

Therefore, when I refer to linguistic capital in this study, I do so at two different
levels. I will mainly discuss linguistic capital in reference to knowledge of English in the
context of Lesotho. The first level is more closely related to cultural capital, meaning, in
this context, the basic knowledge of English. For example, those individuals and families
who can understand, speak, read, and write in English are at an advantage at school
compared to those who do not have a good knowledge of the language. The greater grasp
a student has in these four skills of English usage, the more successful they will be at
school due to the great emphasis of English in the language in education policy. In the
same light, those who come from families where people at home possess these language
skills, they can more easily draw from their family’s knowledge to benefit their own
education.

The second level of linguistic capital is more on the level of symbolic capital.
That is, those who have a mastery of the language are then able to utilize the language to
exploit social situations to their own advantage. Examples of this would be someone who
knows how to effectively use the proper register in English under appropriate
circumstances, or someone who effectively uses their English language skills to write a
persuasive article or give an influential speech. These acts move language beyond just
having knowledge of the language, but into the realm of knowing how to use the
language for one’s own benefit.

With regards to the government school families I interviewed, there were very

few who possessed much linguistic capital. Out of the 19 interviews I conducted with

174

government school families, only three were conducted in English. There were three
others which were capable of being interviewed in English but preferred to use Sesotho
because they were not comfortable with their English. That means that 6 out of the 19
families had enough knowledge of English to answer questions about themselves and
their family’s social and educational background. Granted, many of the questions and
topics covered in the interviews were difficult to answer and fully express, even in their
own language, but in contrast, out of the 10 interviews I conducted with private school
families, only one was conducted in Sesotho, and the person in that interview understood
all of my questions in English and was capable of answering many of my questions in
English, but she preferred to use a translator. Therefore, there was a significant difference
between the linguistic knowledge that was available in private school families’ homes
compared to those of government school families.

In addition to this, the material culture at the homes of the government school
families was much less conducive to learning English. Out of the 19 homes, only 9 of the
homes had televisions, while all 10 of the private school homes had televisions. Although
most of the government school families had books in their homes, most did not have
many books in comparison to private school families, and only four families expressed
that they read for pleasure at home. Out of the 19 families I interviewed, only four of the
parents or guardians had employment which required them to use English on a regular
basis. Thus, most of the government school students did not have much access to using or
learning English outside of school. In Chapter 7, I will illustrate the great differences
there were in the use of English at government schools in comparison to private schools,

but for purposes of this discussion, government school students are also exposed to much

175

less English at school than private school students. So, not only do they get less exposure
to English at home, but also at school.

Using a policy as practice analysis we can see that all of these conditions combine
with the lack of other sources of capital to make it difficult for government school
students to learn and become proficient in English, which is so vital to gaining a good
quality education in Lesotho under their current language policy. Therefore, although the
policy of using English as the language of instruction at schools does little, if anything, to
improve the linguistic capital available to students in their families and homes, it plays a
significant role in determining which languages are valued over others in school, and
hence, which families have a greater potential to succeed and benefit from their schooling
experience. Thus, language policy in education has a close connection to what is deemed
valuable symbolic and linguistic capital, it does little to help students obtain the valued
linguistic capital through schooling. In fact, it may do the opposite by putting students
with a lack of access to the English language in their everyday lives at a disadvantage

compared to those who are regularly exposed to the English language.

Conclusion

Through the examples provided in this chapter we are able to see how the
different forms of capital discussed by Bourdieu play out in the lived realities of students
and their families at one particular government school. The different combination of
economic, cultural, and social capital that families possess has an enormous influence on
the types of choices and opportunities available to them to influence their children’s

education. Those families who possess little of these forms of capital find their lives

176

constrained by difficult choices with little opportunity to move out of their situation.
Families can use their agency to decide between the choices available to them, but these
choices are sometimes very constrained, which may limit the extent that individual
agency can be used to make changes in their lives.

On the other hand, families which possess one form of capital more than others
may be able to compensate for their lack of the other forms of capital by utilizing their
agency and making decisions that will benefit their family. For example, if a family lacks
the economic capital to pay for the quality of education they desire, they can try to make
up for it if they possess enough cultural capital to provide the quality of education
through assistance with schoolwork at home. If a family lacks cultural capital to assist
their children with the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed at school, they can try
to compensate for this through their social capital by drawing upon those within their
social network who can provide such cultural capital. On the other hand, if they have
enough economic capital they can either pay for tutors or decide to send their children to
a private school that will provide a higher quality education.

Therefore, the mix of different types of capital that families possess has a strong
influence on the choices and opportunities available to them. This helps to show that the
structures of society do indeed act to strongly influence the different possibilities
available to families for their children’s education. However, social structures do not
determine how these families and individuals will act because each has their own unique
combination of different forms of capital which leads to different options available to
each family. In addition, these families must still utilize their agency to act upon these

different options and decide what they feel are the most beneficial choices to them and

177

their families. These decisions may not always be the best informed or end up being most
beneficial to their families, but in the end, individuals must make choices based upon the
options available to them within the social structures of their lives. This is one place
where the structure/agency dynamics meet, in the decisions that families make for the
education of their children.

So what does this mean with regards to language policy in education in Lesotho?
Building upon the discussion in Chapter 2, my criticism of much of the LPP research,
especially regarding LiEP in Africa, is that it puts too much emphasis on the policy itself
and the actual language of instruction that is used at schools and claims that by changing
the official language of instruction to using local languages it will help to solve many of
the problems facing education in Africa. By illustrating the many different pushes and
pulls on the lives of government school families, we can see that through their different
sources of capital, or lack thereof, there are many different structural constraints which
limit the opportunities of students to succeed at school. Language, or linguistic capital, is
only one of those structural constraints. Although changing the language of instruction to
use local languages may help students to understand what they are being taught better, it
will not replace the lack of economic, cultural, or social capital that underprivileged
families possess. I would argue that these other structural issues have a much larger
impact on the educational experience that students have than the language of instruction
that is used at schools.

Using a policy as practice approach in analyzing the circumstances within which
local stakeholders, such as students and their families, operate helps to place the actual

language and education policies in perspective within all of the realities involved in

178

educational practices. Policy decisions indeed have an impact on the opportunities and
practices of local stakeholders, but they only do within the context of their particular
lives. Thus, a policy that may benefit one set of stakeholders may disadvantage other
stakeholders within the same school or context. This type of analysis helps to show the
complexity of determining the actual impact of policy decisions because on they deal
with very different circumstances on the ground.

In the following chapter, I will explore the sources of capital that families who
send their children to private English Medium schools possess and discuss the ways in
which their greater access to valuable capital often provides them with more choices and
opportunities to assure that their children receive a better quality education. In that
chapter we will be able to see how many different influences outside of schools have a

great impact on the education that students receive.

179

Chapter 5: Private School Families

Introduction

In the previous chapter I discussed the influence that different forms of capital
have on the lives of students who go to government schools and their families, especially
with regards to the educational decisions they are able, or not able, to make. In this
chapter I will do the same by focusing on the opportunities and constraints which are
presented to the families of students who send their children to private schools. In doing
so, I will follow a similar approach as I did in Chapter 4 by portraying the manifestations
and influences of different sources of capital through the stories of a few selected families
by drawing upon their own explanations and depictions of their lived realities in their
own words, which I collected through interviews and observations with the students and
their families. In this chapter, 1 contrast some of the differences between the structural
constraints and opportunities facing government school families compared to those
presented to private school families, while also showing the diversity in attitudes and acts
of agency between families in each category. Therefore, although families from each
category tend to have similar influences placed upon them, they differ in their particular
manifestations and the ways in which they combine from family to family. In addition,
each family and individual utilizes their agency in unique ways, which results in various
outcomes.

As in Chapter 4, 1 will continue to use a policy as practice approach to the
analysis in this chapter, where I first focus on what is happening in practice on the ground

at private schools and in the students’ families’ lives. I will largely rely upon Bourdieu’s

180

sources of capital to analyze and discuss the different lived realities in their lives. I will
then relate the experiences, attitudes, and practices of the families to the language and
education policies at their schools. The ultimate goal of beginning with the experiences
and practices of the private school families is to place the language and education policies
within perspective of the larger context of all that is involved in the education of students.
Policies are only one of many factors that influence the education of students. Therefore,
by starting with the actual attitudes, experiences, and practices of students and their
families, as was portrayed to me through interviews and observations, we can gain a
better appreciation of the role that language and education policies play in their
educational experiences.
Before I delve into the stories and interviews of the private school families, I
would like to point out a few differences in the sources of data for this chapter. As I
mentioned before, in Chapter 3, I conducted previous research in 2005 at the government
school I worked with, so I was already familiar with many of the students and their
families. In addition, I lived in the immediate community of the government school, so I
had a greater understanding of the particular context of the school as well as greater
access to the teachers, students, and families at the government school, who all lived
1' elatively close by. With regards to the private school students and their families, they
Were from diverse communities and populated all over the city. Therefore, it was more
di ffi cult to gain access to the particular contexts within which they lived and caused
greater complications in arranging for and following through with interviews with many
of the students’ families. As a result, I worked with about half as many private school

fami lies (10) as I did with government school families (19). Also, for some reason, I was

181

more successful in gaining access to families of students from Standard 4 at the private
schools (7) than those from Standard 7 (3). This is the nearly opposite of the proportion
of families I managed to work with at the government school, with six students from
Standard 4 and thirteen from Standard 7. Therefore, the data in these two chapters is not
necessarily comparable along parallel lines, but the stories which they depict serve to
illustrate the differing lived realities that the private school families have compared to the

government school families in this study.

Economic Capital
As was discussed in Chapter 4, one of the greatest constraints making it difficult,
if not impossible, for most of the government school families to send their children to
what they perceived as better private schools was their lack of economic capital. Due to
the fact that ever since the implementation of F PE government schools no longer charged
school fees, many families were now able to send their children to school when they
otherwise might not have been able to afford it. When it came to sending their children to
private schools, or other government schools which they perceived of as better, it was
often not possible for them to do so. This was because they could not afford to pay for the
SChool fees at private schools, could not pay for the transportation to get to far away
Schools, or a combination of both. In a few cases, some families had the potential
economic capital to pay for their children to go to another school, but there were other
demands the family had to meet, such as paying for the older children’s unavoidable
Secondary school fees, which made it more difficult to justify spending money on their

pri mary school aged children’s education. As a result, many families tried to compensate

182

for their lack of economic capital by drawing upon other sources of capital, such as social
or cultural capital, to ensure that their children received as good of an education as they
could, despite not being able to go to a better school.
In this section I will contrast the examples mentioned above with the experiences
of some of the private school families I worked with. Although economic capital was a
concern to nearly all of the families, both at government and private schools, it did not
pose nearly as much of a constraint to most of the private school families than it did to
the government school families. In some cases, the parents of private school students saw
their access to economic capital as a resource from which they could draw in order to -
ensure that their children received the best education possible. In these cases, rather than
acting as a constraint, economic capital acted as a resource for greater opportunities and
possibilities. In a few cases, the families were able to make up for a lack of other fortns of
capital by the economic capital to which they had access. I will illustrate some of these
issues through the stories of two private school students and their families.
Poloko
Poloko is in Grade 4. He seems to like having fun with his friends because he is
always playing around. He usually follows along in class, but he easily gets distracted
and sometimes has a hard time keeping on task. He was part of the Standard 4 class at
Dayspring English Medium where three different classes met together in the school’s
aSSernbly hall (which 1 describe in more detail in Chapter 7), therefore it was easy for
mOSt of the students in the class to get distracted and not always pay attention to the

1eSSOn. But overall Poloko seemed to be a good student, but not exceptional. His teachers

183

said he was one of the lower performing students in the class, but they also said they had

seen some great improvements in him lately.

Poloko lives in a rather large house with a large yard surrounded by a stone fence.
1 only entered the living room and dining room, but it looked like the house had at least
three bedrooms along with a good sized kitchen. The living room and dining room were
completely furnished with what seemed to be new furniture, including a large
entertainment center, a formal dining table, and other luxuries. His house was about a ten

minute walk from Dayspring English Medium, so he did not have to use any

transportation to get to school, but rather walked.

I conducted the interview (September 22, 2007) with Poloko’s mother with the
help of a translator. She could understand my English and was able to respond to basic
questions in English, but she did not feel comfortable answering questions about her
son’s education in English, so she opted to answer questions in Sesotho throughout most
of the interview. Poloko is the last out of four children. His oldest brother, who is 28
years old, finished high school and went to a technical university in nearby South Africa
to study auto mechanics. The second born child is 25 years old and is finishing his final
Year of high school. The third born is 16 and is in Form C (10th grade) at Lesotho High
School, one of the best high schools in town. Poloko’s mother made it up through Form C
in her own education. She says she speaks limited English and doesn’t always feel
Comfortable with her English abilities. She owns her own business as a tailor. Poloko’s
father received a primary education and did not go any further in his schooling. The

mOther said that the father does not speak any English. He now works in the mines in

S . u -
011th Africa and comes home every month or so to vrsrt.

184

Poloko’s two oldest siblings went to primary school at the local government
school Morena Primary when it was run by the church, which was before F PE was
implemented. When I asked how she felt about that school she responded, “Morena
Primary was fine during those days when the older ones went there. I was satisfied with

it. The second born has always been brilliant, he would do well anywhere.” She said they
had to pay school fees back then, but the fees were minimal compared to private schools.
She added that she would have preferred to have sent her first two children to a private
primary school, but they could not afford it at the time. In any case, she said she was
satisfied because they ended up doing well in primary school. When I asked her how she
felt about Morena Primary now that it has become a government school under FPE she
responded, “It’s been over a decade now since my second born went there and that was
the last time I had dealings with [the school], so I don’t know how it is now. . ..I can’t say
I’ve heard anything, but when my children went there it was regarded as one of the
schools with a low standard in education, but kids still did well and l was happy.”

When I asked her how she felt about F PE in general she replied, “It is good for
those parents who couldn’t afford any fees so that their children can get basic knowledge,
but it’s also bad if the parents don’t play a bigger role and take interest in their children,
because teachers don’t do much towards their education now that it’s fiee.” She went on
to express how she feels that the F PE program has impacted government schools in a

negative way. “Most schools belonged to churches before and the leaders used to push
teaChers to do best to keep high reputations, but since free primary education no one is
behind anyone to do a good job anymore because there’s no money coming in from the

Parents.” Thus, much like the parents quoted in Chapter 4, Poloko’s mother felt that FPE

185

was a good thing because it allowed many children to go to school who previously could

not afford it, but she also felt that the quality of education has gone down significantly
since its implementation. She accounted this to less leadership at the schools and less
accountability to parents since the government has taken over and the schools no longer
charge school fees.

When the younger two children were old enough to go to primary school, which
was nearly nine years later, the mother said their family was in a much better situation
financially, so they were able to send them to private schools. The third born did all of his
primary schooling at Lerato English Medium, which was nearby. Poloko also began
primary school at Lerato, but the mother was not very satisfied with his progress.
Therefore, after he completed Standard 2 they transferred him to Dayspring English
Medium, which had a better reputation and was also in the area. She explained Poloko’s
situation in the following passage, “Dayspring is of a higher standard than those. At
Lerato English Medium, the one doing Form C did well, but with Poloko, his work
wasn’t satisfactory so maybe it was the teacher that taught them.” She went on to say that
she has been very pleased with Poloko’s performance at his new school, Dayspring. “He
is doing much better than when he was at Lerato. At Dayspring he struggled for a while
When he was adapting to their standard, but lately he has been catching up with everyone

since he has been full of enthusiasm and interest in his studies.” When I asked her what
She thought was the difference between the two schools she suggested it was due to,
“Committed teachers who real care. When you talk to a teacher and hear the care in them,
you know your child is going to be fine. Since I can’t teach him I’m happy they persist

te - . .
achmg hlm until he understands. They even have late afternoon classes where they

186

learn more, ask questions, and later leave with a better understanding.” I had witnessed

Poloko stay after school a number of times during these sessions, which the teachers

called “revisions” for the day’s lessons.

I then asked Poloko’s mother how she felt about education in general in Lesotho.
She answered, “The general education is fine. The problem is English, because when our
children are faced with exams they don’t understand the English, and therefore fail to
know what to write. I think that if English is taught more and the standard is upped in all
schools, things will be fine for every child. They will go through life better. Actually I
feel that if everyone in Lesotho could speak English, life will be better.” Poloko’s mother
referred to the teaching of English as an important role for primary schools, throughout
the interview, with comments such as, “I like [English medium of instruction] very much
because you can’t survive this life now without English language. When kids get to high
school the kids don’t struggle to understand teachers that teach in English,” and, “I think
if English could be taught early in [government] schools, the children will grow up
knowing English and there won’t be difficulties when they start to be taught strictly in
English.” She even used it as one criteria for determining which school was better, “I
think Dayspring’s standard is better than Lerato. Here at Dayspring kids speak English
even if they’re playing but at Lerato they speak Sesotho outside of class playing.”
Although Poloko’s mother was not comfortable with her own English knowledge,
and the father could not speak any English, she was happy to see her children being able
to learn and speak English well. She stated, “1 think it was the standard of that time
because even in my day no primary child spoke English. We’ve only heard English

Speaking Children since English Medium schools were established.” Therefore, it seems

187

that she is quite pleased with the education that her children are now able to receive at

English Medium private schools. As she had mentioned before, they are now able to
afford to send their children to these types of schools, which she feels has made a big
difference for her children, especially Poloko, who was struggling before. According to
Poloko’s mother, this is not only because they speak English at these schools, but also
because the teachers seem to spend the time and dedication making sure their students
learn well.

In Poloko’s family’s situation they did not have the economic capital to send their
first two children to a private school. But the mother was pleased with the education they
received. She claimed it was because the government school was much better when it
was run by the church and charged school fees. She feels that the quality has decreased
tremendously at the government school since then, but she does not have direct
experience with that. At the time the family’s options were limited because they had
limited economic capital. But now that the father has good, steady employment in South
Africa and she runs her own business, they are able to afford sending their two youngest
children to better quality private schools. Their opportunities have opened up due to their
increased economic capital, which has allowed them to utilize their agency more freely.
This is CSpecially evident from the experience when they took Poloko out of Lerato
English Medium, where they had had good experiences in the past, but things were no

longer Working out well for Poloko. So, they used their agency and economic capital to
transfer him to a different private school which seemed to be serving his needs much

bfitter. This most likely would have not been possible if they did not have the necessary

economic capital.

188

Nthabiseng
Nthabiseng is in Standard 7 at Dayspring English Medium. She is an active girl

who does not seem to be too engaged in her schooling. She seems to enjoy being with her
friends and spends a lot of time hanging out with the other girls in her class. Whenever I
approached her with questions or tried to follow up on interviews with her family, she
seemed reluctant and short with her responses. Her English was fine and she could
communicate well, but she acted like she was more interested in being with her fiiends
than talking to someone in an authority position. Her teachers said that she was one of the
lower performing students in her class and expressed their concern about her dedication.
She received a third class pass on the PSLE (English: 1, Sesotho: 1, Math: Fail) which was
very low for her school.

Nthabiseng’s mother passed away years ago, so she now lives with her
grandmother somewhere close to where the school is located. I never was able to visit
their home, but I spoke to her grandmother for a short time over the phone. Her
grandmother did not speak any English, so we had a broken-up conversation in Sesotho. I
did not get much out of my interview with her, other than she lives with two of her
grandchildren, who are both going to Dayspring, and takes care of them because their
mother is dead and the father does not help them. When I asked Nthabiseng whom I
Could interview as her guardian, she referred me to her uncle. So, I conducted an
interview with her uncle on July 12, 2007 in his business office in town. He did not want

me to tape record the interview, so 1 do not have many direct quotes. The interview was

Completely done in English without any translator or research assistant present.

189

Nthabiseng’s uncle, Mr. Kabelo, is a successful businessman who is quite well
known in the business community. He is highly involved in a number of activities. He is
on the board of commerce and said he is constantly in consultation with the government
on how to improve business opportunities for people in the country and how to work
better with local businesses to improve Lesotho’s economy. When I talked to a number of

businessmen in town, most of them knew Mr. Kabelo and had great respect for him. In
my interview with him, we talked about his own educational and occupational
background as well as how he is involved in Nthabiseng’s education as well as many
others like her.
With regards to his involvement in Nthabiseng’s education, he said he has been
paying for her and her sibling’s education, who are both going to Dayspring, ever since
their mother, his sister, passed away. He is also paying for the education of his late
brother’s three children, one also at Dayspring, one in high school, and one at the
university. The children who are going to Dayspring all live with their grandmother, Mr.
Kabelo’s mother, while they go to school. He says that he tries to keep up with their
education and periodically checks to see how they are doing, but he does not have the
time to be involved on a daily basis. He says that his mother tries to do so, but she did not
receive much of an education and cannot speak English, so she is limited in how much
she can help with their schoolwork. When I asked him why he sent them to Dayspring, he
said it was because it was close to where their grandmother lives, which has allowed
them 150 stay with her while attending school, and because the school has a good
reputation. He seemed to be quite pleased with the way the school was performing but

said he did not visit the school much at all and did not know the children’s current

190

teachers. He knew the principal quite well, but that was about it. He said their
grandmother was the one who dealt with any day-to-day issues relating to the school.
Mr. Kabelo explained that the reason why he could not be so engaged in the
children’s education at such an intimate level was because he was helping a number of
other students to firrther their education at the same time. He said that ever since he has
become a successful businessman he has tried to utilize his finances and social influence
to help as many young people that he can in whom he sees great potential. He explained
to me that a number of his employees first approached him for help in paying for their
schooling. He said he believed in these individuals, so he helped them get an education
and then employed them himself. He was excited that one of his employees was moving
on to another job, because he said that was his main purpose of employing them, to train
th em for a better future. Mr. Kabelo also said that he has established a scholarship
pro gram and award ceremony for a particular high school in a town a few hours north of
Maseru. Through this he has managed to work with the government, the local media, and
oth er business sponsors to provide M20,000 ($3,000) of scholarships every year for the
hi gh school students. He said that through this and his own personal interventions and
ass i Stance to many students he can no longer count how many people he has helped
fi‘lt'tl‘ler their educational opportunities.
When I asked him why he does all of this to help so many individuals, Mr. Kabelo
Sai d that he began from very humble circumstances himself and had to struggle on his
Own to survive. He originally was able to get a good education only because people from
his Community and extended family stepped in to help him when he could not pay for

s . . .
chOOl fees and other necessrtres. Therefore he feels that he owes it to others to help them

191

progress, and he feels that education is the best way to do that. When I asked him about
the education system in Lesotho, Mr. Kabelo said that he feels one of the biggest
problems is that they need to teach students with more business thinking skills. He claims
there is a lack of entrepreneurial spirit in Lesotho, and he thinks this stems partly from
the education system. He wishes the ministry would be able to incorporate a curriculum
th at would empower students to develop the creative and critical thinking skills necessary
to start and run successful businesses. He feels this is greatly missing in Lesotho.
Overall, Mr. Kabelo expressed his belief in formal education as a way for people
to move out of their impoverished situations, so he felt it was necessary to use the capital
and influence he has gained through his own education and hard work to give other
people the same chances in life. He stated to me, “I believe in God and that things happen
in Ways that I don’t understand. If I can help then I do. I don’t just help with money. . ..I
never believe that I’m the best. So I make sure to train people so they are competent and
can do without me.” He expressed the importance of having access to economic capital in
Order to gain a good education and opportunities to succeed in life. He said that is why he
did so much to help others to obtain a good education.
It is interesting to see that through Mr. Kabelo’s access to economic capital and
S‘()Cial influence he has been able to provide his niece and many other young people with
educational opportunities, but he has not been able to provide them with direct assistance
Wi th their school work and day-to-day educational needs. As such, he had limited
i1IfIIJence over the actual performance of Nthabiseng at school. Although he was able to
proVide financial assistance to assure that Nthabiseng and her siblings went to a good

priVate school, he himself did not have the time nor did their grandmother, whom they

192

lived with, possess the necessary cultural and symbolic capital to assist them in their
daily needs to succeed at school. Although I cannot speak to the specific circumstances in
which they lived with their grandmother, I can confirm, through my interview with Mr.
Kabelo along with conversations with Nthabiseng’s teachers, that the children’s living
circumstances were of a lower standard to most private school families. Therefore,
al though access to economic capital can help provide students with opportunities they
otherwise would not have had, it cannot overcome all social constraints, such as a lack of
cu ltural, symbolic, or social capital.
Discussion
In these two examples we can see that having access to sufficient economic
capi tal opens up educational opportunities that otherwise would not be available to some
S111(1ents and their families. In the first example of Poloko’s family, his two oldest siblings
Were not able to afford to go to private schools due to the family’s economic situation at
the time, even though their parents wished they could. Nearly a decade later, when the
younger two children were old enough to go to primary school, the family was in a much
better financial situation and was able to pay for their children to go to a private school.
In fact, they were in such a position that they could afford to transfer Poloko to an even
mol‘e prestigious private school because he was not performing well at his initial private
Sch(30]. Without the economic capital they would not have been able to do so. Poloko’s
ITlo‘iher felt that their first two children were able to do well at the church school because
the School had better leadership and the teachers did a better job of teaching at the time.
She expressed that she did not think the same school would have been able to produce

Slrnilar results for her younger two children, especially for Poloko because of his troubles

193

with learning at school, because she felt the quality of the school had decreased ever
since becoming an F PE school. By the time Poloko was old enough to go to school, their
family did not have to worry about the possibility of sending Poloko and his brother to
the government school because they had the financial resources to make other choices
and open up different educational opportunities.
In a similar way, the example of Nthabiseng shows that even though she and her
si bl ings did not have the necessary economic capital themselves, they did have access to
su ch capital through their extended family, in this case their uncle. Therefore, through
their social networks (or social capital) they were able to be provided with the necessary
economic capital to open up opportunities they otherwise wouldn’t have had. As was
di Seussed in the previous chapter, the different forms of capital introduced by Bourdieu
Ofien work in combination with each other to either cause further constraints, or in this
Gas e, open up opportunities for individuals. Although their social ties led to opening up
OIDIDOI'tunities in one aspect (financially) they did not necessarily compensate for other
fol‘l‘ns of capital which the children lacked, namely cultural and symbolic capital, because
a1 th ough they lived with their grandmother, she did not possess the educational nor
1 iIlg'uistic background to sufficiently compensate for what they lacked and needed help
With at school. Due to his busy lifestyle, Mr. Kabelo, their uncle, was not able to provide
er7‘(>ugh time and attention to sufficiently provide these other sources of capital which
they were in need of. Although I cannot make a direct connection, this probably made it
more difficult for Nthabiseng and her siblings to perform well at school compared to their

peers at the private school who had both enough economic capital and lived with family

194

members who possessed necessary the cultural and linguistic capital to be able to
effectively help them with their schoolwork and learning.
Using a policy as practice approach to analyze these families’ experiences
compared to those at the government school, we can see that language and education
policies can do little, if anything, to change the economic situations of these families.
Without the necessary economic capital it becomes difficult for families to provide the
best education for their children, especially when there is a large discrepancy between the
q uality of education provided at free government schools compared to fee charging
pri vate schools. The F PE policy has tried to mitigate some of these economic
di screpancies by making schooling more available to the poor, but, as has been discussed
be fore, most families feel the FPE policy has increased the gap in quality between
government and private schools. Therefore, policy efforts often attempt to intervene with
SOC ial and economic barriers for certain students and families, but they cannot always

0V’ercome these barriers. At times they may even exacerbate the barriers in unintended

Ways.

Cu [rural and Symbolic Capital

The next forms of capital 1 will discuss in this chapter are cultural and symbolic
c‘1I3ital. As was seen in Chapter 4, the government school families varied greatly in the
atl1(3unt of cultural and symbolic capital available in their homes to help their students
with schoolwork and learning. One student’s family was able to make up for a lack of
ee()Ilomic capital by drawing upon the educational experience and knowledge of her

mother and older siblings to help her succeed at school, while the parent of another

195

student felt as if she could contribute little, if anything, to her child’s learning because

she had only reached the same level of education that her child was currently completing

This diversity in the amount of cultural and symbolic capital available to students
was also displayed in the lives of the private school families I worked with. As was

il lustrated above, although the two families had sufficient economic capital to send their

oh i ldren to higher quality private schools, they were lacking to some degree in their

abi lity to provide the cultural and linguistic support their children needed for help on their

schoolwork. In this section 1 will highlight the experiences and lived realities of a few
families which possessed the necessary cultural and linguistic capital to help their
Ch i ldren do well at school.

In this chapter I have combined the forms of cultural and symbolic capital
t()geurer because they largely go hand in hand at schools, especially with regard to being
ab 1 e to follow the language policy of using English at school. One distinguishing
di fference between government and private schools is that private schools begin
ins truction in English from day one in grade one and adhere to this policy quite strictly
th r()ughout the children’s education. One of the things that make this possible is the
amount of cultural and linguistic capital students bring with them and can draw upon to
S“ICCeed at school. In the following examples I will illustrate how students are able to
draw upon their families’ cultural and linguistic capital to succeed at school. Once again,
us ing a policy as practice approach in this analysis helps to put the language in education

pg 1 icy in perspective within all of the other social, cultural, and linguistic factors which

c . , . .
011tribute to students educational experiences.

Thato

196

Thato is in Standard 4 at Dayspring English Medium. She is a very bright girl
who almost seems to be more mature than the rest of her classmates. All of her teachers
said that she was the top student in all three classes. She seemed to enjoy school very
much and was always involved in the classroom lessons. She was often the first to raise
her hand to answer questions or go to the board to solve problems. The teachers also
tended to call on her more often than others for answers to question. On one occasion the
S tandard 4 teachers had Thato teach a lesson to the whole class on the chemical
components of air. She did an excellent job and seemed to be quite confident in her
scholastic abilities.

Thato lives in a medium sized, four-room home with two bedrooms, a kitchen,
and a living room. The house was fumished with furniture which was typical for a middle
i n C()Ine family, but not too extravagant. In the living room there was a medium sized
entertainment center and the walls were lined with cabinets and book shelves. The family
0\JV’I'led a lot of books on all sorts of topics, but especially science related books. The
hollse was set in a very large yard with a large garden, a few old cars, and other materials
lyi 11g around. It took at least a half hour to walk to school from their home, but Thato
LlSllally went to school in a minibus which was hired by a group of families in the
nei ghborhood with children who attended Dayspring. I conducted an interview with
Thato’s mother (September 5, 2007) almost completely in English, without the assistance
of a research assistant or translator.

Thato’s family is composed of her parents, one brother, and herself. Her brother
is in Form A (8th grade) in high school. Her father was a high school science teacher in

8011th Afiica for a number of years and also taught at a teacher’s college, but he decided

197

to come back to Lesotho to be with the family more permanently and is now looking for a

job. Thato’s mother works in a science laboratory for the Department of Mines and
Geology, which is located in town. She received her bachelor’s degree in chemistry from

the National University of Lesotho. When I asked her what her dreams were for her

children, she said, referring to her son, “I just hope that he will choose a career that will
work for him. 1 want him to go to the university. . . .I want him to go to South Afiica
because the choice is much broader. They have many universities. They have many
51.1 b j ects and offerings in different careers. In our system it isn’t that way. There aren’t

many subjects.” Thato’s parents had high hopes for both of them and did not want them

to be limited in their opportunities, even within the borders of Lesotho.

Thato’s mother claimed that they enjoy reading in their home. “We do a lot of
r e adi ng, especially for pleasure, but also for updating in my field.” She said that she
pre fers to read novels and story books, but she also reads chemistry and biology books to
keep updated on things. Her husband especially likes to read newspapers often at home.
Wh en I asked her if their children read at home she said, “Yes, especially Thato. She
1 ikes to read the story books or anything she can get her hands on.” She commented that
they try to buy her books whenever they can to help her keep learning. I then asked her
whether they prefer to buy English or Sesotho books she replied, “They are all in English.
It i 8 not really hard to find books in Sesotho. I think that sometimes we prefer her to read
in English because it is a foreign language. In Sesotho it’s not that difficult to pick up.”
Therefore, in Thato’s home there is a strong environment for school learning and support

for academic advancement. According to her mother, Thato thrives under such an

e -
11v Ironment.

198

I then asked Thato’s mother whether they spoke English much at home. She
responded, “Sometimes, when we help the children with their homework.” Otherwise she
53 i (1 they hardly ever speak English at home because, “It’s not natural. And Thato says,
we are taught to speak English at home. And then we try, but then we forget.” So, they do
not speak English much at home, but there are many books in English around the house,
and the children can always turn to their parents for support in their homework whenever

they need it. This type of home environment, with such a rich supply of cultural and

symbolic capital can only help in Thato’s educational experience.

When I asked Thato’s mother how she felt about English being used as the
medium of instruction at school she replied, “I think it’s fine because it’s universal. You
haVe to know English to get anywhere in the world. So I think it’s okay that it’s used.” 1

th en asked her what she felt the role of Sesotho was at schools. “I think it’s mainly to
eclllcate them about their culture mainly. To know their culture and to stick to their
Culture. . .. To know where you come from and such things. And relate to the. . .to learn to
combine your culture and the western whatever.” In this statement, she expressed her

SL1pport for the teaching of Sesotho as a subject at schools because she felt it was

i ITlportant to teach students their cultural roots and understand their background better.
But she did not feel that Sesotho should be used as a medium of instruction for all

8 ubj ects, “because we have limited words. Like in science it would be very difficult to
trzillslate some concepts or anything into Sesotho. It can’t work. It would have a limited
Illilliiber of words to use, so it would be confusing.” From her experience she sees it as

IDroblematic to use Sesotho for teaching all subjects, because, as a scientist, she has found

199

that Sesotho does not have a sufficient vocabulary for certain topics, especially in

5 Ci ence.
Even though her children attend a private school, Thato’s mother said that she

thought the F PE program in Lesotho was “very good because there are kids who cannot
afford to go to school, but they still must learn basic things. It is very good. But it has to
be run so that it actually benefits children, because sometimes it doesn’t. It has to be
good, because they need the full attention of the teacher, like any other kid. But when it is
overcrowded it is difficult for a teacher to give full attention to their students. That’s
When it would be nice, if they had more teachers to teach the children.” Thato’s mother’s
per-c eption of government schools since the implementation of F PE was similar to most
of the parents I interviewed. Many parents, like Thato’s mother, thought one of the main
re‘c‘tsons government schools had such low quality of teaching was because the classrooms
Were overcrowded. The CEO of primary education at the MOET claimed this used a
problem during the first two or three years of F PE’s implementation but is not longer true
because they have largely taken care of overcrowding by putting more teachers in

Sc3110013. In my own observations, all but one of the private schools had larger student to

teaCher ratios than at the government schools.
Overall, Thato’s mother was pleased with her children’s educational experience.

S he felt they were getting a good education at Dayspring English Medium and felt it was

i mportant for them to learn English well. She and her husband are both very well
eCllJcated and have a continued interest, not only in their children’s education, but in
1Kill‘thering their own knowledge. As a result, they do a lot of reading at home and own a

gre at number of books. Living in this type of environment has provided Thato and her

200

brother with a great amount of cultural and symbolic capital that is beneficial to their
education.

Mohapi

Mohapi is in Standard 4 at Dayspring English Medium. He seems to be a typical

9— year-old boy who was usually seen playing with his friends and laughing a lot. He is a
small boy, a little shy, and well behaved in the classroom. His teachers said that he is an
ab ove average student and he does quite well at school.

Mohapi lives just down the street from the school in a new, large home with at

l eas t three bedrooms. The home is located on a rather large yard which is completely
enc l osed by a large wall and a gated driveway. The grounds are very well kept with grass,
flowers, small trees, and bushes, which is quite rare in the area. There is a large driveway
Whi ch leads to an enclosed garage. Inside the home there is new, somewhat expensive
filmiture with a large entertainment center and cabinet holding books, pictures, and other
deCorations. I conducted an interview with Mohapi’s mother (September 7, 2007) in their
1 iving room. The entire interview was conducted in English, even though I had a research
as Si stant there available to translate if needed.

Mohapi has one sibling, a younger sister who is 17 months old. So, he is the only
one in the family attending school at the moment. Mohapi’s mother is a high school math
teaCher in town. When I asked her about her job she said, “I have been teaching for 5

years now. I really like it. I’m teaching what I like. I like math very much, that’s why I
l i ke it.” She received a degree in math and geography at the National University of
L‘eSotho. Before that she received a diploma in architecture at the technical college in

town and worked for a couple of years in the highlands. She said never did like

201

architecture, but she studied it because she initially did not have good enough results in
English on her COSC exam. She eventually took the English exam again and was able to
go to the university in preparation for high school teaching. Her husband is a technician
who works in South Africa. She said that he comes home every fortnight.
I asked Mohapi’s mother why they decided to send their son to Dayspring
English Medium. She responded, “One of the reasons is because it is the closest school. I
d i (111 ’t want to have problems with transporting these kids. That was the main thing that
caused me to send him there. Apart from that I heard that it was a very good school. I did
not know much about it, but I knew that it was a good school, looking at the results, and
SO forth. But the main reason was that it was the closest.” There were also some
government schools close by, so I asked why she did not send her child to one of them.
She replied, “I don’t like government schools. They don’t do well, the government
Sc110015, most of them they don’t do well.” I then asked her why she thought so, she
c()l'hmented, “I think it’s because of management. One of the reasons is because of
management. It is the teachers. 1 don’t know if it is because they don’t have anyone who
i S pushing them around, or what, but they don’t do well. The schools, not the kids as
SuCh, but the schools. The kids don’t do well maybe because of the system, the schools.”
She had a very negative perception of government schools although she did not have any
d i l‘e<:t experience with them herself as a mother.
I then asked her how she felt about the education Mohapi was receiving at
bayspring. She replied, “Maybe because Mohapi is somehow a brilliant kid, he is doing
Very well, he is doing very well. But the only problem 1 have seen is that he has somehow

a problem in English. Somehow he has a problem of spelling. His English is not so good.

202

He is doing good in all these subjects, but his English is not so good. . .. Maybe it is

because he is not reading too much, I don’t know why is that, but his English is not that
good.” She said she tries to help him improve his English by pushing him to read. “I tell
h im to do that. He doesn’t do it on his own. He will do it only when I tell him, ‘Go and
get that book to read.’ He likes drawing too much. He likes drawing too much. So I
always get rid of him to draw by telling him to get a book and read.” In addition to this,
M ohapi’s mother said she continuously monitors his progress at school. She commented,
“ I make sure every time, every day that he has done his homework or if he has been

given homework. I always ask, ‘Have you done your homework, were you given the

homework?”
Both of Mohapi’s parents speak English well and use it every day in their work.

H i S mother claimed that they do not speak English much at home. The only time they
really speak English at home is when they are helping Mohapi with his homework. But
She did say that she reads quite a bit at home, especially religious and motivational books,
always in English. She said her husband reads newspapers all of the time. He prefers to
read the English newspapers. They also have a television where they mainly watch
English speaking shows. So, Mohapi is quite exposed to English, even though his mother
Claims they do not speak it often in their home. In addition, his mother said that she

always gets him books in English from the library for him to read. She said she always

h a S at least one book checked out for him.

When it came to questions about the language of instruction at schools, she had
her own opinions based upon her experiences as a high school teacher. She commented

about Sesotho, “It is a nice language, but the problem with Sesotho is that it doesn’t have

203

a lot of words. Sometimes you are not able to express yourself clearly in Sesotho because
of a lack of words. That is where you have to use English.” She has found the language
1' ssue difficult in her own teaching because, “you will find that [students] want you to
teach in Sesotho, they want me to teach math in Sesotho. And you find it impossible to
do it because they have a lot of terms that you cannot express in Sesotho.” As a math
teacher she does not see it as a realistic possibility to use Sesotho as the language of
i n struction at schools.

She sees the language of instruction issue as a major barrier for some of her
Students. When asked if she thought this caused problems, she emphatically replied, “Of
C Ourse it does. For some of them it does. You will find students very brilliant in science

Sub j ects and maths, but they have a problem in English. That is where you will find
S(Diflleone getting a “1” in maths but getting “8” in English. In so many cases that
happens.” She expressed that she feels one reason many students struggle with English is

because schools do not use English enough. She commented, “It’s not because they are
1”IOt taught English. They are taught English. But it’s only because they don’t speak
Erlglish in their schools. They are taught English, but they don’t speak English in their
Schools. That is why they still cope with doing other subjects.” Therefore, she said she is
i 1'1 favor of English Medium schools, like the one her son is attending, because it provides
8 t1~ldents with enough opportunities to not just learn English, but to also practice and use it
on a daily basis.
Overall, Mohapi’s mother felt quite positive about the education system in
I\‘eSotho and the educational opportunities for her children, but she said she does worry

about their future. Her main concern was with the economy of Lesotho in general. She

204

claimed, “We have a lot of people who are struggling because they don’t have jobs. Some
people are even from university but they don’t have jobs. They spend a lot of time doing
n othing because they don’t have jobs. And we lose very important people, people who
can change the country because there is no. . .there isn’t enough to earn in Lesotho, so
they decide to go where they will get a lot.” She went on to comment about how this has
a f f e cted her own educational goals, “Like myself, I have only done the first degree, I
want to go further, but I know I will go to school and I will come back and teach and earn

the same. So I don’t find it necessary to go to school and continue with my studies, unless

I do something else.”
Mohapi’s mother identified education as the key to opening up opportunities for

her children’s future. She stated, “If they are not educated then they cannot do anything,
they can’t get a job. And if they can’t get a job then it means that, somehow, not always,
but somehow their life is hopeless. They will struggle in life.” She and her husband

th erefore decided to send their child to a private school in order to provide him with the

beSt education possible. Not only did they invest the necessary economic capital to make
this happen, but they also possessed a great amount of cultural and symbolic capital
which they could use to ensure their children succeed at school. As a high school teacher
he1‘self, she knew what students needed to do well and made sure that her child kept up
on his homework and took his studies seriously. She even pushed him to read books
when he did not want to, because she recognized that he had a weakness in English

SI3'Etlling. With this type of cultural capital at home, Mohapi is more likely to benefit from

h 1 8 educational experience.

Manti

205

Manti is in Standard 4 at Dayspring English Medium. She sits near the back of the
classroom in a row full of boys. She sits at the end of the row and prefers to stand half of
the time. She pays attention quite well, but likes to play and gets distracted at times in the
large classroom. Her teachers said she is an average student in her class performance.
When I talked to Manti she said her favorite subject is math.
Manti lives in town, close to where I stayed while living in Lesotho. She would
0 f ten stop by our house with her neighborhood friends to play with our one—year-old
daughter. Some of her friends were not Basotho, so they often spoke in English when
they played with each other. Others of her friends did not speak English very well, so
they usually had an interesting mix of Sesotho and English when they played and talked
With each other.

She lives in a large, three—bedroom home with a very large fenced-in yard. The
faI‘nily owns a couple of cars with a garage in the back yard. They have rather old but
Comfortable furniture with an entertainment center in the living room and a large table in

t1‘le dining room. Manti does not have any siblings, but there are seven people living in
the house. Many of them are Manti’s aunt’s and uncle’s who are not yet married and still
attending high school and college. Manti’s mother is a student at the University of Fort
H are in South Africa and is completing her fourth year with honors in Industrial

P Sychology. Manti’s father completed his bachelor’s degree at the National University of

L"eSotho. He now works for the government in the Department of Corruption and

1Economic Offenses. They live far away from the school Manti attends, which takes at
least 30 minutes to drive in the car. Manti’s father drives her to school every day. Her

tjlether said this gives him the opportunity to keep updated on her schooling experience

206

on a regular basis. I conducted an interview (July 2, 2007) with Manti’s mother in their
home without the assistance of a translator. The entire interview was conducted in

English. She did not want me to tape record the interview, so I do not have many direct

q notes.
I was curious as to why they decided to send Manti to a school so far away, when

th ere are plenty of private schools in town. Her mother explained that they first sent her

to a local private English Medium school from pre-school to Standard 2, but they were

d i s appointed with the performance of the school. The main reason was because the

s ch00] was not consistent or timely in paying their teachers, so there was a high turn over

rate for teachers. They wanted something more consistent and steady for Manti, so they
Sent her to Dayspring, which had a very good reputation. They have been pleased with
t11e school and Manti’s performance there. She also said it is an advantage that her father

can drive her to school every day, because he is able to keep in close touch with the

Sehool and her teachers. She said the school goes out of their way to keep parents

i nformed about things.
When I asked her why they decided to send Manti to an English Medium school

r ather than a government school, she said that she likes how they start with English from
day one. She stated that “These days English is most important. With English you can go
e\ferywhere as a second language.” She said that she and her husband are pleased they
have the means to send Manti to an English Medium school because they did not have the
O13portunity to do so when they were in primary school. As a result, she said she struggled

Very much at first in high school because she was forced to speak English, even though

207

she did not know it very well. Therefore she does not want her own child to have the
same struggles. She wants her to be fluent in English as soon as possible.

When I asked her how she felt about Sesotho being taught at schools, she said she
loves the language and is proud of it. She felt that it should be taught as a subject because
it is important for students to understand their own culture and history so they are
grounded in their roots. But she did not think it was a good idea to use Sesotho as the
language of instruction for other subjects. She preferred that they use English because it
is an “international” language and opens up opportunities that Sesotho cannot. She
provided her own personal example for this, that she would not have had the opportunity
to study in South Africa if she did not know English.

When I asked her how she felt about government schools, Manti’s mother said

she did not think they were bad because she knows a lot of students who go to
government primary schools and end up doing well on the PSLE and move on to high
school. But she preferred to send her child to a private school because she feels that the
teachers work harder and are more dedicated at private schools. She claimed one of the
main reasons this is the case is because at the government schools the teachers know their
l0bs are secure. Therefore, they know that they do not have to work hard or teach well to
maintain their job. She feels this leads to laziness and lack of dedication. She then
explained that, on the other hand, private school teachers’ jobs are never fully secure.
Therefore, she claimed they have to work hard all of the time to make sure to maintain
theirj0b. She felt that every parent in Lesotho would send their children to private
SChools if they could afford it, but most cannot, and that is why she thinks there are so

many Who attend government schools.

208

Manti’s mother is only able to come home during long breaks at the university,
therefore, she is not able to help Manti much with her schoolwork. As noted before, her
father is able to keep up daily with her progress because he drives her to school each day.
In addition to this, the young aunts and uncles who stay with Manti in their home are also

attending school in higher grades, so they are able to help her with her schoolwork. Her
mother said that a few of her aunts help her quite regularly. In this way she still has great
support with the cultural and linguistic capital necessary to succeed at school. Manti’s
mother claimed they did not read much in the home, and 1 did not see many books, but
she said her husband is constantly reading newspapers. They also watch English speaking
programs on television quite often. On top of these sources of cultural capital at home,
Manti has the added advantage of playing with a group of friends in the neighborhood, of
which some individuals do not speak Sesotho, and therefore, she is placed in a very
natural situation to practice speaking English outside of school on a daily basis. All of
these aspects add to the amount of cultural, symbolic, and linguistic capital from which
Manti can turn to for her educational success.
Discussion
In the three examples illustrated above, the students have a wealth of cultural,
symbolic, and linguistic capital upon which they can turn to as a resource for learning in
school. In each of the families the parents have strong educational backgrounds and
experience working in occupations where they are constantly required to use both English
and the Content knowledge they gained from schooling. In two of the households, but
eSpecially in Thato’s home, there is a strong emphasis on reading and support for their

Children to read for pleasure and not only for schoolwork. Every home has a television set

209

and watches English speaking programs regularly. Although none of the parents said they
speak English much in their homes, they are always available to help with English
homework or other subjects which are taught in English. One student, Manti, had the
opportunity to speak English with her fi'iends on a daily basis outside of school. From
what I saw in observations and learned from interviews with government school families,
these experiences are not common for the average student at a government school. This
makes it even more difficult for government school students to practice using English and
to get support with any of the school work they may struggle with. This places the private
school students in an advantageous position when it comes to academic performance,
which then gets rewarded through credentials and high marks on the national exams.

In a way, this confirms much of what Bourdieu proposes in his theory as the
overriding purpose of education, namely, to maintain social class distinctions. But there
is more going on than just that. These parents use their agency by consciously being
involved in their children’s educational experiences. Mohapi’s mother does this by
constantly monitoring what her son is doing at school. Manti’s family does so through the
daily drive to school with her father and the assistance of her aunts and uncles who live
With her and also attending school. These types of decisions and acts of agency are not
isolated to the parents of private school students only. As was illustrated in Chapter 4,
most of the government school families also did what they could to help their children
succeed at school. Some were not able to this very successfully because they do not have
enough Cultural and linguistic capital to draw upon, but others, such as Palesa’s familiy,
Who’s mOther was able to draw upon her own educational background, as well as

Palesa’s older siblings’ education, to help her with her schoolwork, even though they

210

could not afford to send her to a private school. In a similar way, also in Chapter 4,
Pulani was able to turn to her neighboring uncle, who had obtained a good education, for
support in her schoolwork, even though her mother did not possess the necessary cultural
capital to sufficiently assist her.

Therefore, it is the combination of available capital and how individuals and
families use their agency to access and take advantage of their available capital which
shapes the educational experiences of these students. Indeed, some families possess a
much greater combination of these sources of capital, which provides them with greater
opportunities and more choices to act upon, but their sources of capital do not determine
their situation. It is how these families decide to use their agency to access their sources
of capital which establishes whether they benefit from their capital or not. Language and

education policies can do very little to change the amount and types of cultural and
linguistic capital available to students and their families, but it does play a strong role in
determining which forms of capital are more valued at schools. By declaring English as
the language of instruction at schools it automatically puts families who can speak
English at an advantage. Likewise, the selection of what content is included in the
national and school curriculums has a great influence on what type of knowledge is
deemed valuable at schools. This has a direct link to the types of cultural capital that
Students obtain in their homes. Thus, taking a policy as practice approach to education
POHCY helps to indicate how and why certain policy decisions play a key role in

advantagin g some stakeholders while placing others at a greater disadvantage.

Social Capital

211

The final source of capital I will discuss in this chapter is social capital. As we
have seen in the previous two sections, the amount of economic and cultural capital a
family possesses has a great influence on their children’s educational opportunities. In a
similar way, the amount of social capital families can draw upon through their social
networks and social influence has a strong impact on shaping the possibilities available to
their children. In Chapter 4, I discussed how for some families their limited social
networks and access to knowledge of the area created constraints to the choices available
to them, while for others their social networks opened up opportunities they otherwise
would not have had. In this section I will focus more on the opportunities and choices
which are opened up to students and their families because of the types of social capital
they possess.

By using a policy as practice approach, which begins with the educational
experiences and practices of key stakeholders on the ground and then analyzes the role
that policy plays in those experiences, we will be able to see how much influence factors
outside of policy play in the education of the students in this study. As will be seen, the
Students I worked with from private schools had much greater social networks to draw
from than those at government schools which had a direct impact on their education.
There is little that the language and education policies themselves can do to change these
circumstances, but they do create an environment which allows for certain forms of social
caPital to be more advantageous than others. One such factor is the relationship that
private school parents have with their schools compared to those at government schools.
The ways the different types of schools are structured, funded, and administrated makes a

great difference in how the parents interact with their schools.

212

Tsepo

Tsepo is in Standard 4 at Dayspring English Medium. I would often see him
playing with the other boys, laughing and having a good time. He usually sits near the
front of the classroom on a very crowded desk full of rowdy boys. Tsepo seems to
struggle in school more than most of the other students. I would often see him stay after
school working with the teachers and other struggling students doing revisions on their
lessons for the day. The teachers said he was previously one of the lowest performing
students in the class, but he has made great improvements lately.

I interviewed with Tsepo’s mother (June 28, 2007) at her office at the agricultural
college campus on the outskirts of town. The interview was conducted solely in English
without the assistance of a translator. l was not able to see where the family lives and did
not learn much about their current living conditions. The mother is a lecturer at the
agricultural college. She teaches forestry and has been at the college for two years.
Previously she had worked with a number of organizations, including the government,
mainly working with rural communities on environmental issues. After working for about
eight years she went back to school at the National University of Lesotho and received a
Bachelors of Science, in general agricultural studies. She is hoping to eventually continue
onto get a Masters degree. Tsepo’s father works for the Lesotho Defense Force.

Tsepo has an older sister who is now in Form D (1 1th grade) in high school. She
also went to an English Medium private school, but a different one from Dayspring.
When I asked her why she put Tsepo into a different school she said it was because
DaySpring was not in their area at the time their daughter started primary school. By the

time Tsepo was old enough for primary school, their daughter’s primary school was

213

having “some quarrels there, so I decided to take him to the other place.” They chose
Dayspring because the school had since moved into their area from town and she had
heard good things about the school.

As I spoke a little more about Dayspring with Tsepo’s mother she expressed her
great satisfaction with his school. “They care. They have time. The number of students
which are admitted are limited. So they care. They are able to touch each and every
student.” In contrast, when I asked her about government schools she emphatically
responded, “Ay, ka nnete, I cannot take my children to the government school. I am
working. Achhh, I want them to be offered a better education. During our time there were
no alternatives. Each and every one does what he or she thinks can benefit.” I then asked
her why some families decide to send their children to government school. She said that
most cannot afford to do otherwise, but then she added, “Tjee, others they don’t care

about their child’s education. I care because even at Dayspring I visit at any time and talk
with teachers. The way we take things, it is different.”

She went on to discuss how she feels about English being used as the medium of
instruction at school. “Ah, I like it because my child won’t struggle. I’m not struggling
[With English], ne? Hey, I have problems there and there, but I like when it’s used.” She
further emphasized this by claiming that English is, “an international language. Even you,
you are an American, you cannot speak American, you are speaking English. That is how
peOple begin to meet each other.” Therefore, she felt it was important for students to
know English well, so they can communicate with the outside world. But she also
expressed support for Sesotho to continue to be taught at schools. “Even Sesotho, they

should know it. It should be used. How can you be a Mosotho? You have to be proud

214

about your language. It has to be used if you are a Basotho, so that, our kids do not know
where they will work. For instance, me, I was working in the rural areas where I had to
speak Sesotho and forget about English when I would visit the villages. So how are you
going to address such people?” Thus, she still felt it was important to keep teaching
Sesotho as a subject, but she followed up by saying, “During Sesotho they should tackle
Sesotho, but these other subjects should be done in English. Just as I have said, English is
an international language. They must do everything in English.” So, in the end she felt
that using English as the medium of instruction was important because it prepared
students to work in an international world.
When I asked Tsepo’s mother about her son’s experience at Dayspring, she said,
“I am okay about the school. Except that my kid has a special problem. When he started
there he got A’s, but as time went by he got Bs, C’s, D’s, up to F. So, I was wondering
what was happening with the boy. But due to the thing that I am carrying, I went even to
the school, when I saw his grades falling like this. So, some teachers — we are able to talk
to teachers — so some advised me to try to assist him while I was at home so that they
meet their time even when they are at school. So we tried to balance his grades, but what
I noticed is that he was forgetful. I did not know what was happening. So we tried to deal
With this matter together with his teachers until one of his teachers advised me to take
him to the psychiatrist and the psychologist this year. Achh, ka nnete, he is improving. So
we are attending such and so on. And the psychiatrist has advised me to buy some pills,
which I think are playing a big part in this. So such pills they say work with the
development of the brain. But what I was impressed with is that he was getting low fold

in each and everything and was forgetful, but after attending the psychiatrist and

215

psychologist he has passed about seven subjects, and even his teachers are so happy.
They have seen a big improvement.”

Thus, as Tsepo’s mother began to see her son’s performance at school gradually
get worse and worse, she took action to talk to his teachers and try to figure out why this
was happening. As she described it in her own words, “due to the thing that I am
carrying,” she felt that she had the right and need to approach Tsepo’s teachers about his
problem. As a result of this, one of Tsepo’s teachers eventually recommended that his
mother try seeking some medical advice because they thought it might be a learning
disorder which was causing his problems. Without this advice, Tsepo’s mother would
have most likely continued to be frustrated and confused about her son’s lowering
performance and not known what to do. Fortunately for her and her son, through the
social capital they possessed she was able to draw upon the networks available to her — in
this case, Tsepo’s teachers - and find a solution that currently seems to be helping Tsepo

improve at school.

In order to draw upon this social capital, a few things needed to be in place. First
of all, the relationship between Tsepo’s mother and the school needed to be at a level
Where she could feel comfortable to approach them about concerns and questions that she
had related to her son’s performance at school. Secondly, his mother also needed to be in
such a social position that she felt she had the right, or was entitled, to approach her son’s
teachers. As was discussed in Chapter 4, many of the government school families did not
feel they were either in a position nor had the right to approach the school about their
children’s problems. For some of the government school parents, even when they did

approach their child’s school, they felt like their concerns were never taken seriously or

216

even taken into account. Thus, they lacked the necessary social capital that could be
utilized for their children’s benefit. The situation in Tsepo’s case was very different. His
mother did possess the necessary social capital and, thus, was able to use her agency to
draw upon it for her child’s own good.

Another crucial aspect to this is that Tsepo’s family not only possessed the
necessary social capital to obtain the information which eventually helped his situation,
but they also possessed sufficient economic capital to follow through with the advice they
received from his teacher. Many families, even if they were able to get the type of advice
that Tsepo’s mother received, would not have been able to afford to take their child to a
psychologist and psychiatrist, let alone pay for the pills which were diagnosed for him.
This helps to show, once again, that many different forms of capital often operate at the
same time to either create constraints in people’s lives or open up opportunities.

Refiloe
Refiloe is in Standard 4 at Dayspring English Medium. She is a very energetic
little girl who seems to always be smiling and having fun with her friends. She sits near
the front of class and participates quite regularly in class discussions. She seems to have a
hard time sitting still and is always fidgeting and looking around the classroom. She is

very OUtgoing and was never shy to approach me or the teachers about anything. She does

quite well in class. Her teachers say she is an average student in her academic

performance.

Refiloe lives in a medium-sized home with two bedrooms, a small living room,
and a jarge kitchen. Their home is in a medium-sized yard with a rather large garden.

They also have a small two-room building on the lot, which could either be used for

217

storage or to rent out to tenants. Inside the home was very basic furniture, which looked
rather inexpensive, but functional. Their home is about a twenty minute walk from her
school. I conducted an interview with Refiloe’s father in their kitchen with the assistance
of a translator, but most of the interview was conducted in English. Refiloe and her
mother were also present at the interview, but they did not say much.

Refiloe has one younger sister who is in Standard 2 at her same school. Her father
works in the mining industry in Carletonville, South Africa. He comes home one
weekend every month to be with his family. He has worked in South Africa since 1999.
He finished high school in Lesotho and then continued his studies through
correspondence with Technikon SA in South Africa, where he received a certificate in
labor studies. He is still furthering his studies while he works in Carletonville. He is
working on a national diploma in human resource management through correspondence
with UNISA. Refiloe’s mother went to school up through Standard 7 but did not continue
any further. She spoke very little English.

Refiloe did not begin her schooling at Dayspring English Medium. She first went
to a nearby government school for her first two years. Her father explains this experience
in the following passage. “You know, what I have learned? My child, while she was still
at kinder (a private pre-school), I could see that she was clever, that she could progress.
But the first year she was at [a government primary school], she worked well for two
quarters, but the rest, she couldn’t perform quite well. And as I tried to get what was the
main reason for that I could identify that perhaps it was a problem with the teachers
because they had no patience towards the way that my child was behaving, because she’s

that kind of person who, I cannot say, actually I cannot know how to explain her to be.

218

But she’s that kind of person who likes a person who can look after her a lot, because if
you cannot check, you cannot guide her quite well. So, since I’ve taken her out from [the
government school] to Dayspring, I could see there has been a lot of progress.”

In this example, Refiloe’s parents first decided to send her to the local
government school because it was nearby and free. But through their attention to her
progress at school, along with their prior experience of sending her to a private pre-
school, they suspected that the school was not doing its job properly. Consequently,
Refiloe’s family used their agency and decided to take action by finding other options for
their child. Because of the father’s steady employment in South Afiica, their family
possessed enough economic capital to open up their options for an alternative school for
Refiloe to more than just government schools. Many other families would not have been
able to look into private schools as possible alternatives. An example of this is Lebo’s
family in Chapter 4, where her mother was not satisfied with the education that Lebo’s
younger brother was receiving at the nearby government school, so she transferred him to
Lebo’s school, which was farther away. Although Lebo’s family did not have the means
to send their children to a private school, they did have the agency to choose a different
government school from the one their son started at.

When I asked Refiloe’s father why they decided to send their children to
Dayspring specifically, he responded, “I basically checked many results amongst the
schools, especially where I am living here, and I found Dayspring to be the most
interesting and their results are very outstanding. And so I liked that place because I
wanted to give my children a proper foundation of education. So that they won’t struggle

while they intend to study further.” So, they decided to transfer Refiloe to an English

219

Medium school. When she transferred, Dayspring required her to repeat Standard 2 so
that she could be at the same level of learning as her classmates. This did not seem to
bother her father because he was pleased with the education she is now receiving. I asked
if paying school fees was ever a problem for them. He replied, “Not at all. I have never
had a problem of paying school fees. . ..I don’t mind paying, as long as my children get a
proper education.” When Refiloe’s father wanted to change schools for his daughter he
was able to access information about other schools in the area, and through his own social
networks and his social position he was able to effectively make the change happen, for
the benefit of his children.

In speaking of government schools, be compared the education that his children
are currently receiving at Dayspring to his own when he was a child. “My education was
good, although I cannot, actually, it’s not the same as the one that is being given at
English Mediums because I just attended these ordinary primary schools, the church’s
primary school. And I didn’t have any problem with that. But I still think there is a lot
that must be improved like the way that Dayspring is doing. Because at the age of
Refiloe, I couldn’t even speak English, like the way that Refiloe is speaking. And I
couldn’t even read alone, except the teacher would be here and guide me. So that’s why I
feel there is a lot that must be done, there is still a lack of guidance that must be
considered.” He said he felt that it was good that Lesotho now has F PE, because now
every family can send their child to school, but he feels that there needs to be a lot of
improvement at government schools, especially in the methods they use to teach.

When I asked him about the language of instruction at schools, be told me that he

likes how it is at Dayspring. He feels that English should continue to be used as the

220

language of instruction for most subjects because it is most important for the students to
learn English. He stated, “Now that English seems to be dominating many countries, I
think it must be taught because it is being studied as an international language. If you
don’t know English that simply means you will not be able to communicate with other
nations.” Having said this, he also stressed that he felt Sesotho should continue to be
taught as a subject declaring, “It’s good that Sesotho must be used at primary schools...
because if you don’t know Sesotho that simply means you will not know where you are
from and where you are going. As you are learning other nation’s language you must also
know your own language as well. They must go together.” Therefore, although he felt it
was most important for students to use English at school, he did not want Sesotho to be
neglected. He thought that it is important for students to be grounded in their own
language and culture while they are learning new languages and knowledge.

Discussion

In the two examples above, we can see that the social networks which families
possess, along with their social status in the community, can provide them with valuable
information. This information can in turn be utilized to open up new opportunities or
choices for the families to make for the benefit of their children’s education. Therefore,
the social capital which individuals and families possess plays a large role in the
educational experiences of students. Nevertheless, social capital does not operate in
isolation from other sources of capital. If either of the families illustrated above did not
possess the necessary economic capital, then their social capital would have done them
little good. Tsepo’s mother would not have been able to afford to consult with medical

experts, nor afford to pay for Tsepo’s medicine. Refiloe’s father would have still been

221

able to choose a different school for his daughter, and thus use his agency, but his choices
would have been limited if they were not able to afford to pay for the school fees at a
private school. Consequently, it is the combination of different forms of capital that are
available in people’s lives, along with their own acts of agency, which shapes the types of

decisions that families make for their children’s education.

Conclusion

In the sections above, I have provided a number of different examples of the ways
private school families utilize their different sources of capital, namely, economic,
cultural (including symbolic and linguistic capital), and social capital to make decisions
about their children’s educational experiences. Although families and individuals cannot
do much to change their own particular circumstances at any given time, they can utilize
their agency to make choices within the constraints and opportunities presented to them.
In order to understand how these dynamics operate, we need to see them as interrelated
concepts which all work together. Different forms of capital operate to either limit or
expand opportunities for groups and individuals while the acts of agency these groups
and individuals choose to use shape how their particular sources of capital become
utilized and put into action. These actions, in turn, influence the types of capital which
are subsequently available to them in the future. As a result, it is the interplay between
structure, through the forms of capital available to particular actors, and agency, through
their own actions, that decisions are made and where the possibility for change can occur.

If we can come to better understand these complex dynamics, then we can better

appreciate the particular role which structural influences have on the educational

222

decisions of local stakeholders while also recognizing the vital role that agency plays in
the actualization of educational policies and practices on the ground. One key factor in all
of these dynamics is the influence of language and education policies at schools. The
examples illustrated above help to show that many factors outside of policy decisions
contribute to the educational experiences of students and families. It is difficult to
determine to what degree each factor plays in isolation from the others because they all
act together in a complex whole. Therefore, certain policy decisions create an educational
environment which naturally puts some students and families at an advantage because
they possess the necessary economic, cultural, symbolic, and social capital to succeed
within those policy constraints. But language and education policy decisions are not
made in isolation from larger society. They usually reflect social norms and values rather
than working against them. Thus, policies usually help to perpetuate the inequalities of
society, even when the policy, such as with F PE, is couched in the discourse of providing
greater access to education for the poor. As has been stated before, policies are only one
of many factors contributing the education of students. They can only do so much in
changing the lived realities of educational stakeholders on the ground.

In this and the previous chapter, I have focused on the lived experiences of the
students’ families and how they relate, or do not relate, to language and education
policies. I have mainly drawn upon Bourdieu’s theory of capital to illustrate the many
different factors within stakeholders lived realities which contribute to their educational
experiences. In the following chapters I will focus more specifically on the policies

themselves and how they play out in practice at the schools.

223

Chapter 6: Ideological Influences on Language Policy in Lesotho

Introduction

The nature of schooling is complex and often contradictory. In Chapter 2, I
discussed how many different competing goals and ideologies intersect at the site of
schools. In this chapter I endeavor to explore this contradictory nature of schooling at the
primary schools where I conducted my field research in Lesotho. More particularly, I will
investigate the ideologies which influence these goals. This is because underlying every
goal, or perceived purpose of education, is a set of ideologies. As a theoretical framework
for analysis, I will expand upon the concept of language ideologies (as was discussed in
Chapter 2) to investigate not only the language ideologies influencing the practices of
local stakeholders but also the social, cultural, political, and educational ideologies which
influence the policies and practices which operate at schools. Taking a policy as practice
approach I will investigate how these ideologies manifest themselves in practice at the
both the national and school levels then analyze how they are related to the national and
school-level policies. In the next two chapters I will analyze how various ideologies
(global, national, and local) operate in competition, conflict, cooperation, and/or
combination with each other as they play out in the school policies, practices, and

language attitudes of local educational stakeholders.

Competing Ideologies in School Practices
In my theoretical framework (Chapter 2) I discussed the concept of language

ideologies and how it may be applied to various educational settings, such as schools. In

224

this discussion, using Kroskrity’s (2004) five converging dimensions of language
ideologies, I propose that by looking at the ideologies which shape language attitudes and
school practices we can come to a better appreciation of the contradictory nature of
schooling and understand how unexpected consequences often occur when policies are
implemented by local actors. Policies are not simply planned, developed, and mandated
from the top-down, but they are also interpreted, received, rejected, or changed, and
eventually implemented in complex ways by stakeholders on the ground level. In order to
better understand how and why policies end up being implemented the way they do in
actual practice, it is important to understand the multiplicity of ideologies which
influence these policies at all different levels, from inception to realization.

In this chapter I will utilize this conception of ideologies to explore the various
competing ideologies, from all different levels and sources, which contribute to the
diverse language and education policies, practices, and attitudes revealed at the primary
schools I worked with. Given the complexity of school practices, I will need to expand
upon the anthropological linguistic concept of language ideologies to entail ideologies
impacting various aspects of society, not just language. This is because educational
practices at schools, including language policies and practices, are affected by a
multiplicity of ideological influences, not just language ideologies themselves. Given that
the focus of my research is on local attitudes and responses towards language and
education policies at schools, it will be important to analyze the diversity of ideologies
that have an impact on what happens at schools, whether these practices are directly

related to language issues or not, because they are all ultimately interconnected.

225

It is also important to be clear about the definition of ideology I am using for this
study. In Chapter 2, I discussed the four strands of ideology described by Woolard
(1998). The definition of ideology being used for this study is a combination of her
second and third strands. These come from the “neutral”, descriptive definition of
ideology as being “derived from, rooted in, reflective of, or responsive to the experience
or interests of a particular position” (Woolard, 1998, p. 6) and the more critical
conceptualization of ideology as “ideas, discourses, or signifying practices in the service
of the struggle to acquire or maintain power” (p. 7). Therefore, for this study, I define
ideology as being developed through the particular experiences and interests of
individuals which ultimately serve in an overriding struggle to acquire or maintain power
in society. Both of these strands are helpful in combination with each other because they
illustrate the positional and contextual nature of ideology while also emphasizing the
importance of power relations involved in competing ideologies.

Before investigating the practices at the various primary schools in this study, it is
important to look into the policies under which these schools operate. In Lesotho, both
private and government primary schools have language policies which ultimately favor
English as the official language of instruction, meaning that all subjects (except Sesotho
reading and writing subjects) are to be taught in English. Nevertheless, private and
government schools approach this policy in different ways. Private schools begin using
English as the medium of instruction from day one (reference to “English Medium”
schools has become synonymous with private schools for most people in Lesotho), while
government schools use Sesotho for instruction through Standard 3 and then switch to

using English as the medium of instruction from Standard 4 onwards. These language

226

policies have been influenced by many different ideologies which combine and compete
with each other at schools. The ways these ideologies combine play a strong role in
establishing which specific policies are adopted, how they are interpreted and received —
through the language attitudes of key stakeholders — and ultimately, how they are put into
practice.

There have been two major global ideologies which have had an especially strong
influence on the formation and continued prevalence of English medium LiEPs in
Lesotho. These are the colonial legacy of English and the global hegemony of English.
These two ideological influences have had a similar impact on the LiEPs in many African
nations, especially amongst those which are former British colonies. In the next two
sections I will discuss these two major global ideologies which have influenced the

formation and maintenance of English medium language policies.

Colonial Legacy of English

Perhaps the most direct ideological link to the current English medium LiEP
comes from the colonial legacy of English in Lesotho. As a former British protectorate,
Lesotho’s education system has been highly influenced by British colonial and
educational practices, and thus, Lesotho has inherited a language policy which favors the
use of English as the language of instruction at schools over the national language of
Sesotho, especially after the early primary years. Historically, the common practice of
British colonial education systems throughout Africa was to use “mother tongue”
instruction during the first few years of schooling and then switch to using English as the

language of instruction onwards. In Lesotho this meant teaching in Sesotho through the

227

first three grades of primary school and then switching to use English at Standard 4. This
practice has commonly been attributed by language policy scholars to a 1957 UNESCO
declaration which declared that it is the right of every child to be educated in their mother
tongue. Most of the British colonies interpreted that declaration to mean that children
should be taught in their mother tongue during the early years of primary education and
then switch to using English as the medium of instruction in the later years of schooling.

According to the CEO of primary education in the MOET (interview, July 19,
2007), this has been the practice ever since education started in Lesotho and became a
formalized policy under the 1982 National Manifesto on Education, when many of the
common educational practices were formally consolidated as official policies. The first
officially documented statement about this LiEP policy I could find from the MOET was
in 1995:

Sesotho is the medium of instruction from Standard 1 to 3. English is the medium

of instruction from Standard 4 upwards; English and Sesotho are taught as school

subjects both at primary and secondary levels, English is a failing subject.

(Ministry of Education, Maseru 1995, p.21)

This language policy, like many others, has continued to be practiced at
government schools since colonial days in basically the same way without a great deal of
scrutiny or criticism. A striking example of this continued legacy of colonial education
policies is in the Cambridge Overseas School Certificate (COSC) which is still used as
the national matriculation exam at the completion of Form E (12th grade) in high school.
In contrast, other Afiican nations which inherited a similar exam, such as Botswana,

abandoned these exams years ago and have replaced them with locally constructed,

228

locally administered and assessed matriculation exams. The CEO of curriculum and
assessment at the Lesotho MOET insists they are currently in the process of replacing the
COSC exam but have not done so yet because it cannot be done overnight and must be
accompanied by a sector-wide reform of the curriculum and assessment structures of the
education system. He acknowledged that this is a complicated matter and they want to
make sure they do it correctly, rather than hastily. When I asked him about the COSC he
replied,

I think it is irrelevant. It does a lot of harm to the economy of this country. We’re

not able to produce students according to the needs of this country. . .. It’s not our

curriculum. We can’t maneuver through it. We have to take it as it is. We can’t
dismiss it until we have something in place. So that’s what we are actively

working on. We are working on that. (interview, July 23, 2007)

Thus, more than forty years after gaining independence from Britain, Lesotho still
sends the most important exam for high school students (the COSC) — which determines
whether or not students can proceed to tertiary education and largely decides which
degree programs they may be eligible to enroll in — back to the UK. to be marked by
British assessors and then returned back to Lesotho with the official results.

Although the MOET claims it is being more proactive these days by starting to
address some of these issues and develop an education system that is more applicable to
modern Lesotho needs, rather than just continuing the inherited British education system,
it has been a long time waiting. This has made it more difficult for the MOET to make
the needed changes in a comprehensive, thoughtful way, which has resulted in delays and

setbacks of what I feel are much needed reforms. When I asked the CEO of curriculum

229

and assessment about the process of replacing the COSC with a more locally constructed
exam, he responded,
We don’t localize the examination [first]. You localize the curriculum and then
the assessment will automatically follow. That’s the thinking. And it was not
easy. It’s not an easy task, but I think we are getting there. We are getting there. I
think I’m excited we are getting there. We are coming to grips with it. (interview,
July 23, 2007)
In a similar tone, the MOET is beginning to question the utility of the Primary
School Leaving Exam (PSLE) which is a high-stakes exam administered at the end of
Standard 7 (the terminal year of primary school), largely used to determine who will
qualify to continue on to secondary education. The CEO of curriculum and assessment
had much to say about this exam:
At primary also, as another measure of trying to reform primary education and to
try to give it a clearer focus, we have started to question the whole idea of the
PSLE, primary school leaving certificate, at the end of the seventh year. I think
our understanding is that that comes too early and we don’t see what purpose it
really serves. In the age where we are saying we are expanding access it doesn’t
make good sense for us to be using primary school leaving examination as a
barrier to entry into secondary education. (interview, July 23, 2007)
Thus, it seems as though the MOET is aware of the negative impacts of the
colonial legacy, but they have not yet been able to replace the old curriculum and
assessment practices. In order to do so, the MOET claims to be making great efforts to

first change the curriculum at schools to be more relevant to the needs of the nation and

230

its students and then change the examination and assessment structure. It seems to me
that until they are able to accomplish this, the continued legacy of colonization will
persist in having a direct impact on the educational experiences of schools and students
through various policies, such as, assessment, cun'iculum, and language of instruction.

With regards to the influence of the colonial legacy of English on language policy
in Lesotho, the CEO of primary education claims it continues to have a major influence
on the education system and its practices. He stated that some educators and
administrators are beginning to question the relevance and effectiveness of continuing to
use English as the medium of instruction at schools, but he also claimed,

there has not been sufficient political motivation to make this a big deal... the role

that the medium of instruction plays in the level of attainment of learning

outcomes by children. We have also always thought that it is one of those things
that happen. But the most worrisome factor is many people, including educators
and our political leadership occasionally, do not make a distinction between
language learning and the medium of instruction. You talk about English medium
or Sesotho medium, to them... they don’t understand you to mean what language
are the children taught in or learning in, they are understanding the learning of

that language. (interview, July 19, 2007)

Therefore, although a few people are beginning to question the effectiveness of
using English as a medium of instruction at schools, the majority of stakeholders
unquestioningly view it as the way things have always been done and take it as “one of
those things that happen”. In a way, the ideology of the colonial legacy of English - at

least in the education system - has been internalized and implicitly accepted by most

231

Basotho as a normal, expected practice of education and has been allowed to be
continued, as well as enforced, at schools without much scrutiny or resistance, at least at
the policy level. As will be discussed later in the following chapter, there are many ways
in which teachers and students do not follow, and in effect resist, these policies in
practice, but at the policy level there has been little effort to make significant changes to
using English as the official language of instruction at schools.

The CEO of primary education proposes that this is slowly changing and seems to
have hope that with the current efforts to reform the curriculum there are potential
opportunities to re-visit the medium of instruction issue. As he states,

We haven’t changed in principle, but there seems to be a greater resolve now than

before to acknowledge the use of familiar language. . .by children to have a strong

impact on learning itself and the valuing of schooling. But what we still have to
unfold as we develop our curriculum further is how is that going to manifest itself

in the manner in which our curriculum itself is written. (interview, July 19, 2007)

Hence, according to this ministry official, there is a potential for the English
medium of instruction policy to come under greater scrutiny and revision in the current
environment of educational reform in Lesotho, but this comes up against a general
attitude that he referred to in the country that the language policy is not a major issue that
must be dealt with at the moment. In my own interviews this general attitude was widely
confirmed, as was illustrated in Chapters 4 and 5. This is combined with a general
misunderstanding of the public about what a change in medium of instruction policy
would mean in practice for the education of students. In the interviews I conducted, and

through general conversations, there was a common fear that changing the language of

232

instruction at schools to favor more use of Sesotho will result in students learning less
English, which is unacceptable to nearly all of the people I worked with.

Scholars and activists who are proponents of mother-tongue instruction policies
throughout Africa insist that the use of a local language as the medium of instruction at
schools would not lead to learning less English. Some of these scholars have tried to
show, through quasi-experimental and other empirical data that students who learn in a
local language actually do better in English also, as long as English is taught well as a
separate subject (see Fafunwa, Macauley, & Sokoya, 1989; Brock-Utne, Desai, & Qorro,
2003). The problem is, these scholars have done a poor job in convincing policymakers
or the general population of educational stakeholders of these conclusions. Thus, they
must make a more strategic and concerted effort to educate those most directly involved
in policy formation as well as the general public about their findings before they can
expect local educational stakeholders to embrace mother-tongue instruction. I feel this is
largely because it is counterintuitive to most people when they hear that students will
learn English better if it is not used as much at schools, which is basically what mother-
tongue proponents are saying by proposing to use local languages to teach all subjects
other than English. Even if these scholars’ conclusions are correct, they have done little
to convince teachers, students, and their families that they will not lose proficiency in
English by adopting local languages for the medium of instruction at schools. Until they
are able to get people to believe and accept their ideas, I doubt local stakeholders will be
willing to change language policies that officially call for less English instruction at
schools. As was expressed constantly through interviews (see Chapters 4 and 5) with

parents, one of the main purposes of education (if not the major purpose) for them was

233

for their children to learn English. If any policy is perceived to threaten the learning of
English at schools, it will ultimately be rejected in practice.

Therefore, there are a number of different ideologies competing with each other
when it comes to people’s views on the continued practice of using English as the
medium of instruction at schools. If the MOET is able to follow through on the
educational reforms and changes they propose to be in the process of doing, then there
may be a potential for the dominant ideology of the colonial legacy of English to become
further questioned and scrutinized, and maybe have less of an enduring impact on
educational policies in Lesotho as it so far has. But up until now there has been little

resistance to the current language policy at the national level.

Hegemony of Global English

A second ideological influence that may be even more influential today in
maintaining the current formal language policy is the global dominance of English, as
exemplified in the literature focusing on linguistic imperialism, which was discussed in
Chapter 2. In nearly all of the interviews I conducted, from teachers, administrators,
parents, and students (see Chapters 4 and 5), there was a common theme that nearly all
felt it was important to have English as the language of instruction at schools because it is
perceived as an “international” language. There is also a common belief that knowledge
of English is the most crucial criteria for obtaining a good job and moving on to higher
levels of education in Lesotho. The CEO of primary education emphasized this point

when he told me,

234

You know we say this all the time that in this country education is almost

considered to be synonymous with learning English. You are as educated as you

can speak English. And sometimes anything else you know doesn’t quite matter
or that you don’t know for that matter. It’s not correct in my view. You should
still be able to do your math and understand your history and not necessarily to be

able to express it in English. (interview, July 19, 2007)

This is an important point because it illustrates how integral knowledge of English
is to what is perceived as being educated in Lesotho. It shows the enormous influence of
the hegemony of English in the country. It is also important to note that this ministry
official does not necessarily agree with this ideology, but he acknowledged that it persists
in the minds of most Basotho and therefore is extremely powerful.

Another important point about this ideology, which Kroskrity (2004) emphasizes,
is the level of awareness of speakers, which helps to reveal how comprehensively
ideologies are accepted and internalized. As discussed in Chapter 2, Gramsci’s (1971)
concept of hegemony proposes that the ultimate power of hegemony lies in the ways that
certain ideologies become internalized and naturalized by their recipients. Therefore, if a
certain ideology is perceived as “common sense” and taken-for-granted, then it can be
considered hegemonic. The perceptions of Basotho regarding the role of English in their
society and the great importance which is attributed to knowledge of English help to
reveal the hegemony of English in Lesotho.

Nearly all of the people I interviewed and worked with said something along
these lines about their preference for and the perceived importance of using English as

the language of instruction at schools. Many spoke of its importance as the

235

“international” language despite the fact that many of them had very little interaction
with non-Sesotho speakers in their daily lives. They claimed that to get any good job in
Lesotho required knowledge of English without questioning the relevance of such a
requirement for certain jobs. Few participants questioned, or even considered, the
educational or pedagogical implications of using a foreign language as the medium of
instruction at schools (which is one of the main concerns of mother-tongue instruction
proponents). These policies and practices were largely accepted uncritically by most
people in this study — at least in their conversations with me — as given realities in their
society. The majority mainly expressed their concerns about what they needed to do to
have their children achieve enough proficiency in English to gain access to key social
institutions and opportunities, and thus become a successful citizen.

Out of all the students’ parents and family members that I interviewed, only one
individual, whom I will call Mr. Mokoti, explicitly questioned the role of English in
Lesotho society and the legitimacy of using it as the language of instruction at schools.
Mr. Mokoti was the older brother of a Standard 7 government school student, whose
parents had recently died, and therefore was living with him under his care. He was in his
late-20$ or early 30$, worked at a local hardware store, and was married with a young
one-year—old child. His comments are very interesting because it was the only instance I
found of someone seriously questioning the status of English in Lesotho. I will provide a
lengthy portion of his interview here because it reveals a voice counter to the hegemony
of English:

We have realized it to be a serious problem that we are using English in our

country especially when we are looking for jobs. Sometimes one would find that

236

we are deprived access to things that can help us develop this country. For

example, without the knowledge of English one cannot be allowed to attend any

course [at the university level] even if it is in Agriculture. . . . While we are best in
agriculture as a practice, we are not allowed to impart this knowledge anywhere

simply because we do not know English. (interview, July 12, 2007)

Later in the interview Mr. Mokoti spoke about his concern of using English as a
major criterion for being accepted into technical college programs:

This is serious because one cannot find a job even if it is technical. Once you get

to Lerotholi Politechnique [the major technical college in Lesotho], as an

example, they require knowledge of English, and you wonder about the
connection between brick laying and English knowledge. . . . In technical schools
the criteria for selection should not be based on the knowledge of English.

Basotho are strong and they are good in understanding but they are deprived

privilege. . . . Basotho people are very skilled and if technical schools that do not

consider knowledge of English could be established, Basotho could grow

economically. (interview, July 12, 2007)

This is an important example because it shows that not everyone accepts the
hegemony of English uncritically. This individual is aware of the unequal treatment of
Sesotho compared to English and the faultiness of privileging the use of English in
education and other important social institutions. If more people felt the same way as he
did about the role of English in society, then the hegemony of English would probably
hold less power and be more amenable to criticism and potential change. But such does

not seem to be the case currently in Lesotho, at least from the sample of participants in

237

this study, so its hegemony reigns supreme. More research should probably be done to
investigate the extent of such attitudes throughout the country.

This is also revealing because it shows that even hegemonic ideologies are not all—
encompassing and wholly deterministic. They have the potential of being questioned and
changed, and are therefore malleable rather than static. But changes on the macro, or
national, level can only happen if a greater number of people also come to the point
where they believe that such hegemonic ideologies are unfair and need to be changed to
their benefit. Perhaps there are many others who feel the same way as this individual but
did not express their views to me due to reasons of my positionality as a white, foreign
researcher, or as someone not perceived to represent them. My own research methods or
approach could have possibly influenced some to not discuss the issue in these terms. But
regardless of the reasons why others may not have expressed similar positions to me, the
fact remains that there has been little pushback from the public at the national level for
changes in the current language in education policy.

Although Mr. Mokoti had developed a critical view of the role of English in
Lesotho schools, he was not set free by such a point of view and could not freely use his
agency to do anything he wanted without consequences. He was still subject to the
structural realities which had been influenced by the hegemony of English and could not
change their consequences. This can be seen in his response to a question regarding how
he felt about this issue for his own family, especially now that he has a child of his own:

To be fair it used to trouble me but not much now. I am concerned about my

growing child now and I am getting inclined to English Medium schools and this

will make him end up not fluent in Sesotho. (interview, July 12, 2007)

238

Therefore, although he had acknowledged the inequality inherent in privileging
English over Sesotho and complained that he wished it would change, he still indicated
that he would most likely choose to send his child to an English Medium school despite
the potential of him losing fluency in Sesotho. When the issue was seen to directly impact
his own child’s life he was faced with a dilemma. Although he did not support the current
language policy, there was little that he could do as an individual to change it. He
understood that if he sent his son to an English Medium school, rather than a government
school that uses more Sesotho, his son will have less of a chance of succeeding in
Lesotho today. He also knew that by sending his child to a government school it did not
necessarily mean that his son would learn Sesotho any better than at a private school, and
would most likely result in a lower quality education. The structural realities imposed
upon him by society were perceived to be largely out of his own control, and therefore he
was planning to make the most informed decision he could under current social
conditions in Lesotho for his child. In the end, he expressed his plans towards using his
agency and resources for his child’s best interests by accommodating to an ideology
which, in principle, be disagreed with but could do little about.

Therefore, we can see that the level of awareness which people have of the
influences that particular ideologies play in their own lives has a great impact on how
deeply the ideology influences their practices. Kroskrity (2000) claims that the degree of
awareness that people have of particular ideologies is directly related to the potential for
people to resist and change such ideologies. Hence, if people are not aware of the
ideologies that influence their practices, they are not likely to resist the ideologies

imposed upon them. But if people are explicitly aware of certain ideologies, especially if

239

those ideologies act to create inequalities in their lives, then individuals are much more
likely to resist and attempt to reshape ideologies to their own benefit. The level of
awareness about the hegemony of English as a global language in Lesotho is not likely to
be resisted or changed anytime in the near firture because the majority of people seem to
accept the ideology as a given fact of life in society — at least at the national policy level —
and very few groups or individuals openly question or object to it. If more people felt like
Mr. Mokoti and explicitly expressed concerns or displeasure for using English as the
official language at schools, there could be greater potential for the policy to change.

In summary, the ideologies derived from the colonial legacy of English and the
global hegemony of English have had, and continue to have, a dominant influence on the
language policies of Lesotho schools and the language attitudes of educational
stakeholders. This can be seen in how the language policy of the colonial period has
persisted up to this day with little scrutiny or resistance. It can also be seen through the
overriding attitudes of people in Lesotho that perceive knowledge of English to be one of
the most important things needed in order to succeed in society today.

To some readers, my analysis of these findings, as discussed above, may seem to
be confirming the deterministic theories which I criticized in Chapter 2. Indeed, at the
national level it seems that the findings from this study act in many ways to corroborate
the claims of what Canagarajah (1999) refers to as “reproduction theories” of LPP. To
some extent, this probably is the case because these colonial and hegemonic forces are
most prevalent at macro levels where it is difficult for individuals or small groups to
resist or reverse powerful and persistent influences to the extent that they can make large-

scale societal changes. The example of Mr. Mokoti, mentioned above, helps to illustrate

240

this point. He, as an individual, did not agree with the current language policies, but, as a
member of society who needed to look out for the best interests of his family, he was
forced, in a way, to conform to structural realities.

Therefore, as I discussed in Chapter 2, I find these structuralist theories useful in
explaining macro level dynamics. They are helpful in understanding why the colonial
legacy of English continues to be prominent today in Lesotho, more than 40 years after
independence, and in explaining the reasons why there is little organized resistance
against current language policies at the national level. Some structural forces, which are
most prevalent at the macro, or national, level require great effort and organization for
people to come together under a common interest, in order to create systemic changes in
policies and other issues impacting the society as a whole. I have argued that the
weakness, or shortcomings, of these reproduction theories is not so much in their
descriptive power of understanding macro-level dynamics, but more in their lack of
ability to explain the local dynamics of structural forces as they influence the particular
attitudes and practices of actors on the ground level. These theories are largely inadequate
in explaining the great diversity of responses and reactions that local stakeholders have
towards policy prescriptions. They do not sufficiently incorporate the role of agency for
groups and individuals in interpreting and implementing policies in a multitude of ways.

This chapter has largely been an analysis of the macro-level language policies in
Lesotho and the ideologies behind them. In this chapter I have taken less of a policy as
practice approach because I have dealt with national level issues influencing language
policy. In order to understand how and why local actors react towards the policies placed

upon them at the local, ground level, it is important to also understand the ideological

241

influences at the larger societal level which influence people’s attitudes and practices at
the local level. In the following chapter I will explore the practices of local stakeholders

at the school level and analyze the ideological influences behind them.

242

Chapter 7: Ideological Influences on School Practices in Lesotho

Introduction

Having discussed in the previous chapter the major ideological influences at the
macro-level on the language policies at primary schools and language attitudes of
educational stakeholders in Lesotho, I would now like to turn the focus to the ideological
influences which impact the actual practices at the schools on the ground level. Policies
are not always implemented in practice the way they were initially intended. Therefore, it
is important to use a policy as practice analysis by investigating how policies are actually
put into practice and examine possible reasons for why they are not always implemented
in their intended ways. In this chapter I will provide a few examples of how language and
educational policies are implemented in practice in differing ways at the primary schools
where I conducted research and explore some of the ideologies influencing these
practices. In addition to the strong influence of the two macro-level ideologies discussed
in Chapter 6 (the colonial legacy and global hegemony of English), I will also discuss the
influences of ideologies which derive from more locally mediated views and beliefs
about education and language. These include (1) the conflicting applications of learning
English versus learning content knowledge, (2) conflicting purposes of schooling, and (3)
the differences in organizational and operational structures between public and private

schools.

Language Use in the Classroom

243

Before delving into an analysis of the ideologies which influence the school
practices of local educational stakeholders, I would like to provide a few examples of the
different types of school practices I observed at the schools where I conducted my
research. These examples are not meant to be representative or all-encompassing
examples of what happened at the schools. Schools are too complex and have too many
things going on at once to ever provide such examples. The examples I have chosen to
report, though, I feel are illustrative of the different types of ideological influences which
will be discussed in this chapter, and therefore they have been purposefully selected.

The first type of school practice I will focus on is the actual language use of
teachers and students in the classroom. Although the official policy for Standards 4 and 7
at both private and government schools states that all subjects (except for Sesotho
language and reading classes) are to be taught in English, this did not always happen in
actual practice. At times the schools differed greatly in how much English they used for
classroom instruction and how much Sesotho was allowed to be used in their classrooms.
In nearly every case the English Medium private schools stuck almost exclusively to
using English as the language of instruction by the teachers and the language used for
responses and questions by students. At the government primary school the teachers
attempted to do the same but were often frustrated in their efforts and therefore shifted to
using Sesotho, despite the official language policy.

In the following two sections I will provide contrasting examples of these efforts
to use English in classroom lessons at a private school and a government school. Both of
these examples are from science lessons taught in Standard 7 classrooms where the

content of the lessons was quite similar. As I describe how the lessons developed please

244

note how the teachers and students respond to the lessons as they proceed, especially with
regard to the use of English and Sesotho.

Science lesson in an English Medium private school

The first example comes from a private school Standard 7 science class where the
lesson topic is discussing different types of plants (field notes, April 17, 2007). The
teacher of the class is a very confident, outgoing woman who really seems to enjoy her
work and relates well to her students. I will call her Mrs. Monesa. Mrs. Monesa makes
great efforts in her teaching to engage her students in her lessons and usually tries to
connect the lesson content to their lives. At this particular private school, the three
Standard 7 teachers split the course load among themselves by having each teacher
assigned to teach specific subjects to each of the three Standard 7 classes at the school. In
this way they rotate through each classroom teaching the same lesson three times. This
helps the teachers focus on specific subject content without being too overloaded with
other subjects to teach. It also allows for them to spend more time preparing for each
lesson and forces them to stay within their allotted time whilst teaching because they
know another teacher will be coming into the classroom for the next subject, according to
the pre-determined timetable. This allows for focus and efficiency in their lessons, but it
also discourages straying too far off topic or delving into specific questions or problems
that a particular class or student may have with the lesson. Mrs. Monesa was assigned to
teach the science and Sesotho subjects. The students seemed to enjoy her and were
usually actively involved in her lessons.

The previous lesson had just ended so the teachers switched classrooms to teach

their lesson once again to a new set of students. Mrs. Monesa enters into the classroom

245

holding a stack of papers and writes “Plants” on the board. She greets the students and
then introduces the topic in English, saying that they will be discussing different types of
plants today, beginning with flowering plants, as she writes “Flowering Plants” on the
board. For the next few minutes she lectures the students on flowering plants, talking
about their different parts, how they grow and reproduce, and so on. She then moves on
to speak about non-flowering plants, as she writes on the board “Non-flowering Plants”.
The students are following along, but they seem to be getting a little bored. The entire
lecture is taught in English without any code-switching or mixing of Sesotho at all.

When Mrs. Monesa finishes her lecture she asks the students, “Are we together?”
The class answers “Yes” in unison, which makes the teacher laugh. As she laughs she
asks, “Do you ever say ‘No’?” The students say “No” in unison and they all have a good
laugh. Mrs. Monesa then proceeds to ask the students a few follow up questions in
English. As she does so she notices one student nodding off to sleep. She quickly yells at
the student, first in Sesotho, “U ultoa?” (Are you listening?) then follows without
hesitation in English, “Don’t sleep! Are we together Mpho? Can I ask you a few
questions?” She then asks the student a few questions to see if she was listening.

After the lecture Mrs. Monesa hands out the papers she brought into the
classroom which have pictures of different types of non-flowering plants. She has the
students look at the pictures and begins discussing the first type of non-flowering plant —
moss — by reminding the students of a recent field trip they took into the mountains and
saw a number of different types of plants. She asks the students if they remember seeing
some moss and they say “Yes”. Up until this point, everything has been conducted in

English between the teacher and students. As Mrs. Monesa reminds the students of seeing

246

some moss on their field trip she switches to using Sesotho for a couple of sentences to
explain a little more about what a moss is. She then abruptly retums back to using
English and continues on to the talk about the next type of non-flowering plant — mold.
Many of the students do not understand what a mold is, so the teacher refers them to the
Sesotho word for mold (hlobo) which is written in parentheses next to the picture on the
handout along with the English word. The students still don’t understand what mold is, so
the teacher explains it to them in English by giving them an example of the mold that
grows on old, moist bread. After being provided with this example the students seem to
understand mold quite well.

After discussing a few of the different non-flowering plants shown on the
handout, Mrs. Monesa has students turn over their papers and notes while she asks them
review questions of what they have learned so far. The students answer her questions in
firll English sentences. If they answer with incomplete sentences the teacher makes them
repeat their answer with a complete English sentence. The students do not have much
trouble doing so.

Mrs. Monesa then proceeds to discuss the last type of non-flowering plant on the
paper — algae. A number of the students don’t understand what this is so the teacher tells
them the Sesotho word (bolele). Most of the students understand after being referred to
the Sesotho word, but a few still don’t know what it is. So, the teacher goes on to explain
in English what it is. At the end Mrs. Monesa asks, “Is this clear? Now we have time for
your questions.” A number of students ask questions, some of them quite complex, such
as “Does a mold breathe like other plants?” and “Does spinach have flowers?” At one

point Mrs. Monesa provides an answer with which one student disagrees, and he

247

challenges her on it. Another student speaks up in defense of the teacher’s answer. The
teacher encourages this engagement but eventually confirms her own answer (which was
ultimately wrong), but the students seem satisfied. The lesson ends after the review
session. It is the last lesson of the day, so the students pack up their book bags and are
dismissed.

I would like to discuss just a few key points about this example. Mrs. Monesa
used English almost throughout the entire lesson. The only exception is when she
explained about moss for a few sentences in Sesotho and then returned back to using
English. This may have had something to do with her reference to their recent field trip
into the mountains, which caused her to use the more familiar language of Sesotho with
her students, but I did not follow up with the teacher on this, so I cannot be sure. The only
other two times she used Sesotho was when she yelled at a student for sleeping (which
she quickly follows with an English reprimand) and when the students did not understand
the English word “algae”, where she provides them with the Sesotho word. The topic of
the lesson was quite complex for their age level and understanding. This became evident
when the students didn’t even know the Sesotho words for some of the plant types, which
indicates it is not a familiar concept to them. When the students were confused or had
further questions, the teacher always used English to explain and provided real life
examples for them to understand. The students asked and answered questions in full
English sentences, and when they used one word or incomplete sentence responses, the
teacher made them repeat again with a full sentence. The students were able to ask rather
complex and thoughtful questions while one student even took the teacher to task, all in

English.

248

Science lesson in a government school

I will now contrast this example above with a similar science lesson given in a
government school Standard 7 class (field notes, March 19, 2007). The teacher of the
lesson has been teaching for over 15 years and has been at this particular government
school for 10 years. I will call her Mrs. Selepe. Mrs. Selepe is a strong willed woman
who cares dearly about her students, but is often short tempered and gets frustrated easily
with her students in class. When I would discuss with Mrs. Selepe about specific students
she knew great details about their lives. She knew which students came from difficult
living conditions and which ones were orphans. She knew the temperament of her
students and often the reasons behind why different students acted out the way that they
did. Mrs. Selepe said she spent a lot of time worrying about her students’ lives outside of
the classroom and made great efforts to support them in the ways that she could. On a
few occasions I saw her providing basic clothing for some of the poorest of her students
whose uniforms were getting old and tattered. She collected other such items from fellow
teachers, parents, and community members in order to help her students the best she
could. The year I was there Mrs. Selepe was in the middle of a 2—year university program
studying for her honors in a Bachelors of Education. She attended classes every weekend
in a nearby South African city and had a rather big load of coursework for these classes
on top of her teaching duties. Her own child attended Standard 4 in the same primary
school where she taught.

The lesson which I observed on this day was a continuation of the same topic
which had been taught in previous days, as the students had been learning about plants

and seed germination. They had conducted a lab activity earlier in the week where each

249

student planted a seed in a jar full of grass and had been watering them ever since. The
jars were lined up on the window sill so that they to get some sunlight.

Mrs. Selepe begins the lesson by instructing the students in English to get their
jars from the window. The students excitedly get their jars and go back to their desks.
When they look at their seeds nothing has happened. The experiment did not work
because they had put too much water in their jars. Mrs. Selepe seems frustrated and tells
the students they will try again, but this time they will use soil instead of grass. As she
discusses this she uses a mix of English and Sesotho throughout their interactions.

Mrs. Selepe then begins teaching by writing on the board “From Seed to Plant-
Germination”. She introduces the topic in English and has the students open up their
textbooks. Some of the textbooks are missing the specific page they are looking at, so the
teacher sorts it out for everyone to have a book with the correct page in it. This is
conducted nearly all in English. Mrs. Selepe then asks the students in English, “What do
seeds need to germinate?” The students answer in unison in English. Mrs. Selepe then
goes on to lecture about seed germination, what is needed for a seed to germinate, and
how it happens. This is all taught in English with the only exceptions being when she
uses the Sesotho phrase “Le ultoana?” which means, “Do you understand?” periodically
to make sure the students are following along. At times during the lecture she has
students read out loud certain passages from the book in English, which correspond with
what she is teaching.

After finishing the lecture many of the students look confused, so Mrs. Selepe
asks again if they understand, this time in English. Most of the students say they don’t

understand. One student claims she understands, but she cannot explain it in English, so

250

she answers in Sesotho. When Mrs. Selepe sees that most of her students do not
understand she switches to Sesotho and basically teaches everything that she had just
taught in English all over again, this time in much more detail and with practical
examples that the students can relate to. For example, as she teaches in Sesotho she
provides the example of how people in the mountains prepare a certain type of crop
(mabele) to be grown. Nearly all of the students seem understand this example as they
express agreement out loud, nod their heads, and follow along. This second round of
instruction with culturally relevant examples helps them to understand the concept of
germination better. After receiving the instruction in Sesotho, the students seem to
understand. They do not have nearly as confused looks on their face and are able to
engage with the teacher as she proceeds with the lesson.

Mrs. Selepe then switches back to English and continues on to the next topic of
the lesson which is a review of identifying the different parts of a plant. The students
have already learned this topic recently, so she reviews and quizzes them by refen‘ing to a
picture she has drawn on the board, asking questions such as “What is the name of this
part?” and “What does this part of the plant do?” The students struggle to answer the
questions in English and have to refer to the book to find their answers. When they
provide answers they usually do so by reading verbatim from the textbook in English. As
I observe the students do this it is difficult to know how much the students really
understand or whether they are merely finding the right place in the textbook. This is
because the teacher does not follow up with any questions to search their understanding,

nor does she make them answer in their own words. Answers read directly from the book

251

seem to satisfy for Mrs. Selepe, as she moves on to subsequent questions. The lesson
proceeds like this until they have answered all of the questions in the textbook.

After the lesson I asked Mrs. Selepe how she felt about it. She said she was quite
frustrated because the experiment did not work as planned and it threw her and the
students off a little. I then asked her why she used so much Sesotho for the lesson and she
said it was probably because their experiment hadn’t worked, so they were fi'ustrated and
couldn’t concentrate as well. Mrs. Selepe insisted that most of the time when she teaches
science she does so in English and the students understand quite well. This seemed to be
generally true during most of my observations in Mrs. Selepe’s class, but there had been
a few other occasions where I had seen lessons turn out like this one where the students
did not understand well in English and she ended up having to repeat the lessons in
Sesotho. But this was more the exception than the rule. I then asked her if it would be
better if she could just begin by using Sesotho while teaching these lessons, so she could
avoid the frustrations that misunderstanding from using English brings to her and the
students, as well as the extra time it takes to repeat the lesson a second time in Sesotho.
Mrs. Selepe said she felt like the students would indeed understand better if the lessons
were taught in Sesotho, but she did not like that idea because she felt it was more
important for the students to understand these things in English, not Sesotho, because in
the end they would have to write their science exams in English, especially on the PSLE.

In reviewing this example I would like to point out a few observations about this
lesson in comparison to the lesson on a similar topic at the private school. Mrs. Selepe
began the lesson in English and gave a whole lecture on the topic in English, asking the

students throughout if they understood. When asked if they understood the students said

252

“Yes”, but at the end of the lesson it became obvious that they did not understand much
at all. As a result, Mrs. Selepe felt like she needed to repeat the lesson in Sesotho (even
though it goes against the official language policy) in order for them to understand the
topic. After the students understood the first part of the lesson Mrs. Selepe returned to
using English to review what they had already learned in previous class sessions. The
students understood the review but were unable to provide their own answers in English
and had to read directly from the book. This was a typical practice in many of the
government school classes in which I observed, where the students could identify the
correct answers and read them directly from the book, but were not able to answer the
questions in their own words, or explain in words beyond what was written in the
textbook. It was rarely clear whether the students truly understood the answers they
provided or if they were just regurgitating the correct phrases found in the textbook
because the teachers would hardly ever follow up, either in English or Sesotho.

To be fair to Mrs. Selepe, this lesson is not representative of all science lessons in
her class. Most of the time she managed to stick to using English while teaching her
lessons. A lesson like the one illustrated above happened maybe 10-20% of the time
during my observations, and it usually only happened when the topic was brand new to
the students, especially if it was a complex topic. In most cases Mrs. Selepe would first
teach in English and then only resort to repeating the lesson in Sesotho when it became
obvious that almost no one in the class had understood the lesson. In comparison to most
other teachers at the government school, Mrs. Selepe used English a much greater
percentage of the time. The other two Standard 7 teachers, for example, were much more

relaxed in switching between English and Sesotho as they taught, and they did not

253

demand their students to use as much English either. The lesson described above would
be more typical of what I observed in their classrooms for most topics, not just those
which are difficult or new for the students. The other teachers usually began their lessons
in English, but would quickly switch to Sesotho, often switching back and forth between
languages throughout the lesson.

The use of inserting Sesotho phrases throughout the lesson, such as, “Ha ke re.”
(I’m saying.) or “Le ultoana?” (Do you all understand?) was a common practice in nearly
every lesson that I observed at the government school. Sesotho was also used commonly
for scolding students or getting their attention intermittently in the lessons. (See
Holmarsdottir 2005 for a detailed analysis of these language practices in South African
primary schools). Students were encouraged to answer in English the best they could.
This often meant that students answered with one word answers or incomplete, broken
sentences, but the teachers rarely pushed them to explain more or to rephrase in complete,
proper sentences. If a student could not answer in English it was usually okay for them to
do so in Sesotho, after they had made an attempt in English.

Overall, the lesson example at the government school illustrated above did not
stick to the official language policy of teaching in English. In contrast, the lesson
example illustrated at the private school nearly completely followed the English-only
policy. There are a number of different ideological influences, as well as social, cultural,
and structural influences (which were discussed in more detail in Chapters 4 and 5),
which contribute to some of the differences in the classroom language practices
illustrated in these examples. The significance of these examples for this study is what

they reveal about the types of school realities and competing ideologies which have an

254

influence on the language and teaching practices of both the teachers and students in their
classrooms. In the next few sections I will explore a few of these competing ideological
influences which are mediated through the contextual realities in schools and classrooms,
local interpretations of what the main purposes of education are, and differing views of

how schools should be operated and structured.

Learning English versus Learning Subject Content

In the science lessons described above there are two competing, sometimes
conflicting, pedagogical objectives which the teachers are trying to accomplish at the
same time in their classrooms. These are the goals of (1) teaching students content
knowledge in the particular subject lessons and (2) helping students to increase their
proficiency in English, while also expanding their English repertoire to include the new
content learned in these subject lessons. Although the explicit purpose of teaching these
science lessons is for the students to learn the science content, the underlying
assumptions of using English as the language of instruction for these lessons is that the
students already are proficient enough in English and will be able to increase their
English vocabulary and skills for engaging with the new subject content.

At the private school the teacher is largely able to accomplish both of these goals
simultaneously, because the underlying assumption that the students have enough
proficiency in English to effectively engage in the new content is largely true. In contrast,
at the government school the teacher has a difficult time adhering to using English only
while she teaches the science lesson because her students do not have the assumed

proficiency in English. As a result, at the govemment school Mrs. Selepe initially

255

attempts to accomplish both goals at the same time but is soon thwarted in her efforts.
She eventually has to make decisions about which goal to focus on at the expense of the
other. As Mrs. Selepe explained to me, she decided to switch to using Sesotho and teach
the science content all over again because she realized that her students did not
understand what was being taught in English. Therefore, she felt it was important enough
for her students to learn the science content that she temporarily put the other goal of
providing her students with greater proficiency in English on hold. In this lesson example
the two goals are in direct competition with each other because the students lack the
necessary proficiency in English to make it possible for the two goals to be
accomplished. In the private school lesson there is no such dilemma (except for the few
times where the teacher uses a Sesotho word to help her students understand the English
equivalent for new vocabulary). Overall, in the private school lesson the two goals are
able to be accomplished simultaneously because the students have enough English
proficiency to make it possible, and therefore the two goals complement each other.

There are a number of reasons why the private school teacher is able to
successfully accomplish both pedagogical goals of teaching English proficiency and
science content at the same time while the government school teacher is largely
unsuccessful. These have to do with a combination of things, including, the amount of
cultural and linguistic capital which their students possess, the many different interests
which must be met at each particular school, and the differing organizational structures
and daily operations of private schools compared to government schools.

Background of students

256

A major difference between private and government schools is the backgrounds
their student populations come from. This has a great impact on the ways teachers can
teach in their respective schools because schools cannot control the amount of cultural,
linguistic, and other relevant capital their students possess, which has great implications
on how they are able to teach. For example, if a teacher’s students have very little
background in English and few opportunities to use English outside of school, then there
is only so much a teacher can do. In Chapter 4, I provided a number of examples of how
students at the government school lack certain types of cultural, social, and linguistic
capital which makes it difficult for them to gain enough proficiency in English to do well
in school, when English is used as the medium of instruction. Now that the government
schools are no longer allowed to charge school fees and must accept all students, as long
as they have enough space, these schools have little control over selecting their student
populations. Many teachers expressed to me that this has become fi'ustrating for them and
has discouraged them in their efforts to provide quality instruction in their classrooms.

Previously, when the churches ran the majority of primary schools in Lesotho (up
until the mid-19805), there was less disparity in the quality of education provided across
the spectrum of primary schools. To be sure, there were a handful of private schools
which catered to the elite of society, but not nearly as many as there are now. Amongst
the church schools there were some that were widely recognized as providing much
better quality of education than others, but the disparity between private, church, and
government schools was nothing like it has become in the past two decades. Numerous
private English Medium schools have been established since then, and there seems to be

even greater demand for such private schools today than before.

257

This is especially true since the implementation of F PE in 2000. In this study,
many teachers and parents expressed to me their disappointment with the performance of
government primary schools after they opened their doors to all students, regardless of
their economic or social backgrounds. Prior to F PE, all primary schools, even
government schools, charged school fees. This played an important role in sifting out
families who did not have enough economic capital to pay for their children to go to
school, or, in some cases, those families who did not feel that formal education was
important enough to invest their valuable income into paying school fees for their
children. As a result, the student population at church and government primary schools
previous to FPE came from families which possessed, on average, higher levels of
economic capital, as well as greater cultural and linguistic capital, than students at
government schools do today, on average. The principal and teachers at Morena Primary
School claimed that the difference in the background of the current student population
compared to students in the past has made it more difficult for teachers to use English for
teaching because they feel the students at government schools now are even less
prepared, and have even less support at home, on average, than they did before.

For example, one Standard 4 teacher, who had been teaching at the government
school for over 27 years, said she has seen an enormous difference in the quality of
students over the years (interview, May 17, 2007). She recalled that in the past it used to
be much better teaching at her particular school because the parents seemed to be more
interested and supportive of their children’s education. She complained that these days
most of the parents do not seem to care much about their children’s education, and, as she

stated, even if they do care, many of them are not able to assist in their children’s

258

education because of their own lack of education. In addition, she expressed her concern
about the great number of students who are now orphans and come from extremely
deprived homes. She claims that teachers did not have to worry as much in the past about
their students’ impoverished and deficient home backgrounds. She emphasized that she
was happy these poor children were now able to go to school, but she claimed it made
things much more difficult for them to teach effectively, especially with regards to using
English for instruction at school. This teacher told me that she always tries to begin her
lessons by using English for instruction (which was confirmed in my observations of her
teaching), but she finds that she has to switch to using Sesotho much more often now
than she used to because her students simply do not have the foundational knowledge of
English to understand what is being taught. This is a dilemma that she says she has to
deal with on a daily basis in her teaching.

When I asked private school teachers about their students’ ability to understand
and follow lessons in English, nearly all said it was not a major problem for them. One
Standard 4 private school teacher said that a few of her students had difficulties following
along in English, but she attributed their inabilities to psychological and developmental
problems rather than the students’ home backgrounds (interview, May 3, 2007). I
followed up with one of these student’s parents to whom the teacher was referring (see
the section on Tsepo in Chapter 5), and indeed they had found that her child did possess
some learning disabilities. The mother said they had recently begun sending their child to
a psychologist, which was helping him improve tremendously in school (field notes &
interview, June 28, 2007). Most of the private school teachers attributed much of their

students’ English proficiency to their own school’s language policy of beginning English

259

medium instruction from day one in Standard 1. This may be a big part of the reason why
their students are more proficient in English by the time they begin Standard 4 than at
government schools. But as was discussed in Chapters 4 and 5, there is a great difference
in the amount of cultural and linguistic capital that private school students possess in
comparison to government school students. This must have a great impact on their level
of proficiency in English and ability to succeed at school.

I would argue that the home and educational backgrounds of students and their
families has a much greater impact on students’ ability to be effectively instructed in
English than what the schools and teachers do themselves. When teachers have students
who already possess the necessary cultural and linguistic capital it is much easier for
them to adhere to the policy of teaching only in English, but when their students do not
possess such capital and cannot understand English well, it makes it much more difficult
for teachers to adhere to the language policy. One Standard 7 government school teacher
explained to me that he doesn’t even bother much anymore about whether to use English
or Sesotho while teaching most of his subjects because it has become too tedious for him
to try to stick to one or the other (interview, March 15, 2007). He rather adjusts to the
abilities of his students and uses English whenever he feels it is working, but he often
switches back and forth. In my observations of his class, this seemed to be true, as he
freely code-switched back and forth between English and Sesotho during his lessons. His
students seemed to follow along well and many of them expressed how they enjoyed
having him as a teacher.

In one sense, these strategies used by the government school teachers could be

viewed as acts of resistance, referring to Canagarajah’s (I999) theory of resistance in

260

education and language practices. I’m not sure if resistance is the appropriate term for the
strategies utilized by these teachers, because none of the teachers expressed an explicit
desire to change the language policy. In fact, virtually all of the government school
teachers I talked to strongly supported the English medium policy. Some even expressed
their wish that the school would use English more in the earlier grades so they wouldn’t
have as much of a problem with teaching in English by the time students reached them in
the upper primary grades. Regardless of whether these strategies should be considered as
acts of resistance or not, they do clearly display acts of agency. They show that teachers
constantly make conscious pedagogical and linguistic decisions based upon the realities
of their classrooms. Most of the teachers I worked with expressed that they have an ideal
goal of how they want their lessons to be taught (i.e., in English), but they also
emphasized that their ultimate goal is for their students to understand the content of their
subjects. Therefore, they use their agency to decide when to try to adhere to teaching in
English and when they should switch, temporarily, to using Sesotho for instruction. This
tension in their teaching practices, in fact, requires teachers to constantly use their agency
while adjusting to the particular context of their lessons and students.

In this analysis I have used a policy as practice approach, which looks at the
language and education practices of teachers and students in the classroom. By focusing
on their practices we can make a link to how the specific policies influence, or do not
influence, their practices. Under certain contexts the teachers and students effectively
followed the policy expectations, while in other contexts they did not. If we can better
understand what motivates teachers to make specific pedagogical decisions in their

classrooms, in spite of the official language policy, then we can more effectively

261

recognize what types of policies and support systems can help teachers to make more
informed choices in their teaching practices and utilize their agency to adjust to their
particular teaching contexts. One of the problems with a rigid, across-the-board policy,
such as requiring English-only instruction in all classrooms and subjects, is that it
assumes ideal teaching circumstances and does not provide official support for teachers
to use their agency in “bending the rules” and adjusting to their own particular teaching
contexts. By looking at the specific dynamics of teaching, within the context of each
particular classroom, we can begin to gain such an understanding. This will require more
systematic research which attempts to correlate the backgrounds of students in particular

classrooms to the teaching strategies which are adopted by their teachers.

Competing Purposes of Education

Having discussed how the cultural and linguistic capital of students impacts the
ways teachers can use language to teach in their classrooms, I would like to now focus on
a few other issues which also have a strong influence on how teachers teach at school.
The influences I will discuss in the next two sections are (I) the various ways that
stakeholders, at all levels, view the purposes of schooling and (2) the differences in
organizational and management structures between private and public schools. Although
these influences also have a strong impact on the ways teachers teach in their classrooms,
their connection to actual pedagogical decisions of teachers is less clear, especially with
regard to language policy, and thus, more difficult to correlate with specific classroom
practices. These two issues have a more general influence on how schools operate, but

they also impact the ways teachers teach. Therefore, having discussed the two science

262

lesson examples above, I will now turn to some other examples which portray some of
the differences between how private and government schools operate on a daily basis.

One of the local ideologies which strongly impacts how schools and teachers
operate is in what people believe the purposes of schools should be. Much like the
competing goals in American schools that Labaree (1997) discusses (see Chapter 2),
there are also competing perceptions of the major purposes of schools in Lesotho’s
education system. Two of the major purposes I observed in primary schools during this
study include (1) preparing students to receive necessary credentials required to move on
to higher levels of education and become qualified for limited, prestigious jobs and (2)
providing a safe place to watch over and take care of the needs of school-aged children.
These are obviously not the only perceived purposes of primary schools in Lesotho, but
for this study I will only focus on these two because the government and private schools
approached these two purposes in very different ways. Private schools tended to focus
more on the first of these purposes while government schools tended to focus more on the
latter. These different purposes have great implications on how teachers approach their
teaching responsibilities at school and how much time they can devote to teaching.

Providing credentials for students

Under the current educational structure in Lesotho, where there is limited space
for high school students, one of the major purposes of primary schools is to prepare
students to pass the Primary School Leaving Exam (PSLE) which is administered to all
Standard 7 students upon the completion of primary school. The PSLE is one of the
major criteria in establishing who is eligible to move on to high school. It is also used by

high schools as a major selection criterion for admittance. The best high schools require

263

their students to have high marks on the PSLE to even be considered for enrollment.
Therefore, the PSLE holds great importance for students and their future. I would argue
that for the private schools I worked with, this was perceived of by parents as the most
important purpose of schools. This can be justified by the comments of the majority of
parents I interviewed (see Chapter 5) who said their number one criteria for selecting a
particular private school for their child was in looking at the pass rates and exam scores
of each school on the PSLE. Parents tried to send their children to schools that had the
best exam performance, if possible. This is not to say that the parents were not also
interested in other aspects of the schools, such as how well the teachers treat their
students, the quality of education provided at the school, and the facilities available for
the students, but many of the parents explicitly stated that the pass rates were their top
criteria for selecting a school. Consequently, the student population at private schools is
basically self-selected from families who want their children to have the best chance to
pass the PSLE at the highest level possible and can afford to pay for it.

This also played out in the ways Standard 7 teachers approached their teaching at
the private schools. Even though the PSLE was not scheduled until October, most of the
private school teachers finished teaching the full year’s syllabus by the end of June (thus
cramming a year’s worth of subject content into half of the allotted time) so that they
could begin reviewing and drilling the students solely in preparation for the PSLE. All of
the private schools I worked with required their Standard 7 students and teachers to take
only a two week Winter break in June while the other grades took the full six weeks off.
This was so the students would have more time to review and prepare for the PSLE. Due

to the structure of the PSLE, which requires all subjects other than Sesotho to be written

264

in English, there was extra stress on using English during their preparations. At the
government school the teachers also tried to begin reviews and preparations for the PSLE
as early as possible, but they were not able to do so with nearly the same fervor or
diligence as the private schools. Part of the reason for this is because there was constant
pressure on the private school teachers from the students’ parents who wanted their
children to get the highest marks possible. In addition, because the PSLE results were the
main thing that distinguished one private school from another, the principals were
constantly looking over the Standard 7 teachers’ shoulders making sure they were doing
everything in their power to prepare their students for the exam. At the government
schools there was very little of such pressure. Indeed, the government school teachers and
principal also wanted their students to pass the PSLE with high marks, but there was not
nearly as much pressure on them to prepare their students well. This had a great impact
on how much time the private school teachers kept on task, especially with using English,
while teaching in comparison to the government school teachers, which in turn had an
effect on the quality of education the students received.

The difference between the government school and private schools can be seen in
the students’ results on the PSLE. At Morena Primary School, of the 84 students who
took the exam, only two received a lst class pass, 15 a 2nd class pass, 53 a 3rd class pass,

and 14 failed. Out of 84 students, only 4 received a top score of “l” in math, while 64

66199 ($199

students received a on their Sesotho score, and 18 received a on their English

6619,

subject score. Similarly, only 8 students received a in the science subject and 27
received a “1 ” in the social studies subject. In contrast, at the nearby Dayspring English

Medium primary school the results were as follows: out of 138 students, 63 passed with

265

lst class, 47 with 2nd class, and 27 with 3rd class, with l failing. 133 received a “1” in

English, 120 (out of 133) received a “l” in Sesotho, 65 received a “1” in math, 106

‘61,, 6619’

received a in science, and 133 received a in social studies.

Providing for the needs of children

In contrast to preparing students for the PSLE, another perceived purpose of
schools is to provide a place where children can be safely watched over and provided for
their needs. Ever since the implementation of the F PE program, government schools have
been mandated with a number of simultaneous purposes by the MOET. Not only are
government schools expected to provide an education to all of their students and prepare
them to pass the PSLE, but they have also been required to open their doors to everyone,
including those who previously could not afford to go to school. As has been discussed
before, this has had great implications on the quality of education schools can provide
because they cannot control the outside experiences, backgrounds, and influences of their
students. With a new student population having been introduced, which possesses even
less sources of valued capital than before, government schools find themselves having to
deal with more pushes and pulls than ever before.

In addition to being expected to provide a good education to a larger population of
students, government schools have also been mandated to provide for the well being of
their students. One of the key components of F PE is that government schools must
provide a free lunch to all of their students. This feeding program is ultimately funded by
the government, but the schools are responsible for making sure it is carried out every

day in practice. For some students this is the only meal they receive all day. Therefore,

these schools provide a great service to many children who may otherwise go hungry.

266

This is especially true today where the number of orphans continues to rise as a result of
the HIV/AIDS epidemic which is sweeping the nation. As was explained in Chapter 3,
approximately 30% of the students at Morena Primary are orphans. This is more than
twice as many orphans than were at any of the private schools I worked with. On top of
that, as was illustrated in Chapters 4 and 5, the majority of students at the government
school come from much more impoverished homes than those at private schools.

As an example, one of the Standard 7 students I worked with, Pontso, lived in a
home without any parents because both of her parents had passed away in recent years.
When I visited Pontso’s home on four different occasions over a three month period,
there were no adults living in the home until a 19 year old cousin, with a newborn baby
of her own, came back to live with the girl and her two brothers. Pontso’s oldest brother
was already an alcoholic, while they feared the other brother, at 14 years of age, was
getting into drugs and other trouble. When I finally was able to interview Pontso’s
cousin, barely an adult herself, who had come to take care of the children, she expressed
how difficult their circumstances were (interview, September 9, 2007). The children
survived off of meager financial support from distant relatives, which was inconsistent
and often not enough for even the essentials. Pontso’s cousin had been living with the
children for over a year, but had to leave for a few months to give birth to her newborn
baby. Thus the children were left to fend largely for themselves. Amazingly, Pontso was
one of the top students in her class, according to her teacher. She ended up receiving a
second class pass on the PSLE, receiving the top score of I in every subject except for

math, in which she received a 2.

267

When I spoke to Pontso’s teacher, Mrs. Selepe (the teacher of the science lesson
illustrated above), about the students in her class, she was able to provide rather detailed
descriptions of nearly all of her students’ home backgrounds. She was especially mindful
of the orphans in her class, like Pontso, and did what she could to help them out. One day
I arrived late to Mrs. Selepe’s class to find a number of the students lined up at her desk
waiting to receive new items of clothing for their school uniforms (field notes, May 16,
2007). I later found out that she had asked a number of her students to let her know which
items of clothing they needed to replace because they had become too small or worn out.
She had then organized with other teachers and families of former students to donate
clothing in order to replace these items. This was a wonderful service to her students,
who otherwise probably would not have been able to afford new clothing, but it took
away time from teaching and preparation for Mrs. Selepe. When I asked her about this,
she commented that she could not bear to see her students without these essentials, so she
felt it was worth taking away some time from teaching to provide for these needs (field
notes, May 16, 2007).

At the private schools the teachers rarely expressed wonies about the welfare of
their students. I do not recall observing any teacher take out time from their class to
specifically address these needs like I did in Mrs. Selepe’s class. Due to the fact that
private school students could afford to pay for relatively expensive school fees, it was
assumed that the students’ welfare was taken care of at home. None of the private schools
I worked with provided free lunches to their students. This was the responsibility of the
students’ families themselves. The private schools expected their students to have nice

and clean uniforms and had strict grooming standards. If students showed up with shabby

268

clothes or looked dirty and unkempt their teachers would usually scold the students and
tell them to go home to tidy up. The teachers rarely had to worry about whether their
students were being provided with basic essentials at home and whether that was
affecting their performance at school. I remember one day speaking to Mrs. Selepe in the
government school about one of her students that she was very concerned with because
her father had recently been sent to prison. She said that she had noticed the student’s
performance had decreased tremendously since the instance, and she did not know what
to do about it. At the private school I’m sure there were also issues about the students’
lives that worried their teachers, but none of the teachers expressed these worries to me,
and I did not see it affect the teachers nearly to the same extent as at the government
school. Although it is difficult to determine to what extent this had an impact on how the
teachers taught at each school, it can be concluded that government school teachers had
to deal with many more non-instructional related issues with their students than those at
private schools, which in turn took away from the time and focus they were able to

dedicate to teaching.

Private versus Public Education

The final ideological difference between private and government schools, which I
will discuss in this chapter, is the contrast between their fundamental organizational
structures, systems of accountability, and the basic ways in which they operate. These
two features have a great impact on what is expected of teachers and students. They
influence how teachers go about their daily tasks of lesson preparation, classroom

teaching, marking of students’ work, disciplining, and overseeing extra curricular

269

activities with their students. The management of schools also has a large impact on how
much teachers are required to adhere to certain policies and to what extent they are held
accountable for their actions. As will be illustrated below, the inherent nature of private
schools — where families pay school fees and therefore expect to see direct results in their
children’s education — provides a direct structure of expectations and accountability
which keeps teachers and students on task. In contrast, government schools — especially
since the implementation of F PE — have a much less direct system of oversight, and
therefore, are more prone to having a casual approach to policy guidelines and often do
not hold teachers accountable if they are uncommitted and idle in their teaching
responsibilities.

In the following sections I will provide an example from my field notes of a rather
typical day in two Standard 4 classrooms, one at a private school, the other at a
government school. Although I have referred to these days as rather “typical”, it is not
possible to provide a representative school day for these classes, because every day is
different with constantly new and interesting things happening each day. I have called
them typical because through my four months of experience and observations at these
two particular schools the days which will be portrayed did not contain any extraordinary
or overly unusual events. After presenting an illustration of each day, I will provide a
short discussion.

School day at Dayspring English Medium (field notes, April 19, 200 7)
7:45 — Assembly: Students from all grades line up in rows according to class outside in

the open area between classrooms. A teacher from Standard 6 welcomes the

students, gives a few announcements, and turns the time over to one of her

270

students who recites a short speech to the assembled students. The students
applaud for the speech. The teacher then leads the students in prayer.

8:00 — After all of the official business is taken care of, the students begin singing songs
in unison as the classes file off to their classrooms in an orderly fashion, row by
row, with the Standard 1 students leaving first.

8: 15 — The Standard 4 students have been waiting outside for their teachers to open their
classroom. Some students are waiting patiently while others start playing, a few
getting a little rambunctious. The teachers are inside the classroom making last
minute preparations for the day. At 8: 15 they open the doors and the students rush
into their classroom (in a not-so-orderly fashion). There are three Standard 4
classes, but for this school year they all meet together in the large assembly hall
because the school is in the process of building a new set of classrooms to replace
some outdated classrooms. Therefore, there are three teachers (Mrs. Kutoane, Mr.
Pakisa, and Ms. Motaung) in the classroom, with nearly 150 students sitting in
rows lined up all the way to the back of the assembly room. Under such an
environment it is very easy for the students to get distracted and make a lot of
noise. Therefore, the three teachers constantly work as a team. One teacher
teaches the lesson, while the other two walk around the room maintaining
discipline and helping mark students class work when needed.

8:20 - English: The teachers want the students to practice conversations and introducing
themselves, so they have me come to the front of the class and introduce myself.
After my introduction the teacher asks the students to ask me questions. A number

of students ask questions, many of which make them all laugh. The students are

271

very engaged, but easily become noisy and overexcited. The teachers constantly
have to remind the students to keep quiet and behave. The lesson ends after
students have asked their questions and I was able to answer a few.

8:43 — Math: Ms. Motaung teaches the math lesson, which is about multiplication. She
gives a brief introduction of the topic, leads the students in reviewing the times
tables (as the students shout out the times tables unison), and then has students do
problems for her on the board. After each student solves a problem, the teacher
asks the class if it is correct. The class shouts in unison “yes” or “no”. After doing
this a number of times, the teacher tells the students to get out their notebooks and
provides them with 3 problems on the board at 8:55. She tells them they have 3
minutes to finish the problems. As students complete the problems they raise their
hands for the teachers to come and mark their work. At 9:16 they finish marking
all of the students’ work. Ms. Motaung then takes the next ten minutes to have
students come up to the board to solve the problems. She walks them through the
steps of how to correctly solve the problems. At 9:27 Ms. Motaung wraps up the
lesson by telling the students that they will continue tomorrow with story
problems.

9:30 — English: Mr. Pakisi teaches a lesson on the English vocabulary words used to
describe different sounds made by animals. He begins by asking students what
sounds various animals make. The students respond in complete English
sentences and are very involved. They often laugh when students provide their
answers. The other two teachers work hard to maintain order in the classroom.

Mr. Pakisi writes a list of animals on the board and then has the students help him

272

write down the noises they make. Throughout the class the students are very
engaged and excited because they are allowed to make animal noises and
participate actively. At 9:52 Mr. Pakisi tells the students, “Okay, you take out
your English notes and write them down,” referring to the notes on the board. At
10:03 he says, “Okay, 2 minutes now.” At 10:06 he ends the lesson by saying,
“Now we are going to another subject. Let’s close our exercise books.”

10:07 — Agriculture: Mr. Pakisi also teaches this lesson, which is on “piggery” and the
different products that we get from pigs. He begins the class by asking, “Who can
remind us what we talked about last time?” One student stands and answers in a
complete sentence, “Pi ggery is keeping or rearing of pigs for a certain purpose.”
The teacher goes back and forth with the students asking questions about why we
raise pigs, what we use them for, what products we get from them, etc. As the
students answer these questions, Mr. Pakisi writes their answers on the board. At
10:25 he says, “So you take out your agriculture notes,” and the students copy the
notes from the board.

10:30 -— Break Time: Students break for lunch. They go get their lunches from their bags
and disperse, some stay inside the classroom while most go outside to eat and
play. The break is for 30 minutes only.

1 1:00 — As students file back into the classroom the teacher tells them to finish copying
their agriculture notes from the board.

1 1:20 — Sesotho: Mrs. Kutoane teaches the lesson on “Ieetsi” (verbs in Sesotho). She
begins by asking “Leetsi ke eng? (What is a verb?)” The students answer in

complete Sesotho sentences, basically saying that verbs indicate action. Mrs.

273

Kutoane asks the students to provide different sentences and to indicate where the
verb is in each sentence. Students provide elaborate sentences. When the students
are correct the teacher says, “O nepile! Makofi! (You are correct! Clap your
hands!)” The class claps their hands in unison. At 11:50 the teacher writes two
sentences on the board for the students to copy down and identify the different
parts of the sentence. Many of the students don’t completely understand the
assignment, so Mr. Pakisi explains in further detail what is expected from them.
Teachers go around classroom marking the students’ work. This takes a rather
long time as the students finish the lesson at 12:30. The teachers take a short
break but do not dismiss the students from the classroom. So the students stay in
their desks and chat and play with their neighbors.

12:46 — Science: Ms. Motaung teaches the lesson on air. The teacher had previously
arranged for one of the top students in the class to present a short lecture on air
and what it is composed of. The student stands in front of the class, composed and
confident, and gives her presentation. Ms. Motaung periodically steps in to help
the student with key words and concepts. After the presentation the students clap.
Ms. Motaung summarizes the student’s presentation and writes on the board the
words for the different gases that make up air. She then calls on another student to
give a similar presentation on the properties of air. The students copy down the
notes from the board.

12:59 — Home Economics: Mrs. Kutoane teaches the lesson on washing clothing. She
begins the lesson by asking the question, “Why do we need to wash our clothes?”

The students provide a number of different answers. She then states, “I want to

274

discuss the proper way to wash your clothes.” Throughout the rest of the lesson
Mrs. Kutoane has the students help describe to her the different steps they should
take to wash their clothes. She asks questions like, “What should be done first?
What type of soap should we use? What is the reason we use Stay Soft (a fabric
softener)?” etc. By the end of the lesson many students begin to get wrestless and
rowdy. It is becoming much more difficult for the teachers to keep order in the
classroom. At 1:17 Mrs. Kutoane says, “Now I want to ask you questions.” She
asks review questions, which many of the students are no longer paying attention
to. At 1:22 the teacher says she will give them some homework, but the students
complain, claiming they already have too much homework. So, the teacher
decides not to give them homework and says she will let them finish a few
minutes early.

1:23 — Prayer and Finish Day: Students recite a prayer in unison and are dismissed from
class. School ends at 1:30, so the students are excited to get out a few minutes
early.
in the example above, the teachers keep on task throughout most of the day. They

started the day about 15 minutes later than they were supposed to, but this was quite

common in their class. The teachers ofien met with each other for 5-10 minutes to
coordinate their plans for the day and make last minute lesson preparations. It usually
took this long for the students to get settled and organized because there were so many of
them in the assembly hall. Other than that, most everything stays on schedule. Most
lessons last between 25—45 minutes, whit the exception of the Sesotho lesson which went

for 70 minutes and the science lesson which was only 13 minutes long. This was the

275

common practice, to keep lessons close to 30-40 minutes long. At the end of the day the

students’ interest and attention waned off, and it became much more difficult for the

teachers to keep order in the classroom and the students on task. But overall, the teachers
and students were quite engaged and on task. There were a few periods where students
were supposed to be doing course work on their own while the teachers marked their
work. Typically in this Standard 4 class the students spent less than '/4 of the time doing
course work. Most of the time was engaged with the teachers asking them questions and
having students solve problems in front of the class.

School day at Morena Primary School (field notes, April 23, 200 7)

7:45 — Assembly: Students line up in rows according to grade and class and wait quietly
for teachers to start the assembly. Soon after 7:45 a teacher from Standard 2 opens
the assembly by welcoming the students. She gives a few announcements, leads
the students in prayer, and then dismisses the students. The students begin singing
in unison as the rows file out, beginning with Standard 1, in an orderly fashion.

8:00 — Classes begin: At this time the classes are supposed to begin their lessons for the
day, but the principal of the school has not arrived yet. Most of the classrooms are
locked, so the students and teachers cannot get in. The keys for the classrooms are
in the principal’s office, to which she is the only one who has a key. A few
classrooms, such as the Standard 4 class 1 am observing today, do not need a key
to be opened, so I enter the class with Ms. Kolisang’s students to begin class
according to schedule. In the meantime, most of the other teachers stand outside

and chat with each other. None of them seem to be too bothered by not being able

276

to get into their classrooms. Their students go ahead and begin playing on the
school grounds.

8:10 — Social Studies: Some of Ms. Kolisang’s students are busy fetching water for the
teacher while others sweep the floors, clean the chalkboard, and make
preparations for the day. At around 8: 10 Ms. Kolisang begins her lesson on
different occupations and employment. She lectures the class for a while on the
different types of occupations that are prevalent in Lesotho. She does most of this
in English while writing notes on the board in English about the things she has
said. There is very little interaction with the students, other than when the teacher
periodically asks, “Ha ke re?” (Okay?) and “Le ultoana?” (Do you understand?)
to make sure students are following along. At 8:25 she has the students copy
down the notes from the board.

8:39 — Sesotho: The lesson is on Pitsetso (Punctuation). Ms. Kolisang begins the lesson
by reviewing their previous lesson on basic punctuation in sentences. She then
writes some guidelines on the board for students to follow as they are supposed to
do dictation with proper punctuation. Ms. Kolisang then reads a series of
sentences, one by one, for the students to dictate. She repeats each sentence three
times. At 8:46 she has the students turn their workbooks in to her and then goes to
the board to write down each sentence. As she writes the sentences on the board
students either cheer to themselves or squirm in disappointment when they see
how each sentence is written. Ms. Kolisang then goes through each sentence in
detail to show where capital letters, spaces, periods, etc. should be properly

placed. She then goes to her desk to mark the students’ workbooks. She does this

277

one by one, out loud, so that all students know how each student did on the
assignment. The students tease each other as they get answers wrong and
congratulate themselves when they are correct. At 9:09 the teacher finishes
marking each of the students’ workbooks and returns them to the students for
revisions. At 9:16 the Sesotho lesson ends. 1 look outside and notice that the
principal has still not arrived.

9: 19 — Math: The lesson is on division of whole numbers. Ms. Kolisang tells the
students, in English, to get out their math textbooks. The students distribute the
books, but it takes a long time because many of the books do not have all of the
pages in them. Therefore the teacher has to help them sort out which books are
good and makes the students share with each other. At 9:24 she starts the lesson
by writing a division problem on the board and says, “Joale ke mohlala. (Now
here is an example)” She then walks the students through the steps for solving the
problem. Ms. Kolisang uses English most of the time, but periodically asks the
students in Sesotho if they are following along and if they understand. She then
turns to the book and has the students answer each question. Many students have
a difficult time dividing 2 into 36 because they don’t understand how to divide 2
into 3. So the teacher draws three lines on the board and circles two of them,
explaining that one is left over. She repeats each problem three times to make sure
all students understand, sticking largely to using English. At 9:40 she gives the
students an assignment by saying, “Write ‘class 4... Maths... Division’. You
work out the following: page 22, number 1, a,b,c.” She repeats herself and then

lets the students work on the problems. At 9:49 she goes over the problems with

278

the class, in English. Most of the students got the problems wrong, so she
switches to using Sesotho and goes to individual students to help them out while
the others keep working on the problems. At 9:52 Ms. Kolisang gives another
problem on the board. Students are still having trouble answering the problems, so
the teacher says in exasperation, “Helang Batho! (Oh you people!)”, and starts the
lesson over from the beginning. This time she has a student come to the board to
go through each step of division. When the student gets stuck she has another
student come up to help out. At 10: 14, after six students are unsuccessful in
solving the problem she has them all sit down at their desks. She then starts the
problem all over again. This time she switches completely to using Sesotho and
draws a chart on the board which shows the steps they are to take when dividing.
At 10:20 she then shows the students how to follow these steps by solving a
specific division problem, 72 divided by 6. All of this is done in Sesotho. When
she feels the students have understood she has them do the problems again in their
workbook. She tells them, in English, that when they are done they should bring

their workbook to her desk and then they can go for a toilet break.

10:35 — English: The lesson is on a poem titled “Mice”. Ms. Kolisang begins the class by

saying, “Now you take out your Junior English.” While the students take out their
English textbooks the teacher writes a few new vocabulary words on the board to
prime the students for the poem they are about to read. For each word Ms.
Kolisang has her students repeat it out loud three times. She then asks the
students, in English, “What is mice in Sesotho?” The students answer in unison.

The teacher then reads the poem, line by line, having the students repeat after her.

279

.u.

 

She does this five times. She then goes around asking students questions related to
the poem, but more individualized in nature, such as, “Mpho, do you like mice?”,
“Class do you like snakes?”, “Why do you not like snakes?”, etc. The students
usually answer with one word, but they answer appropriately and are very
engaged. They laugh at certain answers and nearly every student raises his or her
hand, wanting to be called on next. They seem to really be enjoying the lesson.
Ms. Kolisang then returns to the poem and asks specific questions for
comprehension. She tries to make the students answer in complete sentences to
practice speaking. The students struggle but are willing to try. At 11:16 Ms.
Kolisang tells the students to take out their exercise books and has the students
answer the comprehension questions in the book. She tells them in English,
“Don’t answer the questions in short. And don’t just answer, ‘Yes, I do’.” When
the students are finished they go to Ms. Kolisang’s desk to have their work
marked on the spot. At 11:40 they are all finished being marked, so the teacher
goes to the board to show how to answer each question. At 11:46 she says, “Now
you close your books. It’s lunchtime now.”

1 1:46 —— Lunch Break: The students go get their bowls out of their bag and go outside to
get their free lunch for the day. They line up as the two lunch ladies fill their
bowls. One of the students goes first to get food for Ms. Kolisang, who is also
entitled to a free lunch. I cannot remember what they ate on that day, but there
was a certain type of food provided on each specific day of the week so that

students would get some variety throughout the week and have a balanced diet.

280

After getting their food the students return to the classroom to eat. When they are
finished they are allowed to go outside and play on the school grounds.

1:22 — Ms. Kolisang returns to the class. Normally lunch is supposed to end at 12:30, but
today it lasted more than an hour longer. Ms. Kolisang said the reason why she
came back so late was because she was busy meeting with the principal and a few
other teachers. They were busy making arrangements for one of the Standard 7
students who had won the national primary competition for the 100 meter dash
and had been invited to go to Botswana for a regional competition. The student
did not have the means herself to go, so the school was trying to collect enough
money from the teaching staff, parents, and community in order to fund the girl
and one teacher chaperone to accompany her to Botswana. The school had been
preparing for this event for a couple of weeks. It was a great honor for the school
to have one of their students represented at such a prestigious event. This was not
the first time that teachers had been taken away from their classroom teaching to
make preparations for the girl. In fact, when they first got news about the event,
the whole teaching staff met for a couple of hours during school time, while their
students were free to play outside.

1:26 — Agriculture: When Ms. Kolisang eventually came back to class she began a
lesson on poultry. She has the students get out their agriculture textbooks and
begins the class by asking the question, “What is poultry?” Only one student
raises his hand. He tries to answer by reading the answer directly from the book.
The teacher writes that definition on the board. She then asks, “What are birds?”

One student answers in Sesotho, but Ms. Kolisang asks them to answer in

281

English. One student answers, “Birds are animals that have feathers.” The teacher
then asks what feathers are in Sesotho. She then asks for the students to give her
examples of birds. The students are able to do this in English. She then asks what
we use poultry for and the students answer with a list of different products from
poultry, which she writes on the board. She then asks what some of the products
are used for, in English, and none of the students can answer. She has a short
discussion in English about each poultry product and then ends the lesson.

1:45 — Finish the day: After she is finished teaching about poultry, Ms. Kolisang says,
“It’s time up.” The students excitedly gather their items and put them in their bags
and rush out the door.

This example helps to highlight some of the differences that were prevalent in my
observations of the practices at the two different types of schools. At the private school
the teachers largely stayed on task and on schedule throughout the day. In the
government school there were a number of distractions which got in the way of the
regular schedule of teaching. One example of this is in the punctuality of the principal
and teachers. In the example provided above, most of the other teachers were not able to
start their classes for a couple of hours because the principal showed up late and had the
only key to the office, which held the keys to the other classrooms. In my experience at
the particular government school I worked with, this was not an unusual occurrence for
the principal or other teachers to show up late to school. Usually when this happened no
one was reprimanded or punished. I rarely even saw teachers complain when the
principal showed up late. They seemed to treat it as a regular occurrence and did not

seem to mind having to wait to start teaching for that day. Granted, these are my own

282

impressions of the situations, so 1 cannot conclude whether the teachers felt this way or
not. I. can only report my interpretations of what 1 observed. At the private schools I
observed the principals confront their teachers a number of times for not showing up on
time or not keeping on schedule with their teaching.

In addition, it was quite common for teachers at the government school to leave
their classroom during normal teaching hours for school business or other matters. An
example of this is provided above, when Ms. Kolisang does not return from lunch until
an hour later than lunch was scheduled to end. In my observations it appeared that nearly
all school related business at the government school was taken care of during the regular
hours of school while subjects were scheduled to be taught. Staff meetings, planning
sessions, school related errands, and even soccer and choir practices for the students took
place during the time that was officially allotted for classroom teaching. Sometimes the
teachers would provide their students with things to work on while they were gone, but
most of the time they left their students with nothing to do but play.

One last point about this example is the length of lessons at the government
school. On the classroom timetables posted on each classroom wall, the school day was
supposed to be divided up into roughly nine 30 minute lesson segments. The timetables
even had specific subjects listed for each 30 minute slot on each day, in order to follow
the guidelines in the national curriculum. Some subjects were listed over two time slots,
intended to last no longer than an hour. At the private school the teachers largely
followed their timetables, with exceptions here or there, when one class went over time a
little, or when unexpected events created a need for adjustments. But overall the teachers

followed their timetables. At the government school the teachers rarely followed their

283

timetables, and when they tried to they often taught lessons for much longer than
scheduled. Part of the reason for this was because it often took twice as long to teach the
lessons because the teachers had to repeat the lesson over again in Sesotho when the
students didn’t understand in English the first time. On top of this, the students spent a lot
of time copying notes from the board and working on course work in class. As compared
to the private school where I estimated that 25% of classroom time was spent by students
doing course work and copying notes from the board, at least 50%-60% of the time was
spent doing this type of work, or waiting for the teacher to mark their work at the
government school. In a similar study, Schweitzer (2007) made observations in
government school classrooms while working as a Peace Corps volunteer with primary
schools in Lesotho. In her thesis she states that many teachers were absent from their
classrooms for long periods of time during the day and the students were often left to
their own devices while the teacher was absent. She concludes that one of the major
problems with the government schools she observed was that teachers spent very little
time teaching and were not held accountable for their time at work.

Importance of effective leadership at the schools

These are only a few examples of the differences between the ways private and
public schools operated. One of the explanations for this is that private schools have an
organizational structure which offers direct oversight and accountability for teachers.
Private schools are usually led by dynamic and energetic principals who demand the best
from their teachers. They are also under constant pressure from parents who are paying
good money for their children to receive an excellent education. Therefore, if parents

hear about or sense that their children’s teachers are not teaching well and are wasting

284

their students’ time, then the principal is sure to hear about it from the parents. The
private schools depend upon the school fees from students’ families, so they are very
sensitive to the needs and concerns of parents.

In an interview with one Standard 7 private school teacher (September 25, 2007),
who had previously taught at government schools and was even a former principal of a
government school for a few years, I was told about some of the differences from her
point of view between government and private schools through her own experiences. I
will provide a few lengthy excerpts from her interview to illustrate the different
experiences she had while working at the two different types of schools:

I worked [at my first government school] for one year, the principal was so, so,

so, so troublesome that I could not stand him, anyway. Actually, what was

happening at that time, people who were principals were those people who had
been there for quite a long time, those old men and ladies who had been there who
believed that the school was theirs. So whoever was coming with any new ideas
was regarded to be trying to overthrow them. And then he was behaving like that.

So I had to leave the school. I had to go away from that place. I went to one of the

schools around [the area] and then I worked there for two years.

At one point in her career she became the principal of a rural school for three
years, but then she was recruited by Dayspring English Medium. When I asked her what
it was like when she started teaching at the private school she said:

My dear, Dayspring is so much challenging. When I first came here it was as if I

never knew how to teach. I had never been here to Dayspring. You get to learn a

lot when you get to .Dayspring. Because when you look at the way we work here

285

 

at Dayspring you find that we really stick to principles, we stick to rules, we do
our best, we work so hard. Compare it to the government schools where we were,
we were just doing what, my dear? Just to get salaries. When you get out there,
you will find out that some people really do work there just to get salaries.
Actually, it is not challenging at all. You do not learn a thing. You do not learn a
thing. But at my school, where I was a principal, I think I brought a lot of change,
but 1 don’t think that was enough. If I happen to get there now 1 can do wonderful

work.

 

When I asked her what she thought made the difference between her current
private school and the government schools she previously worked at, she responded:
I think it comes from the leadership. Because I always tell the principal that I have
learned a lot from him. I have been watching him. I have been looking at all the
steps that he takes and then compare them to what I was. . .then I see that, oh yes, I
was weak here and there. Now if I happen to be there I can add this to what I
already had. And then I can do something wonderful. So I have learnt that. I have
only learnt that when 1 got here to Dayspring.
Later she stated:
Dayspring is doing wonderful work, just because of the leadership. The head
teacher is good at pushing people to do work. Because I want to tell you there are
some people here who are very lazy to do work, but with that old man behind
them they do it. They do it. And, he makes people to be, to want to do more.
According to this teacher’s experience and perspective, she feels that the major

key to successful schools is in the leadership that comes from the principal. Another

286

teacher from a different private school, who had spent more than 35 years teaching at
church-run government schools, including being a deputy principal at the school for a
number of years, gave similar sentiments about the importance of strong leadership at
schools. In my interview with her (September 14, 2007), I asked her why she thinks some
government schools do much better than others, even though they theoretically have the
same resources available. She said that if you look at the government schools which get
good results on the PSLE, they always have a good, dynamic principal. This bore out in
her own experience teaching at government schools. She actually left the government
school to teach at a private school because the new principal was no longer providing
good leadership, so she wanted to teach at a school that was performing well.

Many of the teachers I interviewed expressed the great difference in what is
expected from them at private versus public schools. One first year teacher said that
incoming teachers are also aware of these differences, which weighs heavily into their
decisions of where they end up applying to teach, at either a government or private
school. He stated:

In fact, most of my friends did not want to teach at English Medium schools

because they said there is too much work to teach in English Medium schools

because the principal will be too much afier you, and the parents will be making
some follow ups so that they are doing the proper things. And they said there at
the public schools they are just going to enjoy themselves. There’s not too much
pressure which is exerted on them. So, many of them wanted to teach at these

public schools. (interview, September 6, 2007)

287

The responses from these different teachers help to illustrate some of the major
differences in the ways that private school operate and are organized in contrast to
government schools. Due to the fact that private schools are led dynamic principals who
work closely with parents and are necessarily concerned about their needs and
satisfaction, the teachers are driven by the principal to work hard and constantly stay on
task. In contrast, at the government schools there is less direct pressure from parents,
especially now that students do not pay school fees. Therefore, without the presence of a
demanding principal who motivates and pushes teachers to work hard, there is little
oversight and accountability in place at government schools to ensure that students are
provided with a quality education.

The CEO of primary education discussed his concerns about this dilemma with
me and explained what the MOET has done to try to address the issue of oversight and
accountability. In his interview (July 19, 2007) he stated, “What we thought we could do,
and we have invested a lot of money into this, was to empower the school committees,
because the law gives them the powers to be able to take steps against teachers, for
example.”

He continued to explain:

So, what I’m saying to you is that we were hoping that by giving the power to the

local committee, which has been by and large elected by popular vote of parents

and a few nominees by the proprietor, then we would give them the tools and the
skills on how to supervise teachers, how to work With the schools, to improve the
school, and so on and so forth. What we know is that that’s not quite happening.

Especially because as the law is now, all the state can do now is advise while it is

288

spending all the resources. So what we know is that, when the whole community

empowerment through school committees is important and should be sustained,

there has got to be a more authoritative power that comes from the state. Whether
or not everybody is going to like that is another question. But that’s the way we
are going. But the way we organize is by changing the law and that is what we are
doing.

Therefore, according to the CEO of primary education, one of the major
problems with the lack of oversight and accountability at government schools is that the
government has limited power, under current laws, to discipline or terminate low
performing teachers and principals. If the local school committee does not decide to
discipline or terminate teachers, then the government has its hands tied, even if it knows
that certain teachers are not even showing up at school. It is only the local school
committee that can make those decisions. And, according to the CEO of primary
education, many of the local school boards are dominated by the interests of the teachers
and proprietors of the school, and therefore little is ever done to ensure the quality of
education at these schools. To him, he feels the laws need to be changed in order for real
oversight to be possible. He said they are working on changing those laws.

An additional factor that has contributed to the lack of oversight and
accountability at government schools has to do with the fact that the number of schools
(increased by 12% since 2000) and student enrollments (increased by nearly 60% since
2000, according to the CEO of primary education) has increased tremendously since the
implementation of F PE in 2000, while the number of supervisors, such as district officers,

has stayed relatively the same. Along with this, the duties — especially with a greater

289

amount of paperwork — of these supervisors has increased greatly. As he stated, “So we
have got so many more people to supervise, but the number of people who supervise
them is exactly the same, if not less than it was, you know, seven, eight years ago.” As a
result, many schools do not see a ministry official for years. At the government school I
worked with they could not remember the last dime a district officer had come to visit.
With such a lack of supervision at both the institutional and community levels, there is no
wonder why many government primary schools do not provide the same quality of
education as private schools.

As for the language and teaching practices at the private schools, they were very
rigid and consistent at sticking to teaching in English only. They required students to
speak in English in their classrooms at all times and tried to enforce the same on the
playgrounds. When students were caught speaking Sesotho to their peers they were
reprimanded and often punished. Teachers demanded that students speak in complete
sentences with correct grammar and would rarely let them get away with short, broken
answers. In non-teaching correspondence with students (e. g, to run errands, send a
message, or clean the classroom), teachers nearly always spoke to the students in English.
Teachers kept their students on task and rarely wasted time. If they were seen to be
getting behind in their teaching or not using their time wisely they were sure to hear
about if from their principal. But the teachers also had a very collegial relationship. They
often turned to each other for help or advice with their teaching. At a few of the private
schools, teachers were periodically assigned to observe and assess the teaching of their
peers in other grades. Each private school held teacher’s meetings on a regular basis to

provide training, encouragement, and feedback from each other.

290

Along these lines, the government school I observed worked very different from
the private schools. As has been illustrated in previous examples, the teachers tried to
adhere to teaching in English but often had to switch to using Sesotho in order for their
students to understand the lesson content. The principal told me that they gave up trying
to enforce English-only on the playgrounds long ago because it was such a futile effort.
By and large, the teachers had a good relationship with each other and usually helped
each other within each grade level, but they did not have organized systems of
professional support like the private schools. I cannot claim that the school was
representative of all government schools, but many different accounts have confirmed to
me that it is quite “typical” behavior for a government school. The PSLE results the
school received were just above average for government schools, suggesting that it was

not an exceptionally good or bad quality school.

Conclusion

In this chapter I have attempted to illustrate how various ideologies from different
levels intersect and collide at the site of schools. These ideologies often compete with
each other and can at times be contradictory or counterproductive. At other times they
complement or combine with other ideologies to have an increased influence on schools.
At the primary schools in this study there were a number of different ideologies at play.
These included conflicts over teaching for English proficiency versus teaching for
content knowledge, various perceived purposes of education, and the differences in
organizational and operating structures at private versus public schools. Investigating

how these different ideologies work in combination and/or competition with each other at

291

 

 

schools helps to explain the diverse ways in which different stakeholders at both private
and government schools approach language and teaching practices in their classrooms.

Using a policy as practice approach to understand the competing ideologies at
play in school practices helps to show that there are a number of challenges which
teachers at government schools must deal with which make it much more difficult to
teach effectively and use English for instruction than at private schools. On the other
hand, at the private schools there are a number of things which contribute to an
environment where students can effectively learn in English. Schools are not just sites
where teaching and learning takes place. There are many different contextual realities
which have an influence of what goes on at schools. In this chapter I have tried to
illustrate the great differences in the competing ideologies that government schools have
to deal with in comparison to private schools by illustrating how they are manifest in
practice. If we can come to a better understanding of the many different influences which
impact language and education practices on the ground, then we can have a better
understanding of the role that policy decisions play in those practices.

As has been discussed in this chapter, private schools are able to focus much more
directly on issues of teaching and learning because they have less distractions and
ideological conflicts in play. The ultimate purposes of private schools are largely in line
with the national education policies and mandates. They are also in line with the goals
and expectations of the families who send their children to these schools. In fact, parents
are willing to pay for their children to go to these schools because they expect the school
to meet their goals. In addition, students who attend private schools come from family

backgrounds which provide them with the necessary cultural and linguistic capital to

292

 

succeed at school. All of these factors make it easier for teachers to focus primarily on
teaching and preparing their students to succeed.

At the government school, on the other hand, there are many more ideologies and
realities which compete and conflict with each other which are in contrast to the
overriding national goals and interests, as manifested through its education policies. The
students come from a greater diversity of backgrounds and often do not possess the type
of cultural and linguistic capital which will help them succeed at school. There is a much
greater diversity in the needs and expectations of various stakeholders at play in
government schools compared to private schools. Not only are the schools expected to
teach their students effectively, but they are expected to take care of their well-being.
They are provided with many of the same goals as private schools, but they have much
less oversight and support to accomplish these goals. Since the families of government
school students do not pay school fees, it could be argued that they have less invested in
their children’s education, which in turn, puts less pressure on the schools to perform. In
comparison to private schools where most of the goals and expectations are aligned,
government schools have many more issues which are in conflict with each other and
must be juggled and balanced by their teachers and administrators. As a result, it becomes
much more difficult for government schools to provide the same quality of education that
private schools provide.

With regards to language policy issues, understanding that there are many
competing ideologies influencing government schools, which makes it more difficult for
schools to teach students well, helps to put the issue of language policy into perspective.

Many of the proponents of mother-tongue instruction claim that by changing the

293

language policy to one which uses a local language it will help to reduce some of these
issues which prevent schools from teaching their students well. Even though using a local
language for instruction may help students understand their lessons better, it will not
compensate for the students’ lack of cultural or linguistic capital in their homes. It will
not overcome many of the students’ needs as a result of their impoverished and
challenging lives. Changing the language of instruction at schools will not change the
organizational structures of these schools and will not provide them with better
leadership, oversight, and accountability. It also will not change the importance of high
stakes exams, like the PSLE, in providing credentials to students. The main point of this
chapter is to show that language policy issues are only one of many different factors
which impact the quality of education that schools are able to provide. By putting this
into perspective we can better understand the role that changes in language and education
policies can potentially make towards improving education in general, and we can avoid
placing too much importance or credence to one aspect of education alone, such as policy

decisions and mandates.

294

Chapter 8: Conclusion

Language and education policy research often begins with the actual policies
themselves as the unit of analysis. In this study .1 have used a policy as practice approach
which analyzes language and education policies from the ground up by first looking at
how local stakeholders appropriate policies in practice and analyzing what factors, of
which policy is only one of many, contribute to local stakeholders’ attitudes, perceptions,
and practices towards language and education. As many policy researchers have come to
increasingly acknowledge, there has traditionally been a lack of attention to the local
dynamics which play into how policies become appropriated and applied in actual
practice. Much of the research on language and education policy, especially in Africa, has
focused on the global and national level dynamics which play into the formulation of
language in education policies. Although those types of studies are helpful in
understanding how national and international policies are formed, they do little to explain
the local level factors which influence how policies are put into practice on the ground.
Therefore, this study has attempted to provide such research which illustrates a more
complex analysis of the many factors which influence how local stakeholders respond to
the language and education needs in their own lives, schools, and communities.

In this concluding chapter I would like to discuss about a few main points that we
can learn from a study like this. These are: (l) by looking at the lived realities of local
stakeholders, and the sources of capital from which they can draw, we can gain a deeper
understanding of the dynamics between structure and agency and how they play out in

the educational practices of students, parents, and teachers; (2) in order to understand

295

how policies become appropriated in particular ways on the ground we must look at the
complex mix of ideological influences, simultaneously at the global, national, and local
levels, which weigh into the attitudes, perceptions, and decisions of local stakeholders;
and (3) with a better understanding of the actual language and educational practices of
local stakeholders, along with an understanding of the local factors which influence how
local stakeholders appropriate policies in their practices, we can better appreciate the role
that policies themselves play in influencing local practices. With such an understanding
we can hopefully gain a more realistic perspective of the impact and importance of
policies and be more mindful of local realities in the formulation and implementation of

language and education policies in the future.

The Structure—Agency Dynamic in the Lives of Local Stakeholders

A large portion of this dissertation has focused on portraying the lived realities of
students and their families through the analytical lenses of Bourdieu’s theory of capital
and a theory of agency which places acts of agency within the social constraints placed
upon groups and individuals. In order to understand how and why actors make the
decisions they do in actual practice, it is important to investigate the dynamics between
structure, as seen through people’s available sources of capital, and agency, as seen
through their actions and decisions. Neither structure nor agency operates in isolation
from each other. The social, economic, and cultural structures within which individuals
live play a strong role in the possible choices and opportunities available to them. In turn,

the individuals utilize their agency to make decisions for their own lives, based upon the

296

structural realities of their lives. These acts of agency are not determined by the structural
constraints placed upon individuals, but they are strongly influenced by them.

1 have tried to portray these dynamics through the stories of the students and
families who participated in this study by showing how the lived realities of limited
sources of economic, cultural, social, and symbolic capital act as barriers which limit the
number and variety of choices realistically available to students and their families with
regards to educational decisions and actions. Those families who had very little economic
capital had their hands largely tied as to where they could send their children to school.
No matter how much they would have liked to utilize their agency to send their children
to better schools, they literally were unable to make those choices. Therefore, their
agency was not unlimited and largely determined by their circumstances. On the other
hand, within the structural constraints placed upon their lives, these families were able to
utilize their agency by making a range of different types of decisions, even though they
came from similar economic backgrounds and had similar forms of economic capital.

One key aspect to this dynamic is that there are a number of different forms of
capital operating simultaneously in the lives of the students’ families which work
together in a unique way for each individual. For example, a family which has very little
economic capital may have a richer source of cultural and/or social capital than another
family which possesses a similar amount of economic capital. Therefore, the range of
choices available to each individual family is similarly different and unique. Thus, there
is both a difference (even if only a minor difference) in the structural constraints placed
upon each family as well as a difference in the available choices and opportunities

presented to them. In this way each individual family makes their own acts of agency

297

within their own unique structural milieu. Understanding what sources of capital and
other lived realities contribute to each unique mixture of structural constraints can help to
better understand how local stakeholders make the decisions they do and why they
possess their particular attitudes and perspectives towards language and education.
Having said this, it still does not determine how individual actors will utilize their agency
in actual practice. Often individuals with seemingly similar social constraints often make
very different decisions in their own lives from their peers, which can best be explained
as acts of agency.

Another important aspect of the structure/agency dynamic is to understand the
role that agency plays in providing the potential for change and variation. As can be seen
in the lives of the government school and private school families, there was a similarity
within each group which helped to distinguish the two types of families from each other,
especially with regards to the social constraints and opportunities available to them, while
there was also a diversity in the ways they reacted to their constraints and opportunities
within each group. As Canagarajah (1999) and Pennycook (2000) have emphasized, these
acts of agency are important to investigate because they are the sight at which variation is
manifested and where change can occur. This is a very different model of social
constraints than that presented by Bourdieu and many of the critical language policy
theorists (as discussed in Chapter 2). Rather than social structures being deterministic,
they provide the context, with both constraints and opportunities, within which acts of
agency may occur. Understanding the realities of these social structures helps to put acts
of agency into perspective. Rather than being viewed as free will for actors to choose to

whatever they want, it helps to show that their choices are limited by social structures,

298

but choices, nonetheless, are available with variety. Therefore, although limited in their
power to choose how to act, react, or resist their social constraints, as well as policies
placed upon them, individuals do have choices and use their agency to navigate their way
through their social realities, ultimately trying to reshape their lived realities for their own

benefit and future improvements.

The Influence of Ideologies at all Levels on Policy and Practice

Another important contribution this study can make to policy studies and social
investigations of language and education is by providing a deeper understanding of how
ideologies at all levels, from global, regional, national, and local, combine together in the
formation and appropriation of policies in actual practice. In Chapter 6, I discussed how
the more global and national level ideologies have a very real impact on both the
formulation of language and education policies as well as on the interpretation, reception,
and appropriation of those policies on the ground. In Chapter 7, I investigated different
ideologies which operate more on the local level to influence how schools and
individuals act towards language and education issues in actual practice. An important
point I have tried to emphasize in these investigations is the fact that both macro and
micro level ideologies act together to influence the attitudes and actions of educational
stakeholders.

The shortcomings of many critical language policy scholars is that they have
focused too strongly on the influence of macro level ideologies in the formulation and
perpetuation of LiEPs, especially in developing nations. I have argued (in Chapter 2) that

these scholars’ conclusions are too deterministic and put too much credence on macro

299

 

levelir
actor:
beenti
beyonr
realar
perce;
officiz
theirt
these
they p
attitut
any.r

react '

\Vhicl

 

level influences. They leave no room for the power of local actors to use their agency to
act or react in a variety of ways to these macro level ideologies. Instead they have often
been treated as empty vessels who are acted upon and manipulated by greater forces
beyond their control. As I illustrated in Chapter 6, these macro level ideologies are indeed
real and extremely powerful. They do have a strong influence on the attitudes and
perceptions of the general population as well as on policy makers and government
officials, but they do not fully determine how they will accept or reject these ideologies in
their own attitudes and actions. Therefore, it is important to understand the impact of
these global ideologies and try to come to an understanding of the extent and degree that
they play into people’s actions on the ground. But to claim that local stakeholders’
attitudes and actions are largely determined by these powerful ideologies leaves little, if
any, room for change and does not explain why different communities and constituencies
react to similar policies and constraints in very different ways.

That is why it is important to also look at the mixture of local level ideologies
which play into the attitudes and actions of local stakeholders. Not only are actors
influenced by global ideologies, but they are also influenced by a diverse mixture of local
realities and ideological influences. In Chapter 7, I illustrated how the complex mixture
of attitudes, expectations, resources, and contextual realities create a different set of
approaches to language and education policies and practices at private schools compared
to those shown at the government school. This difference is largely due to the different
contexts within which each school operates. To a large extent, each school is influenced
by the same set of ideologies, but they receive and interpret those ideological influences

in different ways. In this way, the mix of structural realities and constraints works in

300

 

 

 

comb‘

schoc

Plac.

stake
attitt
into
diss<
polit
inve
schc
poll.
live.
We 1
the

con'
Tilt
on

be

 

0f

 

combination with the set of ideological influences is appropriated differently at private

schools compared to the government school.

Placing the Role of Policies into Perspective

After investigating the economic, social, and cultural realities of local
stakeholders’ lives while also examining the ideological influences which impact their
attitudes and practices, we can better place the impact of language and education policies
into proper perspective. Ultimately, this has been one of the main goals of this
dissertation. As I argued in Chapter 2, much of the research on language and education
policy has put too much credence and focus on the policies themselves without
investigating the local dynamics within which policies are put into practice. Educational
scholars and practitioners often wonder why there seems to be such a divide between
policy and practice. I propose that by looking more closely at the local dynamics and the
lived realities of local stakeholders we can gain a better understanding of this divide. If
we begin with the policy itself as the unit of analysis, then we are mainly investigating
the theories, ideologies, and practicalities behind the policy, often with little regard to the
complex dynamics on the ground where the policies are meant to be put into practice.
Therefore, by using a policy as practice approach, we can begin with the actual practice
on the ground and work backwards to the policy itself. In this way we can come to a
better understanding of how and why policies become appropriated in very different, and
often unintended, ways by various stakeholders. If we can better understand this

appropriation process then we can create policies which are more informed and catered

301

-—_._-

 

tO\\'n

poli

 

 

 

towards the local contexts for which they are intended and hopefully reduce the

policy/practice divide.

302

 

Sump

APPENDICES

Sample of Interview Questions:

Guiding Interview Questions for Teachers:

0 Background Questions
0 What is your educational background?
0 Where did you go to school?
0 Why did you go into teaching?
0 How much teacher training have you received?
0 Teaching Experience
0 How long have you been teaching?
0 How long at this school?
0 How is this school compared to other schools you have taught at?
0 Why are you teaching at this school now?
0 Language of Instruction
0 How do you feel about using English for instruction? Why?
How do you feel about using Sesotho for instruction? Why?
What is the role of English/Sesotho in school? In society?
How well do your students understand things being taught in English?
How would you feel if the MOET changed the medium of instruction to
Sesotho? Why?
0 What do you think is the best language for students to learn in? Why?
0 Free Primary Education
0 How do you feel about the FPE program? Why?
0 Have schools changed much since the implementation of F PE? Why do
you think they have or have not changed?
0 How do you feel about private English Medium schools?
0 Why do teachers decide to teach at one type or the other?
0 Education in General
0 How do you feel about education in Lesotho in general?
0 What are the biggest problems in education? Biggest successes?
o What do you wish would be changed in education in Lesotho? Why?
0 How do you feel about the PSLE?
0 Do you have any questions for me?

0000

Guiding Interview Questions for Parents:

0 Background Questions
0 Where are you from? How long have you lived here?
How much education do you have? Where did you go to school?
How many children? Are you married? How many live in the home?
How much education does each child have? Spouse?
Where do you work? How do you feel about your work? Does anyone else
in the home work?

0000

303

Questions about Child’s School
0 Why do/did you send your child to their particular school?
0 How do you feel about the school?
0 How do you feel about your child’s teacher? The instruction he/she is
receiving?
0 If you have any problems with the school, what can/do you do about it?
0 Do you feel like the school listens do you?
Language of Instruction
0 How do you feel about English being used for instruction at school?
0 How do you feel about Sesotho being used for instruction at school?
0 What is the role of English/Sesotho in education?
0 How would you feel if the MOET changed the language policy to use
Sesotho instead of English?
Free Primary Education
0 How do you feel about F PE?
0 How have schools changed or stayed the same since the implementation of
F PE?
0 How do you feel about private schools?
0 Why do people send their children to one or the other?
Education in General
0 How do you feel about education in Lesotho?
0 What are the major problems with education in Lesotho? Successes?
o What is the purpose of education?
Lesotho in General
0 How do you feel about things in Lesotho?
0 Are there any things you think need to be changed in Lesotho?
0 Are there any things you are especially proud of in Lesotho?
Do you have any questions for me?

Guiding Interview Questions for Focus Groups with Students

Do you like school? Why?

What is your favorite thing at school? Why?

What do you hate most at school? Why?

What is your favorite/least favorite subject? Why?

What is the most difficult/easiest subject? Why?

What do you want to do in life? What do you want to be when you are older?
What do you do for fun?

How much do you read outside of school? Watch TV? Listen to radio? What
programs, books, magazines, specifically?

What do your parents do?

How do you feel about English? How well do you know English?

Do you like it when your teacher uses English/Sesotho to teach you? Why?
Are some subjects easier to learn than others in English? Why?

How much do you speak English outside of school? When? Where? Why?

304

0 How do you feel about Sesotho?
o How do you feel about kids who go to government schools? Why?

305

REFERENCES

Abd-Kadir, J ., & Hardman, F. (2007). The discourse of whole class teaching: A
comparative study of Kenyan and Nigerian primary English lessons. Language
and Education, 21(1), l-15.

Aheam, L. M. (2001). Language and agency. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30, 109-
137.

Alexander, N. (1989). Language policy and national unity in South A fi'ica/Azania: an
essay. Cape Town: Buchu Books.

Alexander, N. (1999). English unassailable but unattainable: The dilemma of language
policy in South African education. Paper presented at the The Biennial
Conference of the lntemational Federation for the Teaching of English.

Arthur, J ., & Martin, P. (2006). Accomplishing lessons in postcolonial classrooms:
Comparative perspectives from Botswana and Brunei Darussalam. Comparative
Education, 42(2), 177-202.

Bamgbose, A. (1991). Language and the nation: The language question in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Bamgbose, A. (2000). Language and exclusion: The consequences of language policies
in Africa. Germany: Lit Verlag.

Bamgbose, A. (Ed.). (1976). Mother tongue education: The West African experience.
London: Hodder and Stoughton Educational.

Barrett, A. M. (2007). Beyond the polarization of pedagogy: Models of classroom
practices in Tanzania primary schools. Comparative Education, 43(2), 273-294.

Bauman, R., & Briggs, C. L. (2000). Language philosophy as language ideology: John
Locke and Johann Gottfiied Herder. In P. V. Kroskrity (Ed.), Regimes of
language. Santa Fe, New Mexico: School of American Research Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory
and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York:
Greenwood Press.

Brock-Utne, B. (1999). Whose education for all? Recolonization of the African mind.
New York: Falmer Press.

306

Brock-Utne, B. (2002). Language, democracy and education in Africa. Uppsala:
Nordiska Afrikainstitutet.

Brock-Utne, B., Desai, Z., & Qorro, M. (Eds.). (2003). Language of instruction in
Tanzania and South Africa (LOITASA). Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: E&D Ltd.

Brock-Utne, B., Desai, Z., & Qorro, M. (Eds.). (2004). Researching the language of
instruction in Tanzania and South Afi'ica. Cape Town: African Minds.

Brock-Utne, B., Desai, Z., & Qorro, M. (Eds.). (2005).L01TASA research in progress.
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: KAD Associates.

C anagarajah, A. S. (1999). Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Canagarajah, A. S. (Ed.). (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21 st century: Applications for advancing
social justice studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SA GE

handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 507-535). London: SAGE
Publications.

Coleman, J ., & Hoeffer, T. (1987). Human capital and social capital Public and private
high schools: Families, and communities (pp. 221-233). New York: Basic Books.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Das Gupta, J ., & Ferguson, C. A. (1977). Problems of language planning. In J. Rubin
(Ed.), Language planning processes (pp. 3-8). The Hague: Mouton.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of
qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds), The SA GE handbook
of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). London: SAGE Publications.

Eagleton, T. (1991). Ideologz : an introduction. London; New York: Verso.
Erickson, F., & Mohatt, G. (1982). Cultural organization of participation structures in two
classrooms of Indian students. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the ethnography of

schooling: Educational anthropology in action (pp. 132-174). New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Wilson.

307

 

Fafi

Fer;

Fisl

For

Gal

G1:

Gr.

G11

Gu

Ht

Ht

 

H5

 

l 1‘\-

F afunwa, A. B., Macauley, J. 1., & Sokoya, J. A. F. (Eds.). (1989). Education in mother
tongue: The Ife primary education research project, 1970—1978. ldaban, Nigeria:
University Press.

Ferguson, G. (2006). Language Planning and Education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press Ltd.

Fishman, J. A. (Ed.). (1974). Advances in language planning. The Hague: Mouton.

F onatana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2008). The interview: From neutral stance to political
involvement. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Collecting and interpreting
qualitative materials (pp. 115-160). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Gal, 8., & Woolard, K. A. (1995). Constructing languages and publics. Special issue.
Pragmatics, 5(2).

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic
Books.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago:
Aldine.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks (Q. Hoare & G. Nowell-Smith,
Trans.) London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gumperz, J. J., & Hymes, D. (1972). Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of
communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Haugen, E. ( 1966). Linguistics and language planning. In W. Bright (Ed.),
Sociolinguistics (pp. 50-71). The Hague: Mouton.

Heath, S. B. (1977). Social history Bilingual Education: Current Perspectives. Vol. 1:
Social science (pp. 53-72). Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Holmarsdottir, H. B. (2005). From policy to practice: A study of the implementation of
the language-in-education policy (LiEP) in three South A frican primary schools.
University of Oslo, Oslo.

Hymes, D. H. (1964). Introduction: Toward ethnographies of communication. American
Antrhopologist, 66(6), 1-34.

Irvine, J. T. (1989). When talk isn't cheap: Language and political economy. American
Ethnologist, 16, 248-267.

308

 

 

Kasule, D., & Mapolelo, D. (2005). Teachers' strategies of teaching primary school
mathematics in a second language: A case of Botswana. lntemational Journal of
Educational Development, 25 , 602-617.

Kloss, H. (1969). Research possibilities in group bilingualism: a report. Quebec:
lntemational Center for Research on Bilingualism.

Kroskrity, P. V. (2004). Language ideologies. In A. Duranti (Ed.), A companion to
linguistic antrhopology (pp. 496-517). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Kroskrity, P. V., Schieffelin, B., & Woolard, K. (1992). Special issue on Language
Ideologies. Pragmatics, 2(3).

Kyeyune, R. (2003). Challenges of using English as a medium of instruction in
multilingual contexts: A view from Ugandan classrooms. Language, Culture and
Curriculum, 16(2), 173-184.

Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over
educational goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39-81.

Lareau, A. (1987). Social class differences in family-school relationships: The
importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60(2), 73-85.

Lareau, A. (2000). Why does social class influence parent involvement in schooling
Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education

(2nd ed., pp. 97—122). New York: Rowan & Littlefield.

Lareau, A. (2002). Invisible inequality: Social class and childrearing in black families
and white families. American Sociological Review, 67, 747-776.

Lareau, A., & Horvat, E. M. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion: Race,
class, and cultural capital in family-school relations. Sociology of Education, 72,
37-53.

Lin, A. M. Y., & Martin, P. W. (Eds.). (2005). Decolonisation, globalisation: Language-
in-education policy and practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Luke, A., McHoul, A., & Mey, J. L. (1990). On the limits of language planning: Class,
state and power. In J. R. B. Baldauf & A. Luke (Eds.), Language planning and
education in Australasia and the South Pacific (pp. 25-44). Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters.

MacLeod, J. (1987). Ain't no makin' it: Aspirations & attainment in a low-income
neighborhood. San Francisco: Westview Press.

309

Mazrui, A. A., & Mazrui, A. M. (1998). The power of Babel: Language and governance
in the African experience. Oxford, UK: James Curry.

Mazrui, A. M. (2002). The English language in African education: Dependency and
decolonization. In J. W. Tollefson (Ed.), Language policies in education (pp. 267-
281). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mooko, T. (2004). An investigation into the use of Setswana to teach primary school
mathematics. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 1 7(3), 181-195.

N gugi wa Thiong'o (1986). Decolonising the mind. London: Currey.
Pennycook, A. (2000). English, politics, ideology: From colonial celebration to
postcolonial perfomativity. In T. Ricento (Ed.), Ideology, politics and language

policies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: a critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialsim. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Phillipson, R. (1997). Realities and myths of linguistic imperialism. Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 18(3), 238-247.

Phillipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1986). Linguicism rules in education. Roskilde:
Roskilde University Centre.

Phillipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1996). English only worldwide or language
ecology? TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 429-452.

Prah, K. K. (1995). African languages for the mass education of Africans. Bonn: German
Foundation in lntemational Development, Education, Science and Dokumentation,

Centre.

Purcell-Gates, V. (1995). Other people's words: The cycle of low literacy. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

Purcell-Gates, V. (2002). "...As soon as she opened her mouth!": Issues of language,
literacy, and power. In L. Delpit & J. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak.

Purcell-Gates, V. (2004). Ethnographic research. In N. K. Duke & M. H. Mallette (Eds.),
Literacy Research Methodologies. (pp. 92-113). New York: The Guilford Press.

Ramanathan, V. (2005). The English-vernacular divide: Postcolonial language politics
and practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

310

Ricento, T. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and
planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(2), 196-213.

Rumsey, A. (1990). Wording, meaning and linguistic ideology. American Anthropologist,
92(2), 346-361.

Schieffelin, B. B., Woolard, K. A., & Kroskrity, P. V. (Eds.). (1998). Language
ideologies: Practice and theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

Schweitzer, M. L. (2007). Instructional quality in Lesotho: A critical case study
examination of disparities between national policies and actual teaching in
primary schools. Unpublished Master, School for lntemational Training,
Brattleboro, VT.

Setati, M. (2002). Researching mathematics education and language in multilingual
South Afiica. The Mathematics Educator, 12(2), 6-20.

Setati, M., & Adler, J. (2000). Between language and discourses: Language practices in
primary multilingual mathematics classrooms in South Africa. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 43, 243-269.

Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In P. R. Clyne, W. F.
Hanks & C. L. Hofbauer (Eds.), The elements: A parassession on linguistic units
and levels (pp. 193-247). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Soceity.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1986). Multilingualism and the education of minority children. In
R. Phillipson & T. Skutrrabb-Kangas (Eds.), Linguicism rules in education (pp.
42-72). Roskilde: Roskilde University Center, Institute VI.

Spolsky, B. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University
Press.

Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.

Swartz, D. (1997). Culture & power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

Vavrus, F. (2002). Postcoloniality and English: Exploring language policy and the
politics of development in Tanzania. TESOL Quarterly, 36(3), 373-397.

Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs.
Manchester: Saxon House.

Woolard, K., & Schieffelin, B. (1994). Language ideology. Annual Review of
Anthropology, 23, 55-82.

311

Woolard, K. A. (1998). Introduction: Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In B.
Schieffelin, K. A. Woolard & P. V. Kroskrity (Eds.), Language Ideologies (pp. 3-
50). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wortham, S. E. F ., & Rymes, B. (2003). Linguistic anthropology of education. Westport,
Conn.: Praeger.

312