This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Foster, Danny S Title: Language of Instruction in Rural Tanzania A Critical Analysis of Parents' Discursive Practices and Valued Linguistic Capabilities General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. Language of Instruction in Rural Tanzania: A Critical Analysis of Parents’ Discursive Practices and Valued Linguistic Capabilities By Danny Foster A thesis submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Education Faculty of Social Sciences and Law May 11th, 2021 Word count: ninety-six thousand Abstract In Tanzania, rural, indigenous language communities attain the lowest out- comes in education. Language of instruction (LoI) is a factor, but indigenous languages are proscribed from classrooms. The exclusive use of Swahili and English in formal schooling has been upheld in over 50 years of educational policies. Research shows that mother tongue-based multilingual education can improve the situation; however, there is little interest from government or society to pursue it. Parents’ linguistic values figure importantly into the problem, yet little is known about how language-in-education is con- ceptualised among minoritised language communities. This qualitative and transdisciplinary study explores parents’ ideological beliefs about language and language learning to better understand their support and rejection of specific LoIs. Perspectives on language were elicited through interviews and focus groups with parents from the Malila language community. Taking a critical realist position that there are deeper mechanisms at work when people act semiotically, interview responses underwent critical discourse analysis to draw out an implicit but well-established Family Language Policy. The study reveals LoI preferences are deeply connected to ideologies which are dialectically related in terms of the kinds of opportunities they are believed to generate. From the Capability Approach, I argue that parents look to schools to provide their children with alternate linguistic identities that better position them to achieve well-being. This is an egregious form of linguistic hegemony that sustains inequality and social exclusion for the Malila community. The study affirms and elaborates work done by Rubagumya et al. (2011) that suggests social status in Tanzania is linked to language repertoires. The findings call for i.) linguistic research and development to more rigorously appreciate the complexities ‘behind’ parents’ stated LoI preferences, ii.) expansive training to address knowledge gaps about language-in-education, especially the efficacy of the mother tongue for learning and language acquisition, and iii.) vigorous work to validate indigenous languages so as to repair decades of discursive practices that have construed them in ‘common sense’ as inadequate for education. i Dedication and Acknowledgements Ink0bh11kha 0l0bhaat1kho ulu 0lwa k0bhalongozya abhant0area bhe Bhamal1la na ku bhapaafi bhe bhíkhaaye peeka kuwenyelezi. Ninaweka nadharia hii kwa watu Wamalila na kwa wazazi walioshiriki kwenye utafiti. I dedicate this thesis to the Malila people and to the parents who participated in the study. This research has been made possible by the support, encouragement and patience of many individuals and groups. Those acknowledged here are only a few of many. Unprecedented grace has been extended to me by Ranette Josiah and Isaac Ken Creech Faculty and Staff of the Canada Institute of Linguistics and its Board of Directors, notably Ruth Behnke and Dr. Arnie Friesen I am especially grateful to my supervisors, Dr. Angeline Mbogo Barrett and Dr. Frances Giampapa for their deep engagement with this work, practical guidance along the way and for constantly cheering me on. Thanks to Dr. Barbara Trudell for helping start this journey, SIL Tanzania for its partnership, Mwawa Wilyasi for organising the data collection, Odia Mahali for her careful transcription, Wycliffe Canada for financial support, my mother Pamela for her prayers, and my brother Tim for well-timed reminders that I ‘got this.’ Lastly, special thanks to my father, Michael Stanley Foster, for being proud of this effort but who passed shortly before it could be brought to completion. ii Author’s Declaration I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the University’s Regulations and Code of Practice for Research Degree Programmes and that it has not been submitted for any other academic award. Except where indicated by specific reference in the text, the work is the candidate’s own work. Work done in collaboration with, or with the assistance of, others, is indicated as such. Any views expressed in the dissertation are those of the author. SIGNED: .......................................... DATE: .............................. iii Contents Abstracti Dedication and Acknowledgements ii Author’s Declaration iii Contents iv List of Figures vii List of Tables viii List of Abbreviations x 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Rationale ............................. 3 1.2 Research Aim, Objectives & Questions ............. 8 1.3 Theoretical Overview ....................... 10 1.4 Methodological Overview .................... 13 1.5 Thesis Overview ......................... 14 2 A Critical Study in Social Justice 16 2.1 Philosophical Position: Critical Realism . 16 2.2 Theoretical Perspectives ..................... 22 2.2.1 Critical Discourse Analysis . 22 2.2.2 Family Language Policy . 35 2.2.3 The Capability Approach . 37 2.2.4 Linguistic Citizenship . 43 2.3 Concluding Remarks ....................... 46 3 Literature Review 48 3.1 The Language of Instruction Debate . 50 3.1.1 Mother Tongue, MTE and MLE . 50 3.1.2 A Matter of Rights .................... 55 3.1.3 A Matter of Results ................... 58 3.1.4 State Resistance to Mother Tongue Education . 61 3.1.5 The Debate in Tanzania . 64 3.2 Parents and LoI in the Literature . 68 3.2.1 Parents and Researchers: Conflicting Ideologies . 75 iv 3.2.2 Parents and Researchers: Harmonized Ideologies . 93 3.2.3 Researchers’ ‘Talk’ about the Problem . 102 3.3 Concluding Remarks . 105 4 Methodology 109 4.1 A Qualitative Approach . 110 4.2 Sampling .............................111 4.2.1 Interviews . 113 4.2.2 Focus Groups . 116 4.3 Methods ..............................117 4.3.1 Data Collection . 117 4.3.2 Data Analysis . 129 4.4 Ethical Considerations . 139 4.4.1 Data Collection . 140 4.4.2 Positionality . 143 4.4.3 Reflexivity in a CDA Context . 149 4.5 Concluding Remarks . 153 5 Findings 154 5.1 Construals of Language . 154 5.1.1 Non-default Labels for Malila . 156 5.1.2 Non-default Labels for Swahili . 182 5.1.3 Non-default Labels for English . 204 5.2 Construals of Language Learning: Motivations and Processes 212 5.2.1 Language Learning Motivations in Discourse . 213 5.2.2 Language Learning Processes in Discourse . 225 5.3 Opposing Views on Malila in the Classroom . 233 5.3.1 Parents for Malila Instruction . 235 5.3.2 Parents Against Malila Instruction . 237 5.4 Concluding Remarks . 247 6 Discussion 248 6.1 The Discursive Landscape of Parents and LoI . 251 6.1.1 Malila in Discourse . 253 6.1.2 Swahili in Discourse . 256 6.1.3 English in Discourse . 261 6.2 A Malila Family Language Policy . 263 6.2.1 LoI: A Language Learning Quandary . 266 6.3 Language and Well-Being: A Conceptual Model . 267 6.3.1 Representing Opportunity Freedoms . 268 6.3.2 Malila Tiered Belief System . 270 6.3.3 Mapping Malila Life Trajectories . 276 6.4 Valued Language Capabilities . 281 6.5 Concluding Remarks . 291 v 7 Conclusion 293 7.1 Contribution to Knowledge ...................293 7.1.1 Methodological Contributions to LoI Research . 296 7.2 Implications: Appreciate, Educate, Validate . 298 7.2.1 Appreciating the Complexities of LoI Preferences . 298 7.2.2 The Importance and Value of Educating Parents . 301 7.2.3 A Need for Language Validation . 303 7.2.4 Policy Recommendations . 307 7.3 Limitations of the Study . 312 7.3.1 Methodological Limitations . 314 7.3.2 Researcher Limitations . 316 7.4 Final Remarks . 317 References 321 Appendices 355 A Ethics Permission 355 B Interviews 356 B.1 Sample Recruitment Letter . 357 B.2 Interview Engagement Letter . 358 B.2.1 Swahili . 358 B.2.2 English . 360 B.3 Interview Guide . 361 B.3.1 Swahili . 361 B.3.2 English . 365 B.4 Interview Worksheets . 369 C Focus Group Discussions 372 C.1 Focus Group Engagement Letter . 372 C.1.1 Swahili . 372 C.1.2 English . 374 C.2 Focus Group Guide . 375 C.2.1 Swahili . 375 C.2.2 English . 377 D Data Sample 379 vi List of Figures 1.1 Indigenous language use in Tanzania by region........ 5 2.1 Dialectical Relational Model of Discourse .