Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
3. Constraints in the
Philippines for MT beyond
Grade 3
4. Opportunities for MT
beyond Grade 3
5. Conclusion
Recent History of
Medium of Instruction (MOI)
Part 1
In 4282 BC, Pharaoh Xirxeflopis wrote the
following about MOI in upper grades:
JK…let’s talk about recent history…
DepEd Order 74, s. 2009
?
Policy before D.O. 74…
?
Former Undersecretary of
Education
Mayroon pa lang MLE policies noon…
“The Order extends the use of the mother tongue beyond the first three
years of elementary school…This means that the mother tongue will
now be used not just for the first three grades, but all the way to the
last year of secondary school, its use progressing one level per year.”
?
So what’s different about D.O. 74?
“At one level per year beginning with
preschool starting June 2010, the use
of the mother tongue as primary
language of instruction will be fully
implemented across the basic
education curriculum by 2021.
Colleges and universities will start
accepting high school graduates that
were taught primarily in their mother
tongue by 2021 or 2023.”
?
Mother Tongue until graduation?!?
Really?
Enclosure 1, section D:
Medium of Instruction
?
DepEd Order 31, s. 2012: Guidelines for K-12
No MT beyond Grade 3
?
How long is enough?
Research and Recommendations
on Extent of Mother Tongue (MT) in Education
Part 2
Report: Closer to Home: how to help schools in low-
and medium-income countries respond to children’s
language needs (2011)
?
Report: Closer to Home: how to help schools in low-
and medium-income countries respond to children’s
language needs (2011)
?
Report: Language and Education:
The Missing Link (2009)
?
Report: EGRA: Applications and Interventions to
Improve Basic Literacy (2011)
“Although children may develop
functional language for social situations
within a year, achieving academic
literacy has been estimated to take 5 or
more years for second-language
learners.”
?
Report: Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse
Language Backgrounds (2011)
?
Report: Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse
Language Backgrounds (2011)
?
Report: Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse
Language Backgrounds (2011)
?
Report: Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse
Language Backgrounds (2011)
?
Report: Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse
Language Backgrounds (2011)
?
Report: Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse
Language Backgrounds (2011)
?
Report: Optimising Learning, Education and Publishing in
Africa: The Language Factor (2011)
?
Report: Optimising Learning, Education and Publishing in
Africa: The Language Factor (2011)
?
Report: Optimising Learning, Education and Publishing in
Africa: The Language Factor (2011)
?
Report: Optimising Learning…(cont)
?
MOI Case Studies
What they reveal about length of MT instruction
Part 3
Thomas and Collier Study
• Landmark longitudinal study on different language-in-education
models
Additive
Late-exit
Early-exit
Subtractive
(No MT)
English
English reading
reading achievement
achievement levels
levels of
of
students
studentsover
over time,
time, for
fordifferent
different language-
education
in-education
models models
Case Study: Niger
The experimental teachers, using the L1, do not do most of the talking.
They let the pupils express themselves very often in the elementary
classes.
?
Case Study: Niger
?
Teachers’ ability to engage
Dramatic effect language has on teaching style illustrated by the study: when
French was introduced as the main language of instruction in the third year
(CE1), bilingual teachers (EE) unfortunately went back to the use of teacher-
centered pedagogy, just like the traditional French-only teachers (ET).
?
In 2001, it was suggested that Niger move from a transitional bilingual
model to more appropriate model that maintains the use of national
languages as languages of instruction throughout primary school.
?
Case Study: Ethiopia
• Despite being one of the poorest countries in the world, Ethiopia was
able to develop 22 Ethiopian languages in addition to Amharic as
languages of learning.
?
Case Study: Ethiopia
?
Retrieved from http://wikitravel.org/en/Ethiopia on 19 August 2013.
Case Study: Ethiopia
?
Case Study: Mali
?
Case Study: Mali
?
MT vs. French schools: Exam Results
?
MT vs. French schools: Exam Results
?
Case Study: Mali
• This change can help reduce teachers’ and students’ fears of lagging
behind monolingual school pupils who are taught exclusively in
French from the first year onward (Traoré, 2001).
?
Case Study: Mali
The World Bank (2004) highlighted Mali as one of the African countries
where learning in public schools is improving.
?
Case Study: Mexico
?
2nd language acquisition studies
Other studies. Studies that control for the number of hours of exposure
to the L2 in the classroom show, with high consistency, that those pupils
who begin L2 instruction at a later age acquire L2 skills faster than those
who begin earlier. That is, although early starters have the advantage of
more hours of instruction, their learning is less efficient, making early-
start programs less worthwhile on a per hour basis (see Collins, Halter,
Lightbown, & Spada, 1999; Lightbown & Spada, 1991, 1994; Cenoz,
2003; Garcia Lecumberri & Gallardo, 2003; Lasagabaster & Doiz, 2003;
Perales, 2004;).
?
Summary of these studies…when is the right time to
introduce L2?
Research on second language acquisition is extremely mixed. The Basque,
Catalonian, and Canadian studies show however that early introduction or
immersion of a second language (L2) does not necessarily lead to better
mastery of L2. In fact, it can even lead to negative results. Why?
• Younger learners are not as as cognitively developed as older learners.
Younger learners cannot easily reflect on the metalinguistic aspects of
language.
• Older learners are more efficient at recognizing patterns, and are able to
ask more targeted questions.
• Older learners are better at prioritizing information
• Older learners have had more real-life experiences and may recognize the
personal benefits of acquiring a second language.
• Older learners are more literate (in the L1), allowing for richer instruction in
L2 (grammar rules, deeper vocabulary, more complex analogies, etc).
• Older learners often have had more exposure to the L2 outside the
classroom than younger learners (having lived longer and participated in
more language domains), and thus may have some familiarity with the L2
already by the time they begin formal instruction in it.
?
Implications
Part 4
1. Policy makers can be given false confidence in early-exit
programs because of misleading research
?
1. Policy makers can be given false confidence in early-exit
programs because of misleading research (cont…)
Therefore…
?
2. Blurring of concepts of linguistic transfer and language
transition
?
2. Blurring of concepts of linguistic transfer and language
transition (cont...)
The problem is, many policy-makers blur the two. They believe that by
enforcing an earlier language transition, they are facilitating cross-
linguistic transfer.
A mother tongue transition policy does not and cannot decide when
children will be able to transfer their linguistic skills. In fact, it is the
other way around. Our knowledge of how cross-linguistic transfer works
should inform policy-makers about what kind of transition plan to
pursue.
?
3. Misunderstanding of what characterizes a strong,
additive, multilingual education model.
— Heugh (2011)
?
3. Misunderstanding of what characterizes a strong,
additive, multilingual education models (cont…)
— Ibid.
4. Desperate hope? “Some MT-based education is better
than none at all”
— Heugh (2011)
4. Desperate hope? “Some MT-based education is better
than none at all” (cont…)
However:
“While evaluators wish to acknowledge progress in moving from
subtractive (zero mother-tongue education) programs to early-exit, they
ought not to obscure the central problem. It is to the medium- to long-
term disservice of the program provider, the community in which the
program is conducted, and the national education system where
relevant, if the evaluator does not point out the fundamental design
flaw(s). The design flaw of the early-exit models offer a lose-lose
scenario for all stakeholders over the medium- to long- term.”
—Ibid.
So what is on the menu for Philippine
education?
An early MT transition,
or an extended one?
Part 5
The Philippines’
Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013
(RA 10533)
?
Reminder of definitions
• Notably, regarding this transition, the law states that English and
Filipino will be “gradually introduced as languages of instruction until
such time when these two languages become the primary languages
of instruction at the secondary level.” Since Grade 4-6 is still
elementary level, this means that English and Filipino are not yet
considered primary languages of instruction (LOI) during this period,
implying that some or most of the subjects should still use the MT as
LOI. Secondly, we can also infer that the number of MT-based
subjects would gradually decrease during this period.
UNESCO 2008. Mother Tongue Matters: Local Language as a Key to Effective Learning
Guided change
Pacing. If you decide to extend the use of MT to new grade levels or
otherwise make a big change to the school system, time is needed for
planning, and implementing.
UNESCO 2008. Mother Tongue Matters: Local Language as a Key to Effective Learning
MOI is not a “cure-all”
Medium of instruction is not everything:
UNESCO 2008. Mother Tongue Matters: Local Language as a Key to Effective Learning
Materials
Materials are very important:
Young, Catherine (2005). “Developing Teaching/Learning Materials and Graded Reading Materials”. In First
Language First: Community-based Literacy Programmes for Minority Language Contexts in Asia. UNESCO
Bangkok.
External factors
External factors affect the feasibility of extended, more robust MLE
programs:
20
15
Frequency
10
0
MT for most MT for most MT for most None of the
subjects until subjects until G3; subjects above
Grade 3; no MT some MT-based throughout
subjects subjects
thereafter thereafter
What subjects, in your opinion, would be
suitable for MT beyond Grade 3?
35
30
25
Frequency
20
15
10
5
0
Science Math AP EPP/TLE MAPEH EsP
Subject
What language should be prioritized as
MOI in secondary level?
40
35
30
Frequency
25
20
15
10
5
0
Mother Filipino English Other
Tongue
Short survey - results
• More teachers prefer there to be some role for the MT beyond grade
3, as an medium of instruction, compared with no role at all. This is
in line with the need for a suitable, gradual transition from MT to
other languages.
• For the secondary level, English is the priority language for the
majority of respondents
• Teachers identified AP and EsP as the most suitable subjects for using
MT as a medium of instruction beyond Grade 3. MAPEH and EPP/TLE
received the next highest number of responses.
?
Short survey - discussion
?
Medium of Instruction Sequences
- Example Plans-
Part 8
KEY
Medium of Instruction (MOI)—this describes the main language of teaching, learning, assessment, and
instructional materials in a given subject and year.
Note about school systems in which the first language [L1] is used initially, followed by a transition to
second language(s) [L2s]: in the early years of elementary, MT-based subjects are ideally almost exclusively
taught in the MT because the focus is to build literacy in the L1. In upper elementary grades, there is a wide
variety of ways the transition from L1 to L2 can be manifested. In some systems around the world, the L1
continues to be the MOI for most subjects, but L2s are gradually introduced as co-MOIs. That is, the languages
are used side-by-side in each class, or on alternate days, or even alternate weeks. This can apply to both oral and
written activities. In other systems, the L1 remains as the exclusive MOI for some subjects, but the L2(s) are
introduced as the exclusive MOI(s) for other subjects, which may or may not increase in number every year. The
following example sequences reflect this latter paradigm, whereby only one MOI is designated for a particular
subject in a particular grade level. This is not to imply that the designated MOI is the only language that can be
used, however. Subjects designated as MT-medium can still make use of English and Filipino, and visa
versa...whatever innovations help the learner.
1st Language Curriculum
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP
MT
This model, in which children receive the majority of their education thru their mother tongue, is often enjoyed by
children who are speakers of dominant languages, like German, French, Spanish, English, Mandarin Chinese,
and others. MT-dominant curricula like this are also provided to regional, minority, and indigenous groups of some
countries, but not the Philippines. If political, economic, social, or linguistic obstacles prevent the implementation
of this model, then consider a late-exit transitional model…
Extended MLE Model
Significant transition after Grade 6
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP
MT
In this model, there would be a big adjustment from Grade 6 to Grade 7, but the transition could be “softened” if
teachers are trained to gradually integrate English and Filipino in lessons before Grade 7, and also if one or two
subjects continue in the mother tongue medium through high school. If political, economic, social, or linguistic
obstacles prevent the implementation of this model, then consider another transitional model…
Extended MLE Model
Staggered transition
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP
MT
In this model, the number of subjects using mother tongue (MT) as a medium of instruction (MOI) decreases
gradually between grades 4-6 for a smoother transition. Content subjects which can be realistically translated into
the MT at higher levels (such as AP, MAPEH, etc.) can transition later than subjects like Math or Science, which
may lack technical terms in the MT. Note: even if instructional materials are rendered in English by Grade 5 in
Science and Math, the MT should be taken advantage of to scaffold learning. This model is compatible with
Republic Act 10553. If political, economic, social, or linguistic obstacles prevent the implementation of this model,
however, then consider a “medium-exit” transitional model…
Medium-Exit Transition Model
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP
MT
Problem with this model: children may not have enough command of English to already begin using it to learn
Science and Math effectively in Grade 4.
Medium-Exit Transition Model
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP any any any any
MT
Ideally, a mother tongue subject should be included in all grades to continue to facilitate cross-linguistic transfer of
literacy and cognitive skills. L1 reading achievement, even as late at high school, is strongly correlated with L2
listening, speaking, and writing ability (see Sparks et. al. 2012).
Medium-Exit Transition Model
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP any any any any
MT n/a n/a n/a n/a
Note: While English and Filipino are the primary mediums of instruction (MOIs) at the secondary level, it is not
necessary that this policy is restrictive. DepEd can theoretically identify one or two subjects that can be taught in
any language as deemed appropriate by the region, division, or school. An element of choice, in some cases, is
favorable for educators to make the best adaptations of national policy in the interest of their learners and
sociocultural context. EsP is a good candidate for flexibility because unlike Science, Math, AP, etc, it is not part of
the high-stakes National Assessments and therefore could be taught in any language. Family and community are
central to EsP content, making it doubly conducive to being taught in the local language.
DepEd Order 31, s. 2012
(Guidelines for K-12)
No MT beyond Grade 3
The plan of DepEd as of 2012 (before RA 10533) was to discontinue the MT as an MOI after Grade 3, as can be
seen by this figure. The plan does not give the student enough time to develop his literacy skills before being
forced to switch to second languages as sole MOIs. It remains to be seen, however, whether DepEd will respond
?
to RA 10533 and extend the MT beyond Grade 3.
DepEd Order 31, s. 2012
“Sink or Swim” Early-Exit MLE Model
SUBJEC K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
T
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Math
AP
EPP/TLE n/a
MAPEH
EsP
MT n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Another big weakness: D.O. 31’s incorporation of two language transitions in subjects such as MAPEH (wherein
the MOI is defined as MT for Grades K-3, Filipino for 4-5, and English for Grade 6+) places unnecessary burden
on learners. The extension of the MT as a MOI will not only buy vital time for developing literacy in the L1, but will
also resolve the problem of the strange double transition. Through the extended use of MT as a MOI, learners can
better absorb the content of subjects like EPP/TLE and MAPEH until at least Grade 5, before transitioning to
English. The same with AP and EsP with regards to transitioning to Filipino. Every subject should ideally have only
one language transition (MTE or MTF), if at all.
Early exit…to?
Part 9
Philippine MLE is evolving, with legal basis
?
Expanding role of MT has potential
?
Transition considerations
Linguistic ability of the child. When is the child ready to switch MOIs
(cont…)?
• While Philippine educators frequently refer to the MT as L1, Filipino as L2, and
English as L3, we must be careful not to presuppose that this scheme accurately
describes all children’s linguistic trajectories. A Sagada child might have L1
Kankana-ey, L2 Ilokano, L3 English, and L4 Filipino; a Manila child might have L1
Filipino, L2 English; a Baguio child might have L1 English, L2 Filipino & Ilokano; an
Iloilo child might have L1 Hiligaynon & English, simultaneously, followed by L2
Filipino. Thus we cannot assume that a particular language (whether Filipino or
English) can be phased in earlier for everyone because it is “easier.” The only
confident statement that we can make is that the L1, by definition, is the best
understood language, and a child should not be disadvantaged by its premature
removal as a MOI.
• Second languages (such as English and Filipino for the majority of children) do not
necessarily have to be introduced as MOIs in a particular order. The important
point is that, collectively, they should not dominate the curriculum too quickly in
the transition period from Grade 4 to 6.
?
Transition considerations
Logistics
• English and Filipino learning materials for higher elementary grades can be
contextualized in the local languages in workshops similar to those organized for
the early grades, with Central Office guidance. But what learning materials are
easier to translate? Would some subjects be cheaper and easier to contextualize?
?
Transition considerations
Features of the secondary school curriculum. How can pupils be lead there in
a smooth and seamless fashion?
• The MT should gradually transition to English in those subjects for which English is the
MOI in secondary school, while MT should gradually transition to Filipino in those
subjects for which Filipino is the MOI in secondary school. But no subjects should
impose two language transitions. If a subject is taught thru MT first, Filipino next, then
English in secondary school, this is confusing for learners and difficult to execute for
teachers. The MOI sequence for EsP/TLE and MAPEH subjects in D.O 31 s. 2012
incorporates this flawed design. The transition from Filipino to English in these subjects
made sense in the past when the school system only included these languages; it meant
that these subjects featured a single language transition. But now that the MT is the
main MOI in the early grades, and should be extended even further, there is no room
nor point for the retention of the Filipino-medium interval in Grades 4 and 5 in these
two subjects (MAPEH and EsP/TLE). Such an interval will: i) detract from content
learning; and ii) create inequalities, whereby children in Tagalog regions will be able to
learn these subjects thru their L1 until Grade 5, whereas everyone else will have to
switch in Grade 3. The judicious paradigm now would be for all Filipino children to learn
MAPEH and EsP/TLE through their respective mother tongues until at least Grade 5,
before transitioning to English. Likewise, other subjects should transition to Filipino or
? English, but not both within the same subject.
Looking ahead
• We can reliably predict that a single MOI model will not be equally
appropriate for all schools in the Philippines.
• DepEd’s “mother language transition program” for Grades 4–6 will ideally
be moderate, research-grounded, and not so restrictive so that it can be
widely implementable
• The elements of the transition program can act as a minimum standard for
everyone. Meanwhile, pilot projects can be organized so schools can
experiment, on a smaller scale, a variety of MLE programs that go beyond
the minimum standard. Costs, sociolinguistic issues, teacher training,
parental and community preferences all play a part in the design of
approaches.
Subject K-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Filipino
English
Science n/a
Extended MLE Math
Model AP
(w/ staggered EPP/TLE n/a
transition) MAPEH
EsP any any any any
MT
Submersion Early-Exit MT Extended MT
Education transition transition
(incomplete development (cognitive academic
(no development
of L1 and L2’s as proficiency developed in
of L1, poor
medium of instruction multiple languages for
development of L2’s)
shifts) lifelong learning)
References
References
ADEA (1996). A Synopsis of Research Findings on Languages of Instruction and their Policy
Implications for Education in Africa. (Working Group on Education Research and Policy Analysis).
Working Paper for the Meeting of African Ministers of Education and the Seminar on Languages
of Instruction, Accra, Ghana, August 26-30, 1996.
Alidou, Hassana & Birgit Brock-Utne (2011). “Teaching practices – teaching in a familiar
language.” In A. Ouane & C. Glanz (eds.) Optimising Learning: Education and Publishing in Africa:
The Language Factor. Germany: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning and the Association for
the Development of Education in Africa. pp. 159-185.
Alidou, H. et al (2006) Optimizing Learning and Education in Africa – the Language Factor, A
Stock-taking Research on Mother Tongue and Bilingual Education in Sub- Saharan Africa. Paris:
Association for the Development of Education in Africa.
?
References
Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 4th ed. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Baker, C. & Hornberger, N.H. (2001) (eds.) An Introductory Reader to the Writings of Jim
Cummins. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Bamgbose, Ayo (2000). Language and Exclusion: The Consequences of Language Policies in
Africa. Münster, Hamburg, London: LIT.
Bamgbose, Ayo (1984). Introduction: The Changing Role of the Mother Tongue in Education. In:
Mother Tongue Education. The West African Experience, ed. by Ayo Bamgbose, 9-26. London:
Hodder and Stoughton; Paris: UNESCO.
Benson, Carol et al. (2010). The Medium of Instruction in the Primary Schools in Ethiopia: a
Study and its Implications for Multilingual Education. In: Multilingual Education Works: from the
Periphery to the Centre, ed. by Kathleen Heugh, and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, 40-82. New Delhi:
Orient BlackSwan.
?
References
Benson, C. (2009). Designing effective schooling in multilingual contexts: The strengths and
limitation of bilingual ‘models.’ In Mohanty, A., Panda, M., Phillipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T.
(Eds.). Multilingual education for social justice: Globalising the local. New Delhi: Orient
Blackswan.
Benson, C. (2005) Girls, Educational Equity and Mother Tongue-based Teaching. Bangkok:
UNESCO Bangkok. On WWW at:
http://www2.unescobkk.org/elib/publications/Girls_Edu_Equity/index. htm
Benson, C. (2004) The Importance of Mother Tongue-based Schooling for Educational Quality.
Background paper for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005. Paris: UNESCO.
Benson, C. (2002). Real and potential benefits of bilingual progammes in developing countries.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 5 (6), 303-317.
?
References
Bergmann, Herbert et al. (2002). Les Langues Nationales à l’École Primaire. Evaluation de l’École
Experimentale. Niamey: Ministère de l’Éducation de Base, Édition Albasa s/c GTZ-2PEB.
Brock-Utne, Birgit & Hassana Alidou (2011). “Active students – learning through a language they
master.” In A. Ouane & C. Glanz (eds.) Optimising Learning: Education and Publishing in Africa:
The Language Factor. Germany: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning and the Association for
the Development of Education in Africa. pp. 187-215.
Canvin, M. (2007). Language and education issues in policy and practice in Mali, West Africa. N.
Rassool (ed.). Global Issues in Language, Education and Development: Perspectives from
Postcolonial Countries. Clevedon, UK, Multilingual Matters Ltd.
?
References
Cenoz, J. (2009). The Age Factor in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. In Towards Multilingual
Education: Basque Educational Research from an International Perspective. Bristol, UK: St.
Nicholas House.
Cenoz, J. & Genesee, F. (eds.) (1998) Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual
Education. Multilingual Matters 110. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Chekaraou, Ibro (2004). Teachers’ Appropriation of Bilingual Educational Reform Policy in Sub-
Saharan Africa: A Socio-Cultural Study of Two Hausa-French Schools in Niger. Ph.D. thesis.
Bloomington: Indiana University.
Collins, L., Halter, R., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1999). Time and the distribution of time in
second language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 655-680.
Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language Planning and Social Change Cambridge. Cambridge University
Press.
?
References
Cruz, Isagani (2009). “Mother tongue education: Part one.” The Philippine Star. July 23, 2009.
Cruz, Isagani (2009). “Mother tongue education: Part two.” The Philippine Star. July 30, 2009.
Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power, and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cummins, J. (1992) “Bilingual Education and English Immersion: The Ramirez Report in
Theoretical Perspective,” Bilingual Research Journal 16(1&2), 91-104.
Cummins, J. (1989) Empowering minority students. Ontario, CA: California Association for
Bilingual Education.
?
References
Dolson, D. & Mayer, J. (1992) “Longitudinal study of three program models for language-
minority students: A critical examination of reported findings.” Bilingual Research Journal,
16(1&2), 105-157.
Dutcher, Nadine and Richard Tucker (1995). The Use of First and Second Languages in Education.
A Review of International Experience. Pacific Islands Discussion Paper Series Number 1.
Washington: The World Bank.
Egiguren, I. (2006) Atzerriko hizkuntza goiztiarraren eragina gaitasun eleaniztunean. PhD thesis,
University of the Basque Country.
Elugbe, Ben (1996). The Use of African Languages in Basic Education in Nigeria with Particular
Reference to Lower Primary and Functional Literacy. In: African Languages in Basic Education.
Proceedings of the First Workshop on African languages in Basic Education, NIED, Okahanja, 18-
23 September 1995, ed. by Karsten Legère, 25-40. Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan Publishers.
?
References
Fafunwa, Aliu Babtunde (1990). Who is Afraid of the Use of African Languages in Education? In:
Propos Africains sur l’Éducation Pour Tous. Sélection d’articles présentés à l’occasion de la
consultation régionale sur l’Éducation Pour Tous. Dakar: UNESCO-UNICEF.
Garcia Lecumberri, M.L. and Gallardo, F. (2003) English FL sounds in school learners of different
ages. In M.P. Garcia Mayo and M.L. Garcia Lecumberri (eds) Age and the Acquisition of English as
a Foreign Language. (pp. 115-135). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Garcia, Ofelia and Colin Baker (1996) (2nd edition). Policy and Practice in Bilingual Education.
Extending the Foundations. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning Through Two Languages: Studies of Immersion and Bilingual
Education. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
Gove, Amber & Anna Wetterberg (eds) (2011). The Early Grade Reading Assessment:
Applications and Interventions to Improve Basic Literacy. RTI Press.
?
References
Greene, J. (1997) “A Meta-Analysis of the Rossell and Baker review of bilingual education
research,” Bilingual Research Journal 21(2, 3): 103-122.
Hakuta, K. (1986). Mirror of Language: The Debate on Bilingualism. New York: Basic Books.
Halaoui, Nazam (2003). Relevance of Education: Adapting Curricula and Use of African
Languages. Background Paper. ADEA Biennial Meeting, Grand Baie, Mauritius, 3 – 6 Dec 2003.
Hamel, Rainer Enrique (2008). “Plurilingual Latin America: Indigenous Languages, Immigrant
Languages, Foreign Languages – Towards an Integrated Policy of Language and Education.” In:
Forging Multilingual Spaces: Integrated Perspectives on Majority and Minority Bilingual
Education ed. by Christine Helot & Anne-Marie de Mejia.
Hartshorne, Ken. (1992). Crisis and Challenge: Black Education 1910-1990. Cape Town: OUP.
Heugh, Kathleen (2011). “Theory and practice – language education models in Africa: research,
design, decision-making and outcomes” In A. Ouane & C. Glanz (eds.) Optimising Learning:
Education and Publishing in Africa: The Language Factor. Germany: UNESCO Institute for
Lifelong Learning and the Association for the Development of Education in Africa. pp. 105-156
Heugh, Kathleen et al. (2010). Multilingual Education in Ethiopia: What Assessment Shows us
about What Works and What Doesn’t. In: Multilingual Education Works: from the Periphery to
the Centre, ed. by Kathleen Heugh and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, 287-315. New Delhi: Orient
BlackSwan.
Heugh, Kathleen. (2003). A Re-take on Bilingual Education in and for South Africa. In:
Multilingualism in Global and Local Perspectives. Selected papers from the 8th Nordic
Conference on Bilingualism, November 1-3, 2001, ed. by Kari Fraurud and Kenneth Hyltenstam,
47-62. Stockholm: Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University and Rinkeby
Institute of Multilingual Research.
?
References
Krashen, S. (2000) “Bilingual education, the acquisition of English, and the retention and loss of
Spanish,” In A. Roca (Ed.), Research on Spanish in the U.S. Somerville. MA: Cascadilla Press.
Krashen, S. (1996) Under Attack: The Case Against Bilingual Education. Culver City, CA: Language
Education Associates.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada. N. (1991). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative
language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
12, 429-448.
?
References
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1994). An innovative programme for primary ESL in Quebec.
TESOL Quarterly, 28, 563-579.
Macdonald, Carol. (1990). Main Report of the Threshold Project. Pretoria: The Human Sciences
Research Council.
Mekonnen, Alemu Gebre Yohannes. (2005). Socio-Cultural and Educational Implications of Using
Mother Tongues as Languages of Instruction in Ethiopia. Master thesis. University of Oslo.
Moll, L. (1992) Bilingual classroom studies and community analysis: Some recent trends.
Educational Researcher 21(2), 20-24.
Mothibeli, A. (2005). Cross-country achievement results from the SACMEQ 11 Project – 2000 to
2002. A quantitative analysis of education systems in Southern and Eastern Africa. Edusource
Data News No. 49. October. Johannesburg: The Education Foundation Trust.
Muñoz, C. (2006). The effects of age on foreign language learning: The BAF project. In C. Muñoz
(ed.) Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Palmer, B.C., Shackelford, V.S., Miller, S.C., & Leclere, J.T. (2007). Bridging two worlds: Reading
comprehension, figurative language instruction and the English-language learner. Journal of
Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 50 (4), 258-266.
?
References
Patrinos, H. and Velez, E. (1996) Costs and benefits of bilingual education in Guatemala: a partial
analysis. World Bank: Human Capital Development Working Paper No. 74.
Philippines, Republic of (2013). Republic Act No. 10533: Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013.
Fifteenth Congress, Congress of the Philippines: Metro Manila. Approved May 15, 2013.
Philippines, Republic of, Department of Education (2012). Department Order No. 31, series 2012:
Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of Grades 1 to 10 of the K to 12 Basic Education
Curriculum Effective School Year 2012-2013. Approved April 17, 2012.
Pinnock, Helen (2009). Language and Education: The Missing Link. London: Save the Children
Alliance / CfBT Education Trust.
?
References
Pinnock, Helen, Pamela Mackenzie, Elizabeth Pearce, & Catherine Young (2011). Closer to home:
how to help schools in low- and middle-income countries respond to children’s language needs.
London: Save the Children Alliance / CfBT Education Trust.
Piper, Benjamin & Emily Miksic (2011). “Mother Tongue and Reading Using Early Grade Reading
Assessment to Investigate Language-of-Instruction Policy in East Africa.” In A. Gove & A.
Wetterberg (eds.) The Early Grade Reading Assessment: Applications and Interventions to
Improve Basic Literacy. RTI Press.
Ramírez J., S. Yuen, D. Ramey & D. Pasta. 1991. Final Report: Longitudinal study of structured
English immersion strategy, early- exit and late-exit bilingual education programs for language-
minority children. (Vol. I) (Prepared for U.S. Department of Education). San Mateo, CA: Aguirre
International. No. 300-87-0156.
Rossell, C. H., & Baker, K. (1996). The educational effectiveness of bilingual education. Research
in the Teaching of English, 30, 7-74.
?
References
Sampa, Francis. 2003. Country Case Study: Republic of Zambia. Primary Reading Programme
(PRP): Improving Access and Quality Education in Basic Schools. Working Document. ADEA
Biennial Meeting, Grand Baie, Mauritius, 3–6 December 2003.
Slavin R.E. & Cheung A. (2003) Effective Reading Programs for English Language Learners: A
Best-Evidence Synthesis. Report No. 66. Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed
At Risk (CRESPAR). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University. URL: www.csos.jhu.edu
Sparks, Richard L., Jon Patton, Leonore Ganschow, and Nancy Humbach (2012). ‘Do L1 Reading
Achievement and L1 Print Exposure Contribute to the Prediction of L2 Proficiency?’ Language
Learning 62:2, June 2012, pp. 473-505
Thomas, Wayne and Virginia Collier. (2002). A National Study of School Effectiveness for
Language Minority Students’ Long-term Academic Achievement. Santa Cruz, CA and Washington,
DC: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence.
?
References
Thomas, Wayne and Virginia Collier (1997). School Effectiveness for Language Minority Students.
(National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education NCBE Resource Collection Series; 9).
Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Traoré, Samba. (2001). La Pédagogie Convergente: Son Expérimentation au Mali et son Impact
sur le Système Éducatif. Geneva: UNESCO International Bureau of Education.
UNESCO (2011). Enhancing Learning of Children from Diverse Language Backgrounds: Mother
Tongue-based Bilingual Or Multilingual Education In The Early Years. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2008). Mother Tongue Matters: Local Language as a Key to Effective Learning. Paris:
UNESCO.
UNESCO (2000). Education for All. Status and Trends 2000. Assessing learning achievement,
International Consultative Forum on Education for All. Paris: UNESCO.
?
References
United Kingdom. Department for International Development (2005). Case studies: Zambia
education. Retrieved from: http://www.dfid.gov.uk
Vaillancourt, François and François Grin. (2000). Language and Socioeconomic Status in Quebec:
Measurement, Findings, Determinants, and Policy Costs. International Journal of the Sociology
of Language 121: 69-92.
World Bank (1995) Costs and Benefits of Bilingual Education in Guatemala. HCO Dissemination
Note No. 60.
World Bank. (2005). In their Own Language: Education for All. Education Notes. Washington, DC:
World Bank.
Wong Fillmore, L. (1991) “When learning a second language means losing the first,” Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346.