CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
3.5 CODE SWITCHING
Evidence and beliefs about best practice in science teaching methods are often developed in first world and first language teaching situations and then simply transferred to economically disadvantaged, developing country and second language contexts. The ambivalent status of English referred to in the introduction has made the decisions about medium of instruction in schools a thorny one.
On the one hand, English is regarded as indispensable for communication of science internationally and for explaining clearly the concepts of science. Many languages, it is
argued, do not possess the vocabulary needed for scientific concepts and produce inappropriate associations when coined words are used (Isa & Maskill, 1982).
Furthermore, Strevens (1980) stresses the importance of non-science-specific words, such as logico-grammatical items. He claims that those who cannot handle such items in English,will not be able to handle science in English.
On the other hand it is acknowledged that expecting learners to learn a new and difficult subject through the medium of a second language is unreasonable, giving them a double task of mastering both science content and language (Rollnick, 2000). As has been seen above, it is frequently the most disadvantaged learners who are given this double task. It is worthwhile mentioning, though, that Singapore appears to have mastered the teaching of science in a second language extremely successfully (not only second language, but a language that uses a completely different set of characters from English).
Fradd & Lee (1999) found that the teachers who share the language and cultures of the learners often bring to the teaching situation styles of teaching which are more appropriate to learners' needs. Officially, the language of instruction in the vast majority of South African schools is still English or Afrikaans from Grade 5 onwards,although it is common practice for teachers and learners to switch between these and African languages.
Code switching refers to switching between two languages where the speaker has some measure of competence in both languages (Rollnick, 1998). In South Africa, code- switching applies to situations where the teacher switches between English and the home
language of learners in order to ensure that learners grasp the concepts (Rollnick, 2000;
Setati, Adler, Reed & Bapoo, 2002). This phenomenon has been observed at all levels of education, from early primary school to teacher training level.
An example at the primary level is provided by Martin (1999) who considers the learner's home language to be potentially the most valuable resource in the classroom. In his study he saw how two languages were used to provide contexts for meaning in two classrooms.
Switches between languages were very clearly indexed by the teacher and were used to explain difficult concepts, at one end of the spectrum, and chorus-type gap filling answers at the other end.
At the secondary level, Adendorff (1996) looks at switches between isiZulu and English in South African classrooms. He views these switches as "guiding the participants' interpretations of academic goals and intentions as well as their interpretation of social relationships in the classroom" (p 406). In the Biology lesson, the switches to isiZulu provide contextualization cues which are semantically empty but alert learners to the fact that a key term is about to be introduced for the first time.
Among South African teachers, Rutherford & Rollnick (1996) obtained some interesting insights into code switching through the taping of groups of SiSwati-speaking pre-service teachers engaged in experimental work. Transcripts of mainly SiSwati group discussion were examined in an attempt to determine why changes to English occurred. In some cases
language into which the word is being translated. Minimizing the reduction in freedom for the original linguistic symbols is one of the challenges and responsibilities which the translator undertakes and this is done by a process where the translator brings the two languages as close as possible - s/he minimizes the linguistic distance between the two languages,rather than highlighting it (McNaught, 1994).
Research by McNaught (1991) suggests that there are considerable problems around constructing meaning at the interface between isiZulu and English. Despite this, Dlodlo (1999) argues strongly for the development of Nguni (isiZulu, isiXhosa, isiNdebele and SiSwati languages) scientific words in order to enable the learning of science through the medium of these languages.
English language proficiency has been found to be a contributory factor in the South African learners' achievement in the TIMSS studies (Howie, 2001, HSRC, 2004). The present research studies the isiZulu-speaking learners who participated in the TIMSS 2003 in the province of KwaZulu-Natal,particularly isiZulu-speaking learners' difficulties when answering science questions in English. The results will contribute to the study of the relationship between language and learning in a bilingual situation such as we find in KwaZulu-Natal.
The aim here is not to review second language teaching but rather to examine the
"language position" in which the isiZulu-speaking learner finds her/himself in the present
South African multilingual classroom, especially in science education. The research
evidence will draw attention to the fact that the isiZulu-speaking learner may be at a disadvantage in a traditional science test that does not take heed of hislher language background.
This study acknowledges that language is not the only factor affecting learners' performance. Damonse (1996), for example, investigated science achievement scores of isiZulu-speaking and English-speaking learners at a high school where the language of teaching and learning was exclusively English. The isiZulu-speaking learners' performance improved on some but not all questions when the test was conducted in isiZulu.
The present study explores, in more depth, some of the difficulties experienced and strategies used by isiZulu-speaking learners when answering science questions. It does so by employing focus-group interviews with learners, in addition to formal tests conducted in English and in isiZulu. My own experience of being an isiZulu speaker and also a science graduate places me in a position where, unlike McNaught (1991) and Damonse (1996) I have first-hand experience of teaching and learning in an African school, and am able to provide an "expert' s" translation of questions into isiZulu. I am also able to conduct interviews in isiZulu, thus eliciting more information from the learners than would be the case if interviews were conducted in English by a non-Zulu person.
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS