Teacher interviews

As described in chapter three, the interviews were semi-structured as this afforded the interviewer the flexibility to rephrase questions to ensure that the interviewees fully comprehended each question being asked and to probe why teachers preferred a certain language practice over the other to support classroom communication. The general categories that emerged from the semi-structured interview questions are discussed below, with

reference to the research objectives in this section of interviews and framed by the theories presented in chapter two and three of this study.

Classroom discourse in general

Data from teacher interviews revealed that they preferred to use both English and isiXhosa at different times and stages of their lessons. The teachers‘ choice of language seemed to be influenced largely by learners‘ linguistic capabilities in English, which was also reported in other studies (see Adler, 2001; Bishop, 1998; Del Campo & Clements, 1987; Vorster, 2008; Webb & Webb, 2008b). The main reason for using English was because it is the official language of teaching and learning mathematics at school and they wanted learners to comprehend the texts in both learner support materials and assessments in order to do well in mathematics. These teachers also confirmed and acknowledged the important role that English plays in the business world as the universal language of power and economic discourse and to access social goods (Setati, 2005a). It was also acknowledged that learners have not yet reached a good command and understanding of English, consistent with reports by Webb and Webb (2008a). As a result, there is a need for them to employ teaching strategies such as code-switching and translation at various stages of their lessons.

Although learners‘ home language, isiXhosa, was predominantly used to support classroom communication and mathematical discourse when they solved problems in groups, some of the experimental teachers also believed that in so doing, learners would then be afforded the good chance of connecting classroom mathematics activities with learners‘ everyday-life knowledge and experiences (Inoue, 2009), and in the process improve classroom participation. However, this is very questionable because the classroom observation data before intervention of the strategy suggested that the teachers generally

lacked pedagogies that encouraged and assisted learners with ways to make sense of the word problem-solving during the lessons.

Language used for sense-making

Although teachers in the experimental schools of this study seemed to understand the importance of construction of mathematical knowledge in the teaching and learning of word problems, interview responses revealed that they were not aware that this may not be achieved if there is little reasoning and argumentation between learner-and-learner and educator-and-learner (Alexander, 2004; Webb & Treagust, 2006). The use of learners‘ home language(s) has benefits for school progress particularly when it is used to explain concepts and for clarification (Cummins, 1981; Wong-Fillmore & Valadez, 1986). In her study of the use of English by standard six learners in Botswana, Arthur (1994) revealed that the absence of learners‘ home language (Setswana) diminished the opportunities for exploratory talk, and thus for meaning-making. In this study, the results of the teacher interviews also showed that using only one language of learning and teaching, which is not learners‘ home language, is not adequate for explaining and clarifying concepts that are taught and learned in the classroom. This reasoning could possibly be attributed to learners‘ lack of English competence and confidence in using the language as suggested by Setati and Barwell (2008).

Language used for word problem-solving

In this study, teachers‘ responses to the use of language for word problem-solving in the classroom, assumed that learners‘ incorrect situational interpretation and solutions to mathematical word problems was a result of lack of understanding of the language used for instruction and assessment. Although teachers also believed that the errors that learners made when solving problems arose from poor computing skills, Hater et al. (1974) and Newman

(1983) reported that often, these errors have been caused by an inadequate understanding of the language of mathematics.

In this study, teachers‘ responses indicated that both English and isiXhosa are used for word problem-solving. Furthermore, data suggest that learners‘ primary language is largely and actively used to solve problems within small groups in the classroom, whilst English is used to record group responses to the word problems and when reporting their solutions to the entire classroom. While in small group discussions, classroom observations suggest that the dual role and to greater extent, the dual usage of the language of mathematics and the language of common English appeared to be ineffective during word problem-solving. In fact, although the participating teachers in this study said they prefer to use English as the LoLT, they actually used their home language to consolidate concepts that were taught during the lesson. In so doing, as Ellerton and Clements (1991) puts it, the grammar, and syntax of mathematical language were far less flexible than is the case for English and isiXhosa usage. On the other hand, it was also observed that, as Alexander (2004) points out, learners sitting together in groups does not necessarily translate to making meaning together. Moreover, teachers‘ responses did not mirror Mercer and Littleton‘s (2007) notion of language as creative and meaning-making and the teacher‘s most pedagogic tool, a notion which presupposes that all users of the same language of learning and teaching should share a similar fluency.

Language for teaching and learning

English second language studies conducted amongst isiXhosa speakers in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa (e.g., Mayaba, 2009; Webb, 2010) have reported that learners are not interested in learning to read or write in their home language. These researchers attributed this notion to the fact that isiXhosa have long since been marginalised and

devalued. Contrary to these findings, data presented in this study suggest that isiXhosa does have a place alongside English, playing a dual role of language of teaching and learning mathematics in multilingual classrooms. Teachers‘ responses also highlighted the fact that it is difficult to persuade learners to speak English during a mathematics lessons, unlike in other studies conducted elsewhere on the African continent, where it was indicated that teachers use coercive measures to force learners to speak in the foreign languages used as LoLT in those classrooms (Alidou & Brock-Utne, 2005). As such, these researchers argued that the use of a foreign and/or unfamiliar language as the language of learning and teaching makes teachers use traditional and teacher-centred teaching methods. In this study, it was also acknowledged by the teachers that the use of both English and learners‘ home language may present unique problems, where a single word could have multiple meanings when translated. The use of language in the experimental classrooms were generously influenced in absentia by the LiEP that was introduced to schools for implementation prior to the curriculum reform in South Africa, which is not easily accessible and understood by the teachers.

Language policy in the school and the LiEP

Howie‘s (2003, 2004) studies provided corroborative evidence of the damaging effects of apartheid language-in-policy, which while not making English accessible to all learners, denied them an opportunity to use their home languages for learning and teaching. In particular, the LiEP in South Africa promotes multilingualism by allowing learners and teachers to use more than one language of learning and teaching (Department of Education, 2007; Setati et al., 2002). The new LiEP is acknowledged by few experimental school teachers as ‗good but not accessible to them‘ and has already met significant on-the-ground constraints. Similar to the finding by Taylor and Vinjevold (1999), experimental schools do not opt for learners‘ home language(s). This situation was anticipated in this study because

mother tongue instruction has a bad image among speakers of African languages (Setati, 2002).

Although all schools in this study chose English as the LoLT, it is widely reported that much code-switching takes place between English and isiXhosa (Peires, 1994, Mayaba, 2009; Webb, 2010; Webb & Webb, 2008b). Some researchers (e.g., Peires, 1994) found that speakers of African indigenous languages do not find it necessary to study their mother tongue at school because they feel that they are already fluent and competent in the language. This is contrary to the results of this study as it indicates that both English and isiXhosa are used together, and both learners and teachers lacked competence in their home language. As such, although both teachers and learners acknowledged the dilemma of using English as LoLT in the experimental schools, they preferred and continued to use English as the language of instruction (Barkhuizen, 2002, Brock-Utne, 2002).

Teachers‘ responses indicated that they are faced with the complex situation of using English and isiXhosa in a dual role when teaching mathematics in order to reap any benefits that come with such a pedagogical approach in the mathematics classroom. What is also questionable for the teachers is the effectiveness of such a strategy and its implications on mathematics teacher practices in multilingual classroom. Secada‘s (1992) studies in the US pointed to findings of a significant relationship between the development of language and achievement in mathematics. Secada reported that oral proficiency in English in the absence of teaching in learners‘ home language is negatively related to achievement in mathematics. However, the results of this study suggest that, similar to reports by Setati (2002), poor performance of bilingual learners thus cannot be attributed to the learners‘ language proficiencies in isolation from the wider social, cultural, and political factors that inspire schooling.