Mathematics lessons in a government secondary school in rural Rwanda: A case study

Abstract

Language of instruction (LOI) is a major factor undermining educational quality and equity for millions of children studying through an additional language (L2) in low- and middle-income countries (The World Bank, 2021). In Rwanda, English medium instruction (EMI) is mandatory from primary to tertiary education and is associated with low learning outcomes, especially for marginalised learners (Milligan, 2020). Most research and advocacy around LOI to date has focused on the use of learners’ home/community language/s (L1) at primary school, although secondary level is part of basic education in Rwanda and internationally. Given EMI is likely to remain at secondary level, it is important to understand how L2-medium instruction occurs in classrooms and how it can be strengthened (Milligan & Tikly, 2016). This critical and ethnographic case study explores mathematics lessons in a government secondary school in rural Rwanda and provides detailed description of situated pedagogical resources and constraints in order to inform teacher CPD in Rwanda and comparable contexts. The study centres on mathematics lessons, because competence in mathematics is key to the Rwandan national development vision, whilst examination results and the numbers of students who pursue science and mathematics streams at upper secondary are disappointing (Uworwabayeho, 2009). Data include 13 hours of lessons, recorded over a 5-month period; post-lesson interviews with the teacher and students; teacher and student interviews and focus groups; and a period of participant observation at school. Analysis centres on classroom discourse, and its relationship to discourses at school and in wider society. The study indicates considerable pedagogical resources in this classroom. The teacher constructs lessons with clearly defined pedagogical purpose, through routines and by responding to students, and using multilingual and multimodal semiotic resources to enable students to access English and mathematics. Students participate multilingually and multimodally to co-construct and at times lead classroom interactions. Monoglossic ideology constrains classroom communication, and the teacher’s ability to adequately describe his practice. English is the language of mathematics, authority and visibility in these lessons; reinforcing linguistic hierarchy between European and indigenous African languages. The teacher does not consider himself a language teacher and while he uses a range of language supportive strategies, he does not discuss them in detail. The teacher and students describe students’ English as ‘lacking’, and this undermines student confidence and verbal participation in lessons. The teacher mediates the ‘English-only’ textbook for students, and systematically omits talk-based tasks. I conclude that teacher CPD should recognise teachers’ situated and subject-specific pedagogy as a resource to develop, rather than a problem to replace, and address linguistic ideology through building teachers’ understanding of, and their ability to describe and develop their multilingual pedagogy and students’ full linguistic repertoires.

More information

Identifiers

Catalogue record

Export record