Page Content:
Task team highlights equitable
access, accelerated parallel medium and improved student experience at
SU
The main focus of the recommendations of
Stellenbosch University’s language task team regarding the language policy and
the implementation of the language plan, is to ensure equitable access to learning and
teaching opportunities for all South Africans; that both Afrikaans and English
have equal status as languages of access to Stellenbosch University’s knowledge
base and that various improvements will be made to enhance the students’
in-class and on campus experience within the university’s multilingual context.
In practice this means that
the options related to the acceleration of parallel-medium teaching will be
investigated with a sense of urgency, and priority be given to the conversion
of modules with high enrolments to parallel-medium teaching (PMT) in 2016. The student
feedback process on language implementation will be revised to ensure a rapid
response.
“The suggestions and demands
received from the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) and Open Stellenbosch (OS)
focused to a large extent on the parallel-medium offering in both Afrikaans and
English at SU. In this regard the task team has recommended that given the real
constraints of lecturer
availability, classrooms, timetable and module combinations, the modules with the
highest enrolments should be considered first for conversion to parallel-medium
teaching (PMT) in 2016, especially where the classes are offered in multiple
groups already,” says Prof Arnold Schoonwinkel, Vice-Rector: Learning and
Teaching. “And, longer term strategies
should be formulated in partnership with faculties to increase the multilingual
offering above 75% in English and above
75% in Afrikaans much earlier than 2020.”
“It is simply not possible to change
to fully-fledged parallel-medium teaching in the remaining months of this year
to allow for all classes to be taught in English and Afrikaans from January 2016.
Part of the process is a consideration of the physical infrastructure
requirements and timetable changes to strive to full access to the University’s
knowledge base by means of multiple languages.
“The real work starts now. Due
to the extensive nature of the implementation of these recommendations,
individual work groups will tackle specific aspects. We sincerely hope that the
SRC and Open Stellenbosch will accept our invitation to become part of these
individual work groups and to assist us to address the issues raised in their
memoranda,” Prof Schoonwinkel says.
A language task team of
Stellenbosch University (SU) that was established to make specific
recommendations with regard to the University’s Language Policy and the
implementation of the Language Plan, has released its report to address issues
raised by the SU Student Representative Council (SRC) and the Open Stellenbosch
collective. The report was released to the SRC and Open Stellenbosch on Monday
(21 September 2015). The task team made recommendations on policy level as well
as practical implementation level with a focus on the improvement of the lived experiences
of students.
The recommendations were
approved by the SU Management and will now be further developed for
implementation. Policy-related recommendations will be tabled at the next
meetings of Council and of Senate for consideration.
The report also set out to contextualise
the issues raised by students with regard to the implementation of the Language
Policy and Language Plan, approved by Council on 22 November 2014, within the
contexts of the Higher Education Language Policy (HELP, 2002) and the
University-specific Institutional Intent and Strategy. The
SU Language Policy and Language Plan are fully in agreement with the summary of
the HELP.
“An important consideration of
the task team was that the Language Policy should clearly convey that SU utilises
multiple academic languages to include more students and staff,” says Prof Schoonwinkel.
“It should be made explicit that Afrikaans may not be used or experienced as a
mechanism to exclude anyone from this university.”
“During the development of the
new SU Language Policy the University Council inserted the word ‘safeguard’ in
the preamble to ensure that Afrikaans as a national language would not be
displaced by English as an international language. Unfortunately ‘safeguard’
was interpreted by some student groupings as an attempt to maintain the
privileged status that Afrikaans had in the previous SU Language Policy. Consequently,
the task
team has recommended a reformulation of the preamble to the Policy in which the
word ‘safeguard’ be removed and replaced by a requirement that languages should ensure equitable
access to learning and teaching opportunities for all South Africans. The
Policy should then state that both Afrikaans and English have equal status as
languages of access to Stellenbosch University’s knowledge base. In doing so,
the
Language Policy requires that one academic language will not be used at the
expense of the other.”
With regard to the accusation that
SU’s investment in isiXhosa being used as a front for multilingualism, the task
team
recommended that the University confirms its commitment to the development of
isiXhosa as an academic language, by extending the existing initiatives and to remove
qualifying words like “judicious” and “where feasible” from the introduction of
the Language Policy. The implementation plans and specific contexts within the
university’s divisions should determine the utilisation and investments in
isiXhosa.
Of paramount importance to the
task team was a paradigm shift in terms of understanding learning at tertiary
institutions, namely that lectures are not primarily for the transfer of
content, but rather for the facilitation of learning. Student learning occurs
before, during and after lectures, supplemented by academic support for all
students in both English and Afrikaans should also be promoted.
“This model, that does not focus on knowledge
transfer in just one language, but rather on learning facilitation in a multilingual
setting, enables students to be guided in the academic language that they
understand best. It is possible to offer learning facilitation for each student
in their language of preference, without necessarily teaching every concept in
both English and Afrikaans. This addresses the fear of some students that they
might be disadvantaged if all the content is not lectured in the student’s
language of preference. Furthermore, there is a local and global recognition that
multilingualism is a competitive advantage for a university graduate who cares
to acquire some multilingual competency, even though SU will not force anyone
to do so,” says Prof Schoonwinkel.
“It was clear to the task team that
there were implementation issues with regard to the Language Plan – especially
with regard to the T-option (dual medium learning facilitation in the same
class contact sessions). In this regard the task team recommended that good practice
guidelines for the T-option be developed in collaboration with the Language
Centre, the Centre for Learning and Teaching, the Vice-Deans (Learning and
Teaching) and relevant faculty and student representatives. This plan will
include mechanisms to identify examples of good practice and systematically
share it amongst faculties.”
Even with differing levels of
academic literacy in English or Afrikaans, the effective use of the T-option
will have significant pedagogical value and deepen the learning experience of
the students, while improving the individual student’s literacy in both
languages. In addition these classes will have the benefit of a diversity of
students and perspectives in the same contact session.
A survey among students in
faculties where the educational interpreting service is well established indicated
that 74% agree that it is a workable support for their understanding. An
interpreted message is obviously never as good as when a listener has full
command of the language of the speaker. The task team recommended that a
technical investigation should be done to improve the educational interpreting
system. A communication plan will also be compiled and implemented to manage
the expectations of students and lecturers, and improved procedures will be
developed for the interaction between the lecturer and interpreters.
Whichever language option is
used, PMT, the T-option or educational interpreting, students should have the
opportunity to give feedback about their experience of how language is used. In
this regard, the task team recommended that the student class representative
system be revised to ensure prompt feedback about and action on language applications
in the learning contexts. Making an academic offering in more than one language
is more complex, but it benefits more students from different language
backgrounds. Proper implementation and rapid feedback from students are
essential elements to ensure a quality experience of any language policy.
The report is available here.