1. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF1 WHY DO TRIBAL CHILDREN NEED MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION? Ajit K Mohanty Jawaharlal Nehru University

2. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF2 Educational neglect of languages leading to: Educational neglect of languages leading to:  Illiteracy & relapse to illiteracy  Poor educational performance  Subtractive language learning in forced submersion programs  High ‘push-out’ rate  Capability Deprivation & Poverty  Loss of diversity

3. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF3 Exclusion of MT from schools is problematic Children do not learn (capability deprivation, poverty)Children do not learn (capability deprivation, poverty) Loss of IdentityLoss of Identity Weakening of languages (the vicious cycle of disadvantage)Weakening of languages (the vicious cycle of disadvantage) Subtractive language learning (Loss of MT)Subtractive language learning (Loss of MT) Loss of linguistic diversity – Language Death, Murder, Genocide. (Suicide?)Loss of linguistic diversity – Language Death, Murder, Genocide. (Suicide?) Marginalization, domain shrinkageMarginalization, domain shrinkage Unimplemented (passive) state policies, statutesUnimplemented (passive) state policies, statutes

4. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF4 National Assessment of Achievement at the end of Grade V (NCERT,2004; N=88,271) :STs scored significantly less than others in: – –Mathematics – –Environmental Studies – –Language (L 2 ) – –Reading Comprehension – –Grammar & Usage

5. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF5 Literacy, Drop Out(?) & School Enrollment of STs Crude Literacy Rate (all age groups) ST=38.41, SC=45.20, Others=54.51 Effective Literacy Rate (7+ Population) ST=47.10, SC=54.69, Others=68.81

6. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF6 THE VICIOUS CIRCLE OF LANGUAGE DISADVANTAGE

7. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF7 Constitutional/statutory/policy Provisions Indian Constitution (Art. 350A): ‘provide adequate facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage of education of children belonging to minority groups.’ The Three Language Policy Ramamurti Committee Report 1990: minority language medium primary schools in areas with at least 10% minority language speakers; parallel sections; appointment of minority language teachers NPE (Govt. of India); NCF,2005 (NCERT) Are we honouring our commitments?

8. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF8 WHY IS MT NECESSARY FOR QUALITY EDUCATION? CHILDREN LEARN BETTER IN THEIR LANGUAGECHILDREN LEARN BETTER IN THEIR LANGUAGE MT IS MOST COMPLETE/POWERFUL RESOURCEMT IS MOST COMPLETE/POWERFUL RESOURCE MT REGULATES CHILD’S THOUGHT (LINKS HER TO FAMILY, COMMUNITY, NATURE & CULTURE)MT REGULATES CHILD’S THOUGHT (LINKS HER TO FAMILY, COMMUNITY, NATURE & CULTURE) CHILD MUST MOVE FROM KNOWN TO UNKNOWN, FAMILIAR TO UNFAMILIARCHILD MUST MOVE FROM KNOWN TO UNKNOWN, FAMILIAR TO UNFAMILIAR

9. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF9 Do children benefit from knowing their mother tongue? What does Research say? Studies among Konds in Kandhamal district show that Kond children who know Kui are: – –More intelligent – –Creative – –Cognitively better developed – –Higher classroom achievers Studies all over the world confirm advantages of learning mother tongues for better education, identity and positive self concept

10. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF10 MOTHER TONGUE OF TRIBAL CHILDREN : A resource or burden?  MT + L 2 bilinguals perform better on Cognitive, Metacognitive and Academic Achievement measures [The Kond studies, & other Indian studies ]  Inter-group relations in bilingual contact situations characterized by integration

11. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF11 Achievement of ST Children in Mother Tongue Medium Schools Bodo children in Bodo medium schools perform better than the Bodo children in L 2 medium schools (Saikia & Mohanty, 2004) Other Indian studies also show better performance in MT medium schools when SES differences are controlled

12. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF12 (TSK, 2000)“ ….. maintaining everybody’s mother tongue(s), while learning additional languages is not only beneficial for the individual but also a prerequisite for ethnic groups and people to maintain themselves as groups which again is a prerequisite for cultural diversity” (TSK, 2000) Colin Baker (2006)Colin Baker (2006) – –Promotion of L 1 & culture in classroom is beneficial – –Oracy & Literacy in L 1 easily transfers to L 2 – –Literacy in a minority language is an efficient route to biliteracy

13. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF13 “NO” Can education remain confined to MT only? “NO” World is increasingly multilingual We need different languages to function effectively Multilinguals are better – intellectually, cognitively, academically & so on They are more successful in to-days world India is a multilingual society (we all need multiple languages, regardless of where we are) Our education must develop multilingual skills

14. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF14 Why must Indian Education be Multilingual? Mother Tongue + Languages for regional/national communication + LWC MT → Regional Language → National Language → English Meaningful participation in the wider democratic, socio-political, economic system Empowerment

15. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF15 MULTILINGUALISM is for ALL

16. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF16 Mother Tongue or/and Multilingual Education? Multilingualism as an Educational GoalMultilingualism as an Educational Goal –Functional/Communicative competence in languages –Positive identification with all language groups and cultures

17. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF17 How do we develop multilingualism in education? THROUGH MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MLE) MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MLE) What is MLE? - What is MLE? - Use of multiple languages as media of instruction. Mother Tongue Based MLE develops competence in MT & builds other languages on the MT foundation

18. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF18 What is the best form of MLE? One that starts with MT (L1) & then develops L2, L3 & so on…., additively. Additive vrs. Subtractive language learning

19. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF19 When is learning L2/L3 additive or subtractive? We need to understand:  HOW ARE LANGUAGES ORGANISED IN OUR MIND?;  WHAT IS THE NATURE OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY?;  WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN L1 (MT) & PROFICIENCY IN L2 (L3 etc)?

20. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF20 LANGUAGES IN OUR MIND: LANGUAGES IN OUR MIND: The ‘CUP’ or the ‘SUP’? Do languages occupy separate space (like different balloons) in our mind competing with each other, so that more space for L1 means less for L2, L3?Do languages occupy separate space (like different balloons) in our mind competing with each other, so that more space for L1 means less for L2, L3?“NO”

21. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF21 LANGUAGES IN OUR MIND We have one common proficiency for all our languages with different input/output mechanisms in each language. [it is like one large piece of iceberg in water with multiple visible tips]

22. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF22 Nature of Language Proficiency CHILDREN’S LANGUAGE DEVELOPS AT TWO LEVELS 1) 1)Language for immediate communication- contextual, simple, less demanding: BICS (Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills) 2) 2)Language for higher level mental activity, for thinking, regulation, planning, cognitive & academic activities: CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency)

23. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF23 Rationale for MT based Multilingual Education Language Proficiency – – BICS & CALP (L 1 ↔L 2 ) BICS → Effective Instruction(3-5 yrs) → CALP Empowerment through education in MT

24. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF24 Common misconceptions about Languages in Education – –Time-on-task (“the more the better”) – –Early start (“the earlier the better”) – –Immersion (“children learn to swim”) – –Balance effect theory (“inflating one balloon leaves little space for another”)

25. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF25 Relationship between L1(MT) & other languages (L2/L3 etc) L1 → L2 (lower level) Negative/Subtractive EffectL1 → L2 (lower level) Negative/Subtractive Effect L1 → L2 (moderate level)L1 → L2 (moderate level) Neither Negative Nor Positive Effect Neither Negative Nor Positive Effect L1 → L2 (higher level)L1 → L2 (higher level) Positive Transfer from L1 to L2 Positive Transfer from L1 to L2 (L2 is learnt faster/better) (L2 is learnt faster/better)

26. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF26 MODELS OF LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT IN SCHOOLING The Submersion/Subtractive ModelThe Submersion/Subtractive Model L 1 → school entry → L 2 → (-ve transfer) → L 1 & L 2 (BICS)(inadequate) The Multilingual/Additive ModelThe Multilingual/Additive Model L 1(BICS) → school entry → L 1(CALP) → (+ve transfer & motivation) → L 2(BICS & CALP) → L 1 & L 2 (adequate) (foundation for multilingual development)

27. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF27 Multilingual Education for the Tribal MT Children Effective Instruction in MT Medium (at least for 3-5 years) ↓ MT + L 2 (both as MI) ↓ L 3 (& other languages) ↓ High Multilingual Proficiency

28. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF28 What are our choices? LINGUISTIC GENOCIDE IN EDUCATIONOR MULTILINGUALISM FOR ALL?

29. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF29 OR Mother Tongue to Multilingualism for All OR MT vs. Maj. Languages vs. English?

30. 16 Oct'08MLE-OPEPA_UNICEF30 Do arguments/research findings inform/influence policy? “No” (TSK,2000, p.667) “The question then is whether the action needs to be done by the same people who do the persuading. I believe it is necessary.” (TSK,2000, p.667)