Task team highlights equitable access, accelerated parallel medium and improved student experience at SU

21 September 2015

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 teamrecommended 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.

Statement issued by Stellenbosch University, September 21 2015