South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 3, August 2017 1

Art. # 1374, 12 pages, https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n3a1374

Teaching strategies to support isiXhosa learners who receive education in a

second/third language

T. Kotzé
Faculty of Education, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa
t.k@telkomsa.net
M. Van der Westhuizen
Faculty of Social Reformation, Hugenote College, Wellington, South Africa
E. Barnard
Faculty of Education, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa

There are a number of challenges related to teaching in a multi-linguistic classroom. Despite the literature clearly indicating
how learners acquire learning, there is still a dearth of material on descriptions of current support provided to learners within
the theoretical framework of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. In an attempt to resolve these challenges, this
article explores and describes challenges regarding teaching strategies to support isiXhosa-speaking learners in Grade One,
whose home language is different from the LOLT in their schools. A qualitative research design was used supported by the
exploratory, descriptive and contextual research methods. A sample was selected of Grade One teachers from schools in
different socio-economic areas in the Western Cape. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews. The findings
provided a clear description of challenges and needs experienced by both the learner and the teacher. Conclusions were made
in terms of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. Based on the findings, practical recommendations were made
regarding teaching strategies for language support to Grade One isiXhosa learners.

Keywords: Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory; language of learning and teaching [LOLT]; multi-linguistic;
teaching and learning strategies; third/second language support

Introduction
According to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996a), every child has the right to receive
education in their home language or language of their choice. However, many learners are often placed in
schools where the Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT) is English and/or Afrikaans (i.e. the learner’s
second or third language). This aspect is viewed as one reason why South African schools show poor academic
achievements (National Education Evaluation and Development Unit [NEEDU], 2013:13–14). Banda (2004:11)
ascribes the phenomenon of second and third language education to the legacy of apartheid, where English and
Afrikaans were perceived as languages with status. On the other hand, Owen-Smith (2010) argues that a learner
who cannot access education in his/her home language is disadvantaged, and unlikely to be able to perform to
the best of his/her ability and reach his/her full potential. The South African Constitution (Republic of South
Africa, 1996a) acknowledges not only eleven official languages to “… redress the injustice of apartheid,
emphasising multilingualism and the rights of indigenous languages against English”, but also emphasises that
“… everyone has the right to receive education in their choice of public educational institutions” (Section 29(2)
of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996a). However, this acknowledgement of the official
languages, together with the child’s right to education, pose specific challenges for teachers. It becomes the
teacher’s role and function to accommodate the diverse needs of learners, including the need for education in
their home language. On the other hand, most teachers experience a lack of knowledge and skills regarding the
diverse use of languages to be offered as LOLT in the classroom in order to support these learners (cf. Chataika,
Mckenzie, Swart & Lyner-Cleophas, 2012; Engelbrecht, 2006; Engelbrecht, Swart & Eloff, 2001). It is clear
that the literature shows a lack of material describing the current support provided to these learners. A need to
investigate current practices was therefore identified as the research problem, resulting in the following research
question: “what challenges do Grade One teachers experience to support isiXhosa learners who receive
education in a second/third language?” The present article reflects on the findings of a recent study that
attempted to answer this question. However, for the purpose of this article, selected sections of the above-
mentioned study will suffice for the discussion here.
Firstly, the background of the research problem will be discussed in terms of a literature review. In the
course of this discussion, the theoretical framework that guided the investigation will also be described.
Secondly, after the research methodology has been explained, the findings will be presented. Finally, the article
will conclude with several recommendations regarding how to address language support to Grade One isiXhosa
learners.

Literature Review
Language is the core aspect of many independent cognitive, affective and social factors that shape learning and
thinking (Collier & Thomas, 2012:155). It is recognised as the means by which an individual learns to organise
2 Kotzé, Van der Westhuizen, Barnard

his/her experiences and thoughts (Department of enable them to learn effectively across the
Basic Education (DBE), 2010:5). There is a strong curriculum (Department of Education (DoE),
connection between mother tongue education and 2000:4). On the other hand, within the framework
academic achievement, with a positive correlation of inclusive education, the teacher should not
between the two, and therefore, the use of language expect learners to give up their home language to
as a method for teaching and learning is important achieve academic success.
in multilingual societies, such as South Africa The language policy for schools is guided by
(DBE, 2010:5). In reality, a large number of South principles derived from the Constitution of the
African learners do not receive LOLT at home, and Republic of South Africa (1996a) and the South
sometimes, not even their second language (Land- African Schools Act (Act 84 of 1996) (Republic of
sberg, Krüger & Swart, 2011:168). One reason South Africa, 1996b). As a result of the latter, the
behind this is apparent within the framework of the former DoE adopted the Language in Education
diverse nature of the South African society, where Policy (LiEP) in 1997 and further clarified the
each ethnic group consists of disparate cultural policy in the Revised National Curriculum
groups, where different languages or different Statement (RNCS) published in 2002 (DoE, 2002).
dialects are used, and that a minimum of eleven The main underlying principle is to maintain the
languages are spoken in the country (Statistics use of the home language as the LOLT, especially
South Africa, 2013). in the early years of learning, while providing
Despite the fact that English is not the access to an additional language. The LiEP aims to
language of the majority of people living in the pursue a language policy supportive of conceptual
Western Cape, the focus on English as the LOLT is growth amongst learners by establishing “… addi-
based on the DBE’s viewpoint that English in tive multilingualism as an approach to language in
South Africa is the medium of communication, and education” (DBE, 2010:6). In further support of the
it is still found that a significant number of acknowledgement of the importance of the home
isiXhosa learners receive education in a second or language in education, the National Curriculum
third language (cf. DBE, 2012, 2013b; NEEDU, Statement (NCS), previously known as the RNCS,
2013:13–14; Statistics South Africa, 2013). explicitly states that learners’ home language be
Therefore, it can be assumed that isiXhosa- used for learning and teaching wherever possible
speaking learners in the Western Cape are facing a (DBE, 2013b). Unfortunately, the implementation
language barrier in the English/Afrikaans thereof still remains a problem.
classroom. More recently, the DBE has released the
For one to understand what it means to be proposed Incremental Introduction of African
proficient in another language, it is important to be Languages (IIAL) policy for public comment. This
able to distinguish between Basic Interpersonal new policy was planned to come into effect in
Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive 2014, mandating the learning of an African
Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) (Cumm- language in all schools (Davis, 2013). However, the
ins, 2000:58). BICS is the ability to communicate pilot project has not yet been fully implemented at
about ordinary matters when speaking about all schools in the KwaZulu-Natal Province. In
everyday situations. The context in which these addition, a lack of consultation on the introduction
conversations are taking place can provide many of the programme at schools was experienced
clues, for instance, in the form of facial ex- (School language project pilot fails, 2014). In this
pressions, as well as pictures and objects, which regard, Wright (2012:111) argues that the
helps one better understand what is being comm- implementation of language policies in schools is
unicated. The person, therefore, does not only rely closely linked to the implementation of the South
on language to construct the meaning of what is African Languages Bill (Republic of South Africa,
being communicated. CALP refers to the academic 2011). Therefore, it is widely acknowledged that it
language that is needed in the classroom to enable is not working (Wright, 2012:111). According to
the learner to construct the meaning of tasks, and Wright (2012:118), “… those involved in this
what he or she is reading (Rothenberg & Fisher, decision weren’t even linguists or language
2007:35). planners.” Consequently, there has been very little
This implies that “scaffolding and explicit provision made for African-Language speaking
language instruction is necessary” to support the learners, i.e. isiXhosa-speaking learners in schools
learner to master the learning content and the where the LOLT is other than their home language.
language at the same time (Rothenberg & Fisher, Inclusive education places an emphasis on the
2007:35). Gibbons (2002:6) asserts that the accommodation of the diverse needs of learners,
curricula should aim to integrate the learning including the need for education in their home
content with the particular second or third language. This poses specific challenges for the
language. Thus, on the one hand, learners should Grade One teacher who has to ensure that the
meet the necessary proficiency level, which learner is educated in their home language on the
includes cognitive academic language skills, to one hand, and cater for the diverse needs of
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 3, August 2017 3

learners on the other hand. According to Wildeman receiving education in a second or third language.
and Nomdo (2007), the implementation of in- Furthermore, the lack of information regarding
clusive education in South Africa is slow and is current practices by educators to support second
generally not being implemented throughout all and third language speaking learners set the stage
South African schools. They also identify the for the focus of this article. The need to identify the
National Language Policy (NLP) as “… causing a teaching strategies for language support to Grade
dilemma in the South African classroom,” ex- One second and third additional language learners
plaining that teachers have a lack of knowledge and was therefore identified.
skills regarding the diverse use of languages to be
offered as the LOLT in one classroom by one Theoretical Framework
teacher. Consequently, as a number of studies con- Piaget’s theory of cognitive development as well as
firm, learners develop a language barrier and Vygotsky’s theory of social constructivism were
teachers struggle to accommodate learners within a used to describe the acquisition of vocabulary in a
multilingual and inclusive context (cf. Chataika et second language. According to Erikson’s stages of
al., 2012; Engelbrecht, 2006; Engelbrecht et al., psychosocial development, the learner in the
2001). foundation phase is in the fourth stage of develop-
Considering the diverse nature of South ment, where ‘industry versus inferiority’ is the
African society, as well as barriers obstructing main developmental task to be mastered. During
access to schools where the home language of this developmental stage, cognitive development
especially African language learners, are not used proceeds rapidly. Learners can process more
as the LOLT, the need for support to second and information faster and their memory spans are
third language speaking learners in Grade One has increasing. They are moving from pre-operational
become of paramount importance. Thus, in order to to concrete-operational thinking (Piaget & Inhelder,
determine the level of support required, the needs 1973; Woolfolk, 2007:69). With the view of second
of the learner, the competencies of the educator, the and third languages in education as a learning
readiness of the school, and the education system barrier, the researcher was interested in a theo-
have to be taken into consideration. retical framework related to how learning occurs.
To shed light on the above, the researcher Thus, the focus was on Vygotsky’s learning theory
planned to consult current research pertaining to (1978) embedded in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological
language as a barrier to learning, second and third systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1994:37). Vy-
language as the LOLT in South African schools, gotsky’s theory maintains that interactions with
with a specific emphasis on the foundation phase, others (i.e. a direct result with the ecosystem) are a
and the role and function of Grade One teachers to product of, or result from, specific mental struc-
support second or third language speaking learners. tures and processes, and therefore places an
A literature search was conducted by accessing emphasis on the role of language in cognitive
databases such as Sabinet, Eric, and Ebscohost. development (Woolfolk, 2007:31, 42). Woolfolk
Ackerman’s study (2005) focused on issues related (2007:73) illustrates Bronfenbrenner’s theory as
to education teacher policies, while Bardel and consisting of different layers in which the learner
Falk’s study (2007) addressed the role of the functions (i.e. his/her environment). In line with
second language during the acquirement of a third this theory, the needs of second and third language
language. Dalton, Mckenzie and Kahonde (2012) speaking learners should be supported within each
and Engelbrecht (2006) reflected on the imple- layer. The learner lives within a microsystem,
mentation of inclusive education in South Africa, inside a mesosystem, embedded in an exosystem,
while Lenyai (2011) specifically focused on lan- all of which are a part of the macrosystem
guage barriers in the foundation phase in schools in (Woolfolk, 2007:73). The final layer is the chrono-
disadvantaged areas. Tshotsho (2013) reflected on system (Santrock, 2006:52).
the mother tongue debate and South African To sum up, Vygotsky’s theory indicates the
language policies. These studies did not provide important role of language in learning and cog-
descriptions of current practices by foundation nitive development. Scaffolding is a form of
phase teachers in support of second and third support related to the learning process. It is based
language speaking learners. Myburgh, Poggenpoel on the needs of the learner with the aim of
and Van Rensburg (2004:573) investigated the supporting the learner to achieve learning goals
experiences of second and third language speaking (Sawyer, 2006:23). It implies that the teacher is
learners in 2002, and found that teachers were not challenged to select relevant tasks related to the
always aware of the discrepancies between the learner’s specific learning needs and the develop-
content of what was taught and how the learner mental skills that need to be mastered. The teacher
understood it. must also be able to anticipate errors and provide
Honing in on the Western Cape, the reality is guidance in this regard. In addition, the scaffolding
that, in practice, a large number of learners are still should be directed at all the different layers within
4 Kotzé, Van der Westhuizen, Barnard

which the learners function, as described by the Vygotsky’s learning theory embedded in Bron-
ecological systems theory (Graves, Graves & fenbrenner’s ecological systems theory.
Braaten, 1996:15). With regards to the ethical aspects of this
research study, participation was voluntary, and
Method informed consent was a prerequisite for commence-
The researcher made use of a qualitative research ment. Measures were taken to ensure that no harm
design, while implementing the exploratory, des- was inflicted on the participants. In addition, ano-
criptive and contextual research method. These nymity, confidentiality and privacy were safe-
methods enabled the researcher to address the guarded as far as possible.
research problem and answer the research question
by focusing on the research aim, which pointed to Findings
the following: 1) The need to explore the use of The findings provided a clear description of the
teaching and learning strategies for language challenges experienced by both the learner and the
support to isiXhosa learners receiving education in teacher, current strategies that are employed by
a second/third language in Grade One; 2) the need teachers, as well as resources and support utilised
to describe the use of teaching and learning by teachers. The following seven major themes
strategies for language support in Grade One; and were identified by the researcher, the researcher’s
3) the focus on the context of the foundation phase, supervisors, and the independent coder:
in particular, Grade One. By means of the pur- Theme 1: Reasons for placing learners in a class where
posive sampling technique, the researcher in- the LOLT is different from their mother tongue
tentionally selected eleven Grade One teachers in Theme 2: Challenges for the learner
the Western Cape region who have second and Theme 3: Challenges facing the teacher
Theme 4: Strategies employed by the Grade One teacher
third language speaking isiXhosa learners in their Theme 5: Resources utilised by the Grade One teacher
classrooms, and where the LOLT is either English Theme 6: Available support systems
or Afrikaans (cf. Creswell, 2009:125). The sample Theme 7: Recommendations to inform further practices
size for this study reached a point of data saturation Due to the limited space available, attention will be
after eleven interviews (Grinnell, Williams & given to the most important findings outlined
Unrau, 2010:162). The researcher made use of below, so as to address the research question posed
semi-structured interviews with open-ended ques- in this article. The first finding demonstrated that
tions that guided the data collection process. This Grade One learners experience a number of
allowed participants to fully explore the meaning challenges in their language education due to
they attributed to the research question (Marlow, receiving education in a second/third language. The
2011:164). data highlighted that learners do not understand the
Using Tesch’s (1990) eight steps of LOLT, and that this language barrier is a reason for
qualitative data analysis, the data was analysed in a failing and/or a lack of progress.
structured and systemic manner by both the In terms of learners who do not understand the
researcher and an independent coder. The steps LOLT, the research participants were of the
followed include: 1) reading the transcripts and opinion that there is a challenge for isiXhosa
identifying sentences that answer the research learners, who were not educated in their mother
question; 2) selecting the first transcript and tongue during their early years of education
reading through it again; 3) generating a list of (referring to Grade R). As a result, these learners
main topics; 4) assigning codes to the topics and had poor language proficiency in their mother
sub-topics and placing these next to the appropriate tongue, which impacted on their ability to grasp the
segments of the text; 5) grouping the topics LOLT when they entered Grade One (cf.
according to themes and writing a descriptive Landsberg et al., 2011:168; Maake, 2014). In
paragraph for each theme; 6) identifying sub- addition to the fact that exposure to English in
themes that emerge from the main themes; 7) Grade R did not prepare the learners sufficiently for
converting the sub-themes into categories, and then Grade One, the participants indicated that some
lastly; 8) discuss and describe the themes and sub- learners were not exposed to the LOLT prior to
themes (cited in Creswell, 2009:186). entering the Grade One classroom, where the
The descriptive validity of the data was LOLT was different from their mother tongue. The
ensured by means of interviewing techniques, the participants described the challenges learners
method of data recording and the use of the facing such a language barrier experience, and
independent coder. The theoretical validity necessi- asserted that they are not sufficiently able to master
tated that a literature control be done after the the LOLT to support learning and teaching (cf.
themes, sub-themes and categories were identified. Browne, 2007:30).
Lastly, the evaluative validity was ensured by Another noteworthy aspect is that the LOLT
drawing conclusions from the analysed data, the of some learners is not the second language to be
literature control, and the theoretical framework of mastered, but the third language. These learners
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 3, August 2017 5

experience specific learning challenges, for ex- parent, namely: 1) a language barrier; and 2) a lack
ample, struggling to follow instructions. On the one of parental involvement.
hand, the learners do not understand the words, and According to the participants, the language
on the other hand, the pronunciation of certain barrier appears to prevent or limit both oral and
written communication between the teacher and the
words known to them is different from what they parent. This, in turn, has a significant effect on
have heard prior to Grade One. The participants communication, understanding, and relationship-
shared two contributing factors to the learners’ building between parents and teachers. Con-
challenges to master the LOLT, namely: 1) a lack sequently, some parents do not understand the
of exposure to the LOLT outside the classroom; various methods used to teach English as a second
and 2) a lack of community resources to provide and/or third language to their children (cf. Water-
further exposure that would support learning and man & Harry, 2008:5–6).
teaching, where the lack of exposure, according to The participants also explained that some
the participants, means that learners do not have an parents of second and/or third language learners are
not involved in the education of their children and
opportunity to practice the second or third language that they do not speak the LOLT at home (cf.
in which they are being educated. Participants Waterman & Harry, 2008:4). One participant, how-
explained that a lack of community resources ever, reflected on how some parents do support the
results in reduced access to support and opp- teacher and the learner, and that this notably
ortunities to practice the LOLT outside the contributed to addressing the cultural differences
classroom. Furthermore, there appears to be a lack that influenced the teaching and learning process
of information regarding the availability of and (DBE, 2013a).
accessibility to community resources and how it 3. The third challenge that teachers experienced in
could support the second/third language speaking their teaching strategies to render support to isi-
Xhosa learners who receive education in a
learners. second/third language was a lack of formal support
With regards to language barriers that are and access to resources that are necessary for the
viewed as a reason for failing and/or lack of learners’ progress. The participants specifically
progress, participants reported that isiXhosa referred to two challenges in particular, namely, a
learners were unable to progress because they lack of training and professional support, as well as
could not understand instructions, and therefore, functional teaching and learning aids.
they first had to master English before they could In addition, the participating teachers stated that
start to effectively engage with the learning they are not receiving any training or professional
material (cf. Owen-Smith, 2010). support from the DBE to enable them to adequately
The second finding focused on challenges address the second and/or third language learner
that Grade One teachers experience when they (cf. Child, 2013; DBE, 2013a). Consequently,
support isiXhosa learners who receive education in teachers have a lack of knowledge and skills
a second/third language. regarding the diverse use of languages to be offered
1. One challenge that Grade One teachers experience as a LOLT in one classroom by one teacher. Thus,
is the limited time that is available. As a means of teachers in current practice teach the LOLT without
dealing with this challenge, participants indicated acknowledging the isiXhosa-speaking learners’
and referred to “forcing” the learners to learn in a mother tongue (cf. Chataika et al., 2012; DoE,
second or third language, due to limited time, 2001:25; Engelbrecht, 2006; Engelbrecht et al.,
instead of making use of different teaching strat-
egies and encouraging the learner to use English as
2001; Hoadley, 2015).
much as possible, while still acknowledging their The third finding differed from the previous
home language. They attributed this aspect to the two findings, which highlighted the challenges
fact that teachers already have limited time to cover experienced by the learners and their teachers.
the curriculum (cf. Hoadley, 2015; Wildeman & However, the third finding attempted to address the
Nomdo, 2007; Wyse & Jones, 2008:249–251). The research question, namely, “what challenges do
participants expressed a concern that it becomes an Grade One teachers experience to support isiXhosa
even greater challenge and more time consuming learners who receive education in a second/third
when teaching current subjects to the second and/or language?” Therefore, the participants made the
third language speaking learner. As a result, more
teaching time—which is already limited—needs to
following four recommendations to inform further
be spent in order for them to grasp the learning practice.
material. 1. The first recommendation that the participants
2. The second challenge that some Grade One made was for additional support from the DBE
teachers experienced concerned the need for regarding training opportunities, resources and
communication between the parent(s) and the learning support professionals. They stressed the
teacher. The participating teachers mentioned their need for training opportunities to support learners,
need to reach out to parents for their support re- language and mathematics, as well as practical
garding the challenges experienced in the class- ways to involve parents to help them be able to
room (cf. DoE, Republic of South Africa, 2008). In support the isiXhosa learner (cf. Landsberg et al.,
this case, the participants identified two factors that 2011:72). Some participants identified assistants as
disrupt communication between the teacher and the an invaluable supportive resource, and recommend-
6 Kotzé, Van der Westhuizen, Barnard

ed that the DBE also support in this regard (cf. will prepare their child before entering the
Hoadley, 2015:13; Landsberg et al., 2011:22). schooling system (cf. Fleisch, 2008:105–136;
Furthermore, the participating teachers reco- Laufer, 2000:18). They proposed that the Pro-
mmended that teachers should identify a language vincial DBE provide parents with guidelines to
barrier as soon as possible and refer the learner for prepare their child for the LOLT prior to entering
extra support at an early stage (cf. DoE, 2001:19). Grade One. In addition, they recommended
However, this recommendation requires assistance sustained teacher-parent contact that allows the
from learning support professionals. They further learner to grow up in a context of ecological
suggested that isiXhosa learners receive assistance harmony between settings. Therefore, home visits
from the learning support professionals within a are one way of ensuring contact and a positive
group, as well as individually. teacher-parent relationship to better meet the needs
2. The second recommendation highlighted the of the learner and family between settings (cf.
importance of Grade R as a foundation and Landsberg et al., 2011:93).
recommended that Grade R should be considered 3. The third recommendation involves school-based
as an important aspect in the language development support. Individual support was recommended for
of the isiXhosa-speaking learners. The participants the learner from various sources in order to address
further emphasised the importance of a firm grasp the language barrier of the isiXhosa-speaking
of the mother language prior to entering the school learner by means of filling the gaps in the learner’s
system (cf. Landsberg et al., 2011:168; Maake, language proficiency and understanding of the
2014). Participants also recommended that the LOLT (cf. Landsberg et al., 2011:84; Miles &
second/third language learner attend Grade R when Ainscow, 2011:163). School-based support also
he/she is exposed to the LOLT (English) before focussed on the important role translators and/or
entering Grade One. However, they also briefly isiXhosa-speaking classroom assistants can play in
indicated that parents are not always able to afford the classroom. The participants recommended that
this option (cf. South African Human Rights the school should provide this form of support (cf.
Commission/UNICEF, 2011:2–11). Landsberg et al., 2011:426; Miles & Ainscow,
The recommendations regarding Grade R as 2011:163). They also recommended that learners
a foundation to support second/third language should first receive education in their mother
learners in the Grade One classroom were provided tongue to ensure that they have firmly grasped the
in terms of two categories, namely: 1) prior concepts before entering a classroom where the
experience and exposure to the Language of Learn- LOLT is different from their home language (cf.
ing and Teaching; and 2) involving parents with the Landsberg et al., 2011:168; Maake, 2014).
decision to place a child in a class where the 4. The fourth recommendation the participants
Language of Learning and Teaching is different suggested was the use of stories as a strategy to be
from the home language. employed to support the learners. This is because
The participants recommended that prior reading activities are an excellent way of engaging
exposure to the LOLT ought to be considered as the isiXhosa-speaking learner in learning activities
beneficial to the learner’s understanding of basic (Haslam, Wilkin & Kellet, 2005:24, 29). In
instructions when they enter Grade One (cf. addition, they also recommended books with high
Gardner, 2002:8). The participants recommended quality illustrations and bilingual texts as an
that learners ought to be supported and prepared to endless source of new vocabulary and discussion.
be included in a classroom where the LOLT is Another recommendation was to simplify the work,
different from their mother tongue. so that the learner could grasp the meaning more
The participants recommended that it is easily (Haslam et al., 2005:24, 29).
imperative that parents be made aware of available The findings, as summarised above, were used to
options and are consulted on available choices, theoretically draw the following conclusions:
such as placing their child in a Grade R class that

Table 1 Conclusion of findings based on the theory of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory
Level of functioning Conclusion of findings
Micro-system Finding 1: Challenges for the learner
Face-to-face interactions, activities and social Not understanding the LOLT:
experiences. Findings indicated insufficient exposure to English in Grade R,
how it did not prepare the learners sufficiently for Grade One, and
how the learners were not previously exposed to the LOLT when
entering the Grade One classroom. Browne (2007:30) explains that
it takes between two and four years to converse fluently in an
additional language (second language) and another three years to
become “… proficient cognitive and academic users of that
language.” Thus, the participants’ reported that the learners are
challenged with a language barrier based on the fact that they are
not able to master the LOLT enough so as to support learning and
teaching.
Meso-system Finding 1: Challenges for the learner
Relationship between a number of settings in the Not understanding the LOLT:
learner’s life. A lack of exposure to the LOLT outside of the classroom: parents
or caregivers are not well-educated and the learners are not
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 3, August 2017 7

Level of functioning Conclusion of findings

frequently exposed to English (the LOLT). This in turn, had a
strong impact on the academic performance of the learners. Taylor
and Coetzee (2013) found that learners who receive education in a
second or third language originate mostly from households where
they receive little academic support.
Lack of community resources: there is a lack of information
regarding the availability of, and accessibility to, community
resources and how it could support these learners (Taylor &
Coetzee, 2013).

Language barrier is viewed as a reason for failing and/or lack of

progress:
Influence on self-image: learners struggle to understand the LOLT
and this affects their self-image. Consequently, this may result in
learners failing Grade One, or experience difficulty in making
progress.

Finding 2: Challenges for the teacher

Limited time:
Teachers do not have enough time for teaching the existing
subjects within the curriculum. In this case it was found that the
LOLT is being forced onto the learners and it puts a strain on their
ability to understand what is being taught (Hoadley, 2015).

Communication between parent and teacher:

Language barrier: there is a language barrier in the efforts to
communicate with the teacher. This language barrier often
prevents or limits both oral and written communication between
the parent and the teacher (Waterman & Harry, 2008:5).
Parental involvement: In this study some parents of
isiXhosa-speaking learners are not involved in the education of
their child. The reason for this is mostly because the parents, in
this study, have limited education and English/Afrikaans skills
necessary for meaningful participation (Waterman & Harry,
2008:4).

Finding 3: Recommendations for further practice

Grade R as foundation:
• Prior experience of/exposure to the LOLT: the importance of a
firm grasp of the mother language prior to entering the school
system was highlighted. However, it takes between two and
four years to converse fluently in an additional language, and
another three years to become proficient cognitive and
academic users of that language (Birsch, 2005:298, 364;
Landsberg et al., 2011:168). It was also found that some ‘pre-
primaries’ (early childhood education facilities) are too
expensive for a substantial cohort of South African parents.
• Guiding parents in the decision to place their child in a class
where the LOLT is different from the child’s home language:
it was found that parents’ roles are to use the child’s home
language to explore and develop the concepts being learnt at
school in the LOLT.

Support from the school:

• Individual classes/support: participating teachers
recommended that schools should offer extra classes for
individual support to the isiXhosa-speaking learners. It was
also recommended that translators or isiXhosa assistants serve
as more beneficial support. However, according to Miles and
Ainscow (2011:163), learners can become dependent on the
translator, as the translator becomes the spokesperson for
them.
• isiXhosa-speaking teachers to introduce English in foundation
phase: within the South African context, research and findings
showed that very few universities prepare students as African
language teachers, and most of these graduates are not
8 Kotzé, Van der Westhuizen, Barnard

Level of functioning Conclusion of findings

qualified to teach a particular African language as a LOLT
(Hoadley, 2015:13). Thus, it was recommended that at least
one isiXhosa-speaking teacher ought to work in the foundation
phase.
Exo-system Finding 2: Challenges for the teacher
Relationship between one setting directly related to Lack of formal support/access to resources:
the learner’s life and another setting that indirectly • Training and professional support: the participants reported a
influences the learner. lack of, and an urgent need for, training and support to
effectively address the research topic. Overwhelming evidence
corroborated the fact that provinces are resource-constrained,
there is an insufficient budget for training, and to compound
matters, available workshops are irrelevant (Hoadley, 2015).
• Functional teaching and learning aids: while the findings point
out that functional teaching and learning aids (i.e. ‘Rainbow
Workbook’) are not accessible to them, the DBE argues that
teachers do not always utilise the materials provided (Child,
2013; Hoadley, 2015; Wildeman & Nomdo, 2007).
Macro-system Finding 3: Recommendations for further practice
Culture, lifestyle, resources, etc., that have an Support from the DBE:
influence on the learner’s functioning. • Training opportunities: according to participants, the
curriculum advisors do not give solutions to problems
(barriers) (i.e. how to accommodate and assist the isiXhosa
learner). Thus, the participants recommended more
involvement regarding the accommodation of the isiXhosa
language learner. Participants also recommended training in
specific methods to support learners, language and
mathematics, as well as practical ways to involve parents to
help them to be able to support the isiXhosa learner. Findings
indicated that complicating factors such as the problem of
multiple home languages in many classes, the dialectisation of
African languages, and the problem of terminology in
mathematics still requires more attention (NEEDU, 2013:2–3).
• Resources: The following resources were recommended:
o Teaching assistants, which the DBE can assist in providing
to schools.
o Teaching and learning resources/aids are valuable.
However, according to the participants, and affirmed by
Hoadley (2015:13), teachers are often not provided with
the needed resources or equal access to a quality education.
• Learning support professionals: Participants recommended that
learning barriers ought to be identified as soon as possible and
learners should be supported at an early stage.

Recommendations language. Acknowledging the home language is

Based on the findings above, this study concludes necessary to emphasise something, as well as
with the following practical recommendations for repeat and/or clarify information within a
parents (micro-level), schools (meso-level) and the communicative event in order to obtain a better
Provincial Department of Education (macro-level). understanding of the LOLT. For this reason,
Within the micro-level, it is recommended teachers should be able to converse in the different
that parents should consider placing their child in a mother languages of learners in their classrooms.
school where the LOLT is that of their mother Hence, teachers’ communication in the learners’
tongue for at least the first three years (Grades One LOLT must be of a high quality.
to Three). It is also suggested that learners be Teachers can apply strategies such as non-
exposed to the LOLT, as much as possible prior to verbal modelling, code-switching and audio
entering the Grade One classroom, and that this linguicism while scaffolding is taking place.
language must be of a high quality. Parent Listening and reading activities are important for
involvement entails attending parent meetings developing language skills, such as the construction
and/or workshops and assisting the learner with and meaning of words and texts. The use of
his/her homework. multicultural and wordless picture books ought to
On a meso-level, it is important for schools to be available in order to read and write the LOLT.
encourage learners to use the LOLT as much as They need to engage in concrete activities to
possible, while still acknowledging their home promote cognitive and language development.
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 3, August 2017 9

Activities should use all of the learners’ five senses and parents ought to be made aware of the value of
in order to create meaning from the supplied these for learning, as well as the accessibility
information. thereof.
Parent workshops must be provided to enable Looking at the macro-level in which the
parents to assist their child. Parent meetings must Provincial Department of Education functions, it
be encouraged and are recommended for teachers was recommended that the curriculum be revised
to get a better understanding of the learner’s by the DBE in terms of subject content and time
background in order to provide the parents with allocation, whilst acknowledging the dilemma
suggestions on how to assist their children with regarding the implementation of the NLP in South
homework. Extra classes can be provided to fill any Africa. In line with the White Paper 6, it is
gaps (i.e. the learner might not have grasped and/or recommended that training focus on how to
understood a concept taught during teaching time. identify and address barriers to learning with the
This gap in understanding can be explained one-on- assistance of a learning support professional.
one during extra classes). Homework must also be Teachers must be trained to develop their
clear and well-designed so that parents can assist knowledge and skills regarding the diverse use of
the isiXhosa-speaking learner. languages in the classroom and with the parents of
Group activities and/or pair work are learners. The DBE needs to review their budget for
important for the facilitation of cooperative training and implement the Education White Paper
learning with the integration of different academic 6 regarding training opportunities within an
and social experiences (Johnson & Johnson, inclusive school system. Parents ought to be guided
2008:9). Peer support is to be made use of where to rather place their child in a school where the
learners with different abilities are grouped LOLT is their mother tongue. Alternatively,
together to share responsibilities, tasks and learners who experience diverse support needs will
successes, while peers serve as helpers. Individual at some point require a degree of individual support
support can be provided by the class teacher in to overcome their barriers to learning. Thus,
collaboration with the Individual Learning Support individual support can be provided by the class
Team (ILST). The ‘Rainbow Workbook’ can be teacher in collaboration with the ILST. Curriculum
utilised to reinforce literacy/language and mathe- advisors should regularly monitor early childhood
matical skills. It also introduces learners to the education facilities in order to promote equal
language and concepts required for learning and education for all learners. A firm grasp of the
understanding other subjects. The ‘Letterland’ mother tongue is needed for a learner to be able to
programme can be utilised to improve learners’ communicate properly and to understand another
spelling. The ‘Do and Learn’ programme can be language (i.e. the LOLT).
used to improve reading, writing and counting. Alternatively, prior exposure to the LOLT in
Phonemic awareness activities in this programme Grade R can help prepare the isiXhosa-speaking
help to develop spelling skills. The utilisation of learner to only understand basic instructions in
library-media centres will help learners to engage Grade One. It is recommended that universities
with their own language, and also to engage with need to prepare all teachers on how to assist
the LOLT through clear and realistic illustrations. It learners within a multilingual and inclusive con-
is important that teachers demand the supply of text, while teachers in current practice ought to be
specific training for required needs from the DBE. trained in this regard. Teachers in current practice
They must also feel free to access curriculum should receive training opportunities to equip them
advisors for language support. on how to accommodate learners within a
Furthermore, within the meso-level, it is multicultural and inclusive classroom. Successful
recommended that all schools have a library or a inclusion requires adequate teaching and learning
library-media centre. IsiXhosa-speaking colleagues aids that must be available to teachers. The DoE
are recommended for translating instructions and should provide resources that meet the necessary
explaining learning content. Classroom assistants proficiency levels of each learner, including
are also recommended to alleviate the teacher’s cognitive academic language skills to enable
workload and increase the isiXhosa learner’s access learners to learn more effectively across the
to the curriculum. Every school should have a curriculum. The DBE should compile a list of
language support professional from the ILST. resources that are available in the community and
Language support professionals should be made inform learners and parents of their value for
available for regular support and sufficient time learning and the accessibility thereof. The
allocated for this additional assistance. Schools Education District Support Team should provide
ought to do more to get parents involved in their specialised professional support in curriculum,
child’s early education programme in order to assessment and instruction to schools by means of
prepare their isiXhosa-speaking child for the training teachers regarding the support of the
LOLT. Schools should compile a list of resources isiXhosa learner within an inclusive classroom.
that are available in the community. Both learners
10 Kotzé, Van der Westhuizen, Barnard

Curriculum advisors must be able to assist Note

teachers regarding learners with language barriers. i. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution
Licence.
The DBE can monitor and train Curriculum
advisors on what and how to advise teachers References
regarding language barriers in today’s South Ackerman DJ 2005. Getting teachers from here to there:
African classrooms. Considering the full Curri- Examining issues related to an early care and
culum, it is beneficial to have extra support to fill education teacher policy. Early Childhood
in the gaps in the isiXhosa learner’s language Research & Practice, 7(1):1–17.
proficiency and understanding of the LOLT. It is Banda F 2004. A survey of literacy practices in black and
therefore recommended that a support professional coloured communities in South Africa: Towards a
pedagogy of multiliteracies. In MJ Muthwii & AN
assist with the understanding of concepts, par- Kioko (eds). New language bearings in Africa: A
ticularly when the isiXhosa learner missed fresh quest. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
something during a lesson. Bardel C & Falk Y 2007. ‘The role of the second
In addition to the recommendations stated language in third language acquisition: A case of
above, further exploration of the research topic is Germanic sytax’. Second Language Research,
proposed in the section below. 23(4):459–484.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307080557
Conclusion Birsch JR (ed.) 2005. Multisensory teaching of basic
This article addresses the teaching strategies used language skills (2nd ed). Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
to support isiXhosa learners who receive education Brookes Publishing Co.
Bronfenbrenner U 1994. Ecological models of human
in a second/third language. In doing so, it reflects development. In International encyclopedia of
on the findings of a recent study that attempted to education (Vol. 3, 2nd ed). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
answer the question: “what challenges do Grade Browne A 2007. Teaching and learning communication,
One teachers experience to support isiXhosa language and literacy. London, UK: Paul Chapman
learners who receive education in a second/third Publishing.
language?” Based on the research findings, the Chataika T, Mckenzie J, Swart E & Lyner-Cleophas M
article makes a number of practical recommend- 2012. Access to education in Africa: Responding to
ations to resolve the language needs of isiXhosa the United Nations Convention on the rights of
learners who receive education in a second/third persons with disabilities. Disability & Society,
27(3):385–398.
language. This allows for an optimistic view of the https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.654989
study outcomes, noting that it contributes to: 1) Child K 2013. Teachers must go by the book. Times
current practice regarding language support to LIVE, 3 April. Available at
Grade One isiXhosa-speaking learners who are https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-
receiving education in a second/third language; 2) africa/2013-04-03-teachers-must-go-by-the-book/.
the different support systems and their Accessed 11 August 2017.
responsibilities regarding language support to Collier V & Thomas W 2012. What really works for
isiXhosa-speaking learners within an inclusive English language learners: Research-based
education system; and 3) the future implementation practices for principals. In G Theoharis & JS
Brooks (eds). What every principal needs to know
of the IIAL policy. The study is imbued with the to create equitable and excellent schools. New
confidence that isiXhosa learners will be able to York, NY: Teachers College Press.
obtain the necessary support to progress Creswell JW 2009. Research design: Qualitative,
academically and that the DBE will not only quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd
consider but also start to implement the ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
recommendations set out here, in order to over- Cummins J 2000. Language, power and pedagogy:
come the dilemma of multilinguilism in the South Bilingual children in the crossfire. Great Britain:
African classroom. Cambrian Printers LTD.
Dalton EM, Mckenzie JA & Kahonde C 2012. The
implementation of inclusive education in South
Acknowledgement
Africa: Reflections arising from a workshop for
This article is adapted from a master’s thesis at the teachers and therapists to introduce Universal
Cape Peninsula University of Technology. I wish to Design for Learning. African Journal of Disability,
express my sincere appreciation, gratitude and 1(1): Art. #13, 7 pages.
thanks to my supervisors, Dr M. Van der West- https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v1i1.13
huizen and Dr E. Barnard, for their guidance, Davis R 2013. Analysis: Can basic education’s new
support, motivation and immense knowledge. Their language policy work? Daily Maverick, 12 June.
guidance helped me during the time of research and Available at
writing of my thesis and article. I would also like to https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2013-06-
thank Lee-Anne Roux, for all her effort and insight 12-analysis-can-basic-educations-new-language-
policy-work/#.WYqf4FFLfIU. Accessed 12 June
regarding the editing of this article. 2013.
 South African Journal of Education, Volume 37, Number 3, August 2017 11

Department of Basic Education (DBE) 2010. The status Graves MF, Graves BB & Braaten S 1996. Scaffolded
of the language of learning and teaching (LoLT) in reading experiences for inclusive classes.
South African public schools: A quantitative Educational Leadership, 53(5):14–16.
overview. Pretoria, South Africa: Government Grinnell RM Jr., Williams M & Unrau YA 2010.
Printer. Research methods for BSW students (8th ed).
DBE 2012. Annual report 2012/13. Pretoria, South Kalamazoo, MI: Pair Bond Publications.
Africa: Government Printer. Haslam L, Wilkin Y & Kellet E 2005. English as
DBE, Republic of South Africa 2013a. Curriculum news. additional language: Meeting the challenge in the
Improving the quality of learning and teaching: classroom. London, UK: David Fulton Publishers
Strengthening curriculum implementation from Ltd.
2010 and beyond. Pretoria: DBE, Republic of Hoadley U 2015. Who will teach a third language when
South Africa. Available at we are struggling to teach two? Sunday Times, 7
http://www.wcedcurriculum.westerncape.gov.za/jd June.
ownloads/DramaticArts/Dramatic%20Arts.%20Pol Johnson DW & Johnson RT 2008. Social
icies/Curriculum%20News.%20May%202011.pdf. interdependence theory and cooperative learning:
Accessed 17 August 2017. The teacher’s role. In RM Gillies, AF Ashman & J
DBE, Republic of South Africa 2013b. The incremental Terwel (eds). The teacher’s role in implementing
introduction of African languages in South African cooperative learning in the classroom. Computer-
schools: Draft policy. Pretoria: DBE. Available at supported collaborative learning (Vol. 8.) Boston,
http://www.saou.co.za/images/INCREMENTAL.p MA: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-
df. Accessed 18 August 2017. 70892-8_1
Department of Education (DoE) 1997. Language in Landsberg E, Krüger D & Swart E (eds.) 2011.
education policy. Pretoria, South Africa: Addressing barriers to learning: A South African
Government Printer. Available at perspective (2nd ed). Pretoria, South Africa: Van
http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/Languag Schaik.
eEducationPolicy1997_1.pdf. Accessed 15 August Laufer M 2000. The multilingual challenge: Schools with
2017. a view series. Cape Town, South Africa: Via
DoE 2000. School management teams: Managing Africa.
diversity. Pretoria, South Africa: Government Lenyai E 2011. First additional language teaching in the
Printer. foundation phase of schools in disadvantaged
DoE 2001. Education White Paper 6. Special needs areas. South African Journal of Childhood
education: Building an inclusive education and Education, 1(1):68–81.
training system. Pretoria, South Africa: DoE. Maake N 2014. To teach your children well, do so in
Available at their own language. Sunday Times, 16 February.
http://www.vvob.be/vvob/files/publicaties/rsa_educ Available at http://www.pressreader.com/south-
ation_white_paper_6.pdf. Accessed 16 August africa/sunday-times/20140216/282114929475733.
2017. Accessed 16 February 2014.
DoE 2002. Revised National Curriculum Statement Marlow CR 2011. Research methods for generalist
Grades R-9 English Home Language. Pretoria, social work (5th ed). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole,
South Africa: Government Printer. Available at Cengage Learning.
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/curricula/southafrica/sa Miles S & Ainscow M (eds.) 2011. Responding to
_al_eng_2002_eng.pdf. Accessed 25 August 2017. diversity in schools: An inquiry-based approach.
DoE, Republic of South Africa 2008. National strategy Manitoba, Canada: Routledge.
on screening, identification, assessment and Myburgh O, Poggenpoel M & Van Rensburg W 2004.
support: School pack. Pretoria: DoE. “Learners experience of teaching and learning in a
Engelbrecht P 2006. The implementation of inclusive second or third language”. Education, 124(3):573–
education in South Africa after ten years of 584.
democracy. European Journal of Psychology of National Education Evaluation & Development Unit
Education, 21:253. (NEEDU) 2013. NEEDU national report 2012. The
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173414 state of literacy teaching and learning in the
Engelbrecht P, Swart E & Eloff I 2001. Stress and coping Foundation Phase. Available at
skills of teachers with a learner with Down’s http://www.education.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileti
syndrome in inclusive classrooms. South African cket=tzLVNvEWpJQ%3d&tabid=687&mid=2604.
Journal of Education, 21(4):256–260. Available at Accessed 1 May 2015.
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/saje/article/viewFi Owen-Smith M 2010. The language challenge in the
le/24911/20523. Accessed 8 August 2017. classroom: A serious shift in thinking and action is
Fleisch B 2008. Primary education in crisis: Why South needed. Focus, 56:31–37. Available at
African schoolchildren underachieve in reading http://hsf.org.za/resource-centre/focus/focus-56-
and mathematics. Cape Town, South Africa: Juta february-2010-on-learning-and-teaching/the-
& Co, Ltd. language-challenge-in-the-classroom-a-serious-
Gardner P 2002. Strategies and resources for teaching shift-in-thinking-and-action-is-needed/download.
and learning inclusive classrooms. London, UK: Accessed 24 February 2014.
David Fulton Publishers. Piaget J & Inhelder B 1973. Memory and intelligence.
Gibbons P 2002. Scaffolding language scaffolding London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
learning: Teaching second language learners in Republic of South Africa 1996a. Constitution of the
the mainstream classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Republic of South Africa Act, No. 108 of 1996.
Heinemann. Pretoria: Government Printer.
12 Kotzé, Van der Westhuizen, Barnard

Republic of South Africa 1996b. South African Schools http://mg.co.za/article/2013-10-18-mother-tongue-

Act, Act No. 84, 1996. Government Gazette, classrooms-give-a-better-boost-to-english-study-
377(17579). Cape Town: Government Printer. later. Accessed 22 October 2014.
Available at Tshotsho BP 2013. Mother tongue debate and language
http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/Act84of policy in South Africa. International Journal of
1996.pdf. Accessed 19 August 2017. Humanities and Social Science, 3(13):39–44.
Republic of South Africa 2011. South African languages Available at
bill. Government Gazette, 34675. Pretoria: http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_13_Ju
Government Printer. Available at ly_2013/5.pdf. Accessed 4 August 2017.
http://www.sacr.gpg.gov.za/legislation/Bills/SA%2 Vygotsky LS 1978. Mind in society: The development of
0Languages%20Bill.pdf. Accessed 19 August higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA:
2017. Harvard University Press.
Rothenberg C & Fisher D 2007. Teaching English Waterman R & Harry B 2008. Building collaboration
language learners: A differentiated approach. between schools and parents of English language
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. learners: Transcending barriers, creating
Santrock JW 2006. Life-span development (10th ed). opportunities. Tempe, AZ: National Center for
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Culturally Responsive Educational Systems.
Sawyer RK (ed.) 2006. The Cambridge handbook of the Available at
learning sciences. New York, NY: Cambridge http://www.niusileadscape.org/docs/FINAL_PROD
University Press. UCTS/LearningCarousel/Building_Collaboration_
School language project pilot fails 2014. Daily News Between_Schools_and_Parents_of_ELLs.pdf.
Reporters, 24 February. Available at Accessed 19 August 2017.
http://www.iol.co.za/dailynews/news/school- Wildeman RA & Nomdo C 2007. Implementation of
language-project-pilot-test-fails-1651582. inclusive education: how far are we? Cape Town,
Accessed 24 February 2014. South Africa: Institute for Democracy in South
South African Human Rights Commission/UNICEF Africa (IDASA). Available at
2011. South Africa’s children: A review of equity http://eldis.org/document/A31398. Accessed 23
and child rights. Pretoria: South African Human February 2014.
Rights Commission/UNICEF. Available at Woolfolk A 2007. Educational psychology (10th ed).
https://www.unicef.org/southafrica/SAF_resources Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
_factschildrens11.pdf. Accessed 19 August 2017. Wright L 2012. Implications of the National Language
Statistics South Africa 2013. Statistical release P0302: Policy in the South African classroom. English
Mid-year population estimates 2013. Pretoria: Academy of Southern Africa, 2(1):111–123.
Statistics South Africa. Available at Available at
https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0302/P03 http://www.englishacademy.co.za/language-policy-
022013.pdf. Accessed 19 August 2017. in-south-africa/. Accessed 4 August 2017.
Taylor S & Coetzee M 2013. Mother-tongue classrooms Wyse D & Jones R 2008. Teaching English, language
give a better boost to English study later. Mail & and literacy (2nd ed). London, UK: Routledge.
Guardian, 18 October. Available at