matinyi@hotmail.com
When I got the report I was shocked to discover that the reported research didn’t even get the name of the language right. I asked myself: how did the study handle much more complicated issues like sampling, reliability, and validity?
When one communicates in English, the name of our language is not Kiswahili, for God’s sake; it’s Swahili. Kiswahili becomes the name when we communicate in Swahili. That’s it!
Let me ask: What is the word for English in French? Is it English? No! The word for the English language in French is Anglais and the word for the French language in French is Français.
English speakers refer to the language of Germany as German, while French speakers call German Allemand, and the Germans themselves call it Deutsch.
Languages have different names in different languages, whether it’s Chinese, Hausa, etc. The name of our language in the language itself is KISWAHILI while in English is SWAHILI. In no way can English structure use the Swahili structure in which the name of the language starts with a prefix “Ki-” like in Kiarabu or Kiganda.
Calling our language Kiswahili in English communication is a common mistake in Kenya, including in the new constitution; it's grammatically incorrect. I think for a Tanzanian to repeat such a mistake is extremely irresponsible.
Now, let’s go back to the research, which some careless Tanzanian writers referred to without realising its obvious slanted tone.The research aimed at assessing the degree of literacy and numeracy of school-age children; thus, it was not examining the mastery of either English or Swahili. However, the study, with a sense of pretentiousness, concluded that: Children in Kenya performed better in Swahili than children in Tanzania.
Indisputably, there is a difference between reading skills and linguistic proficiency. The Uwezo study revealed that 14 and 24 per cent of mothers in Tanzania and Kenya respectively, have no education. However, particularly in Tanzania, these mothers can fully function in Swahili, but because they are illiterate, they will fail a reading test while their literate children will pass.
Does it mean that these children are better in Swahili than their mothers? No! If Uwezo couldn’t figure out the difference between reading skills and linguistic proficiency in their conclusion, then the research was a waste.
The study also pointed out that school age in Tanzania is seven years old but Uwezo surveyed Tanzanian children as young as age five while for Kenya and Uganda, where Uwezo said the school age were six, they started with that age of six. Why?
Luckily, the study acknowledged that Tanzanian children were given much harder tests in Swahili than their counterparts in Kenya while Ugandan children didn’t test at all, but the Swahili tests used broken and confusing Swahili for any Tanzanian children.
Just to mention a few examples, in one reading test the words shule ya upili, which Kenyans translate as “secondary school,” were used but not a single Tanzanian understands them since in standard Swahili it is “shule ya sekondari.”
Kenyans also use nyanya to mean “grandmother” while in Tanzania “nyanya” means “tomato.” I don’t know any Tanzanian child, including mine, who would get this word right in the Kenyan meaning. Grandmother in Tanzania is “bibi,” which Kenyans use to mean “wife.”
Now how could Uwezo expect a five-year-old child from Tanzania to swim in these muddy waters? If educated Kenyan adults couldn’t get it right, how could a Tanzanian kid get it right?
Again, in Tanzania, almost all children attend public schools where the English language starts at standard three, but Uwezo tested Tanzanian children for standard two level English in accordance with national curriculum. How?
Then, despite Tanzania’s having the largest population, the numbers of households, children, schools and districts surveyed were the lowest. The study surveyed 44.3 per cent of districts in Kenya and in Uganda 33.75 per cent but in Tanzania only 28.6 per cent were surveyed.
Let’s say the sample size was acceptable. However, the study observed that Tanzania’s districts have a significant disparity in educational quality; thus, a much larger, more widespread and purposeful sampling was required, yet, Uwezo did the opposite. I can’t mention all the unusual things I noticed in this biased study, but my question is: How did the Tanzanian authorities allow it to go ahead?
Of course, we need a lot of research, but a lopsided study doesn’t help anybody. We know that education system in Tanzania is messed up, but please, don’t tell me that Kenyan pupils can beat their Tanzanian counterparts in Swahili. That’s not only flawed but also foolish!
Mr Matinyi is a consultant based in Washington, DC
No comments:
Post a Comment