Merging English Home Language and First Additional Language curricula: Implications for future quality assurance practices

Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.2989/16073614.2023.2185984
L. Makalela
{"title":"Merging English Home Language and First Additional Language curricula: Implications for future quality assurance practices","authors":"L. Makalela","doi":"10.2989/16073614.2023.2185984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract South Africa has a uniquely differentiated English curriculum in a bid to cater for diverse proficiency levels prevalent among its learner population. While this stride made sense in a population with one of the highest inequalities in the world, it is equally important to reflect on whether the differentiated systems do serve the purpose of equal access in relation to the quality of provision. Surprisingly, very little research has been carried out to validate the merits of this curriculum and assessment differentiation to date. In this paper, I report on Umalusi’s commissioned study on English curriculum benchmarking with three countries: Kenya, Singapore and Canada. This four-country case analysis focuses on curriculum goals and the depth and breadth of English Home Language (EHL) and English First Additional Language (EFAL). The results of the analysis show that the objectives of EFAL and EHL are largely similar and that both compare favourably with these subjects taught in the three other countries under investigation. However, framing the study within theories of language acquisition and language variation, I argue that the EFAL/EHL differentiation at both curriculum and assessment levels is unmerited and serves the opposite intent: deepening inequalities and access to the English language. In the end, useful recommendations for repackaging an assessment of English into one that takes account of its diverse learner population are advanced and further research opportunities are highlighted.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2023.2185984","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract South Africa has a uniquely differentiated English curriculum in a bid to cater for diverse proficiency levels prevalent among its learner population. While this stride made sense in a population with one of the highest inequalities in the world, it is equally important to reflect on whether the differentiated systems do serve the purpose of equal access in relation to the quality of provision. Surprisingly, very little research has been carried out to validate the merits of this curriculum and assessment differentiation to date. In this paper, I report on Umalusi’s commissioned study on English curriculum benchmarking with three countries: Kenya, Singapore and Canada. This four-country case analysis focuses on curriculum goals and the depth and breadth of English Home Language (EHL) and English First Additional Language (EFAL). The results of the analysis show that the objectives of EFAL and EHL are largely similar and that both compare favourably with these subjects taught in the three other countries under investigation. However, framing the study within theories of language acquisition and language variation, I argue that the EFAL/EHL differentiation at both curriculum and assessment levels is unmerited and serves the opposite intent: deepening inequalities and access to the English language. In the end, useful recommendations for repackaging an assessment of English into one that takes account of its diverse learner population are advanced and further research opportunities are highlighted.
分享
查看原文
合并英语母语和第一附加语言课程:对未来质量保证实践的启示
摘要南非有一个独特的差异化英语课程,以迎合不同的熟练程度普遍存在于其学习者群体。虽然这一举措对世界上最不平等的人口之一来说是有意义的,但同样重要的是要思考,在提供服务的质量方面,不同的制度是否确实有助于平等获得服务的目的。令人惊讶的是,迄今为止,很少有研究来验证这种课程和评估差异的优点。在本文中,我报告了Umalusi委托肯尼亚、新加坡和加拿大三个国家对英语课程基准的研究。这四个国家的案例分析侧重于课程目标和英语母语(EHL)和英语第一附加语言(EFAL)的深度和广度。分析结果表明,EFAL和EHL的目标在很大程度上是相似的,两者都比其他三个接受调查的国家所教授的这些科目有利。然而,在语言习得和语言变异理论框架内的研究中,我认为EFAL/EHL在课程和评估层面的差异是不值得的,并且服务于相反的目的:加深不平等和获得英语。最后,提出了一些有用的建议,以重新包装英语评估,使其考虑到不同的学习者群体,并强调了进一步的研究机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信