Content uploaded by Beatrice Ekanjume-Ilongo
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Beatrice Ekanjume-Ilongo on Dec 06, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Teaching of English as a Second Language:
The Case of the National University of Lesotho
(NUL)
Beatrice Ekanjume-Ilongo
Department of English, National University of Lesotho, Lesotho
Abstract—The Teaching of English as a second/foreign language is a very thought-provoking, but gratifying
exercise. Teachers of English as a second/foreign language encounter several problems while carrying out their
profession. This paper argues that teaching English as a second language at the National University of Lesotho
(NUL) is a very challenging activity due to several factor. These range from large classes to the level of
students admitted at NUL. The paper purports that the students admitted at NUL seem to be unprepared with
the content, concepts, and skills they are taught, due to their poor background knowledge from high
school. The paper therefore proposes that the English Language curriculum of Lesotho high schools be
subject to review by staff members of the Department of English at the NUL, who have a better idea of what
they expect of the students from high school. The paper argues that the goal of an English teacher is to excite
the students about learning, speaking, reading, writing, and comprehending English.
Index Terms—teaching English, English grammar, second language, challenges
I. INTRODUCTION
There is no doubt, these days, that the English language is becoming the world’s language. It is the language of
choice in most countries of the word and is playing a very significant role in bringing the world together. The use of
English is widespread in science today and in higher education around the world. According to Johansson and Jonsson
(2006), 85 percent of all scientific publications in the world are written in English or have a summary in English. In
spite of the high interest in the English language, teaching English as a foreign/second language has a lot of difficulties
and challenges.
Teaching students who have a limited understanding of the English language is a very demanding and scary task.
Since the students of the National University of Lesotho (NUL) speak mostly Sesotho at home and among themselves,
some of them hardly utter English words and phrases outside the classroom. This goes a long way to make the teaching
of English at NUL difficult, as the students do not practice what they are taught. This is not common only to students of
NUL. In fact, most countries which use English as a second or foreign language are faced with the situation of the
students underperforming in English as they will always switch to their local languages when challenged by some
expressions of English. This is supported by Clegg and Afitska (2011) when they say that “in sub-Saharan Africa,
education conducted through a European language is associated with low school achievement. Both teachers and
learners may often not be fluent enough to use the language as a medium of instruction. In these circumstances, both
also make use of a common African language” (P. 63).
According to Rassool and Edwards ( 2010) “the dominance of English in many Africa countries is a legacy of
colonialism which continues to influence the implementation of multilingual education policies and affects language
learning, language use and language choice in bilingual and multilingual communities, schools and classrooms”, as is
the case with Lesotho. For learners of English language as a second or foreign language, like those in Lesotho, knowing
the language does not only provide an extra language for communication, but also represents a vital tool for achieving
academic goals and subsequent social mobility (Dhillon & Wanjiru, 2013). In order to establish strategies for successful
performance in such target-language detached circumstances, Wray (2006) states that “the development of productive
second language teaching and learning initiatives needs to operate alongside a sound understanding of language
learning processes”.
For the past years members of the English Department have been lamenting about the very poor quality of students
we receive from the high school as far as the English Language is concerned. This poor quality cuts across all
disciplines in the University, as the English Department teaches all first year students in the common English Language
courses called “Communication and Studies Skills” and “Remedial Grammar”. These students are noted for being
unable to construct correct English sentences both in the written and spoken form, with the spoke form being more
scandalous. The situation has been drifting from worse to worst each year and something definitely needs to be done to
address the situation before it gets completely out of hand. This paper therefore presents an understanding of the
teaching of English at the National University of Lesotho (NUL) and highlights the challenges, difficulties and
problems of teaching English at this institution. It also offers an insight of what has to be done by the staff and students
ISSN 1798-4769
Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 1157-1164, November 2015
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0606.01
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
of NUL, as well as the entire NIL community and the Lesotho Government through the Ministry of Education in
establishing strategies for successful performance in English. The paper reveals the challenges posed by the context and
environment, and the educational system in Lesotho and how these can be overcome.
II. THE LANGUAGE SITUATION IN LESOTHO
Sesotho (or Southern Sotho), a Southern Bantu language, is according to Dalby (2004, p. 576) and Deprez, Du
Plessis & Teck (2001, p. 175) the national language of Lesotho, and is spoken by most Basotho. Rosenberg, Weisfelder
& Frisbie-Fulton (2005, p. 319), state that “Sesotho was recognized as the national language by the National and
Official Languages Bill, ratified by the National Assembly of Lesotho on 12 September 1966, which also established
Sesotho and English as the two official languages of the country”. The language policy of Lesotho promotes
bilingualism (Legère, Fitchat & Akindele 2002) and this is enforced in Chapter one of the Constitution of Lesotho
where it is stated that “the official languages of Lesotho shall be Sesotho and English and, accordingly, no instrument or
transaction shall be invalid by reason only that it is expressed or conducted in one of those languages” (p. 109).
Baker & Prys Jones (1998, p. 270.) state that “Sesotho is the first language of more than 90 percent of the population
and is “used widely as a medium of communication” in day-to-day speech” (p.315). They go further to say that English
is reserved for official interactions, such as "government and administration"(p. 270), although the use of Sesotho in
politics, religion, and the mass media is growing.
Baker & Prys Jones (1998, p. 361) state that “primary education of children in Lesotho takes place in Sesotho for the
first four years, but English becomes the medium of instruction in the fifth year of primary school”. According to
Legère, Fitchat & Akindele (2002) competence in English is “particularly important ... for educational, political, social
and economic transactions in the subcontinent” and facilitates obtaining employment within Lesotho and abroad (p.
114). Although “efforts are made to ensure that Basotho children” learn to read, speak and write English (Webb 1995),
many Basotho complete only “basic primary education [and] remain monolingual in Sesotho” (p. 96)
According to Lewis (2009), “an estimated of number 248,000 Basotho speak Zulu (one of the eleven official
languages of South Africa); 43,000 speak Phuthi (a Nguni language closely related to Swazi, an official language of
South Africa and Swaziland); while 18,000 speak Xhosa (another Nguni language and official language of South
Africa)”. Speakers of these minority languages typically also speak Sesotho (Baker & Prys Jones 1998: 361). There is
also Afrikaans, spoken mainly in South Africa and Namibia, and which according to Lewis (2009), “is mainly an
immigrant language”.
III. METHODOLOGY
The data for this study was collected by interviewing ten (10) staff members of the National University of Lesotho,
five (5) from the Faculties of Humanities and five (5) from the Faculty of Education. Of the ten participants, there were
five males and five females. The two Faculties were chosen purposefully because Humanities, through the English
department teaches English at the first year to all the students of NUL while Education trains teachers and prepares
them for the teaching of English at high schools. The target population in the Faculty of Humanities was staff members
from the English Department because these are the people who actually teach English at NUL. In the Faculty of
Education, staff members were chosen from those teaching in the Bachelor of Education programme (B.ED), based on
availability.
Data was equally collected through interview with some students of the English department. These are students who
are doing other courses in the English department, in addition to the common English language courses mentioned
earlier. A total of twenty students were used, ten males and ten females. As students majoring in English Language and
Linguistics, one would expect their spoken and written English to be of good quality. This is however not the case as
they still commit the same spoken and written errors/mistakes committed by students in other majors. The interview
was meant to identify the reason(s) why these students find it difficult to use English correctly and what they think can
be done to help them. The interview was done orally and the responses were recorded.
The findings of this paper are therefore based on the information obtained from the two groups of participants for this
study, and they go a long way to inform the way forward for the teaching of English at NUL in particular and Lesotho
in general.
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
As already mentioned, the data for this study was collected through interviews with colleagues in the Faculties of
Humanities (Department of English) and Education (B.ED Programme), and some students of the National University
of Lesotho (NUL).
From the interviews with the lecturers of the two Faculties at NUL, it was generally observed that the major
challenge of teaching English at NUL is the poor foundation that NUL students come with from secondary school as
captured in the following response from one of the informants:
1158
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
The teachers of English in most secondary schools in Lesotho (especially the public schools) are themselves poor in
the language. Some are even untrained in teaching English as a second or foreign language and therefore cannot
provide any good foundation for the students they teach.
Another informant said the following:
These teachers, because of their limited knowledge, make English even more complicated to students and they
initiate them into adapting a method which deprives them the communication abilities in English. The teachers
therefore tend to make English appeared as a dreadful subject to most students.
The interview also revealed a common concern of the negative attitude that students have towards the English
language. Most colleagues have observed that many NUL students are intimidated by English. This, as Clegg and
Afitska (2011, p. 65) put it, is partly as a result of the historical reason whereby natives were expected to look up to
their British conquerors with fear and respect. The subsequent development and prosperity enjoyed by the Western
world placed the English speaking people, their countries and cultures on a high pedestal. As a result, many natives
have an innate and unexplained fear of the English language, which makes them shy of handling the language
(www.articlesbase.com). The fear of NUL students to speak English was expressed by many informants. The excerpt
below is a response from one of the informants with regards to this aspect.
NUL students have been brought up with the attitude of fear speaking English, which now impedes on their learning
and handling of the language. They find it difficult and sometimes even impossible to express themselves in English.
When they come for assistance to a lecturer, they resort to Sesotho (their native language). Once the lecturer insists
that they must speak in English (especially for those lecturers who do not understand or speak Sesotho), the students
will simply go away without saying what they came for.
This is a major challenge at NUL and therefore makes the teaching of English difficult, as one is not able to help the
students if they are afraid to speak.
One other issue that arose from the interview with both lecturers and students is that of pronunciation. Clegg and
Afitska (2011) have observed that “one of the biggest difficulties a teacher faces when teaching English as a second
language is to instill proper pronunciation in native speakers”. All the teachers of English at NUL are second language
speakers of English, and as such they do not have the native speaker’s accent. There is therefore the problem of
pronunciation not only on the part of the students but also on that of the lecturers. The English language has a number
of characteristic features which most foreign speakers do not easily absorb. This explains why different regions have
their own English accents leading to the rise of different Englishes. This also explains why many students find it
difficult to understand native English. Worse still, the lecturers of English at NUL are from different cultural
backgrounds with very different pronunciation in some cases. This can be seen from the following excerpt from one of
the students;
The pronunciation of some of the non-Sesotho speaking lecturers confuses us and makes the language even more
difficult than it is. We do not understand some of the words they say and we end up writing something different when
taking notes during a lesson. It is only when we reproduce those notes in a test for instance, and after being corrected,
that we realize that what the lecturer said is not what we wrote down. This makes us get things wrong which we could
have gotten right.
It is important to note that the above view was shared by almost all the interviewed students. This therefore implies
that there is a gap between the teacher and their student that needs to be addressed before proper teaching and learning
can take place.
Another issue that emerged is the fact that the grammar of English has its own set of complicated rules and
regulations which students find difficult to master. A good number of NUL students struggle with these rules, and
cannot really understand many of the irregularities of English. Most often, the students apply the rules of Sesotho
grammar to the English Language and end up with incorrect English sentences. One of the students mentioned in the
interview that:
English has a very complex structure unlike my native language Sesotho. So, I prefer using Sesotho all the time and
will use English only when it is really necessary like when writing a text, assignment or examination. In fact, if I am
given the opportunity to do all these things in Sesotho, I will very happily do so.
Again, this view was shared by almost all the students who participated in this study
There is also a challenge with regards to the poor socio-cultural and financial background of students at NUL vis-à-
vis the English Language. Most NUL students come from rural areas with parents who know little or nothing about
English. This implies that the students do not speak the language while at home and their performance therefore lacks
parental supervision and guidance. Experience has shown that students whose parents live in urban areas and are of a
high or even middle class perform better in English because they have the opportunity of speaking or using English
outside the classroom. To bridge this gap, the lecturers of English at NUL are expected to expose the students to
English as much as possible. This is however difficult to do because NUL students hardly speak in class; and even when
they are asked question they are so shy to respond for fear of committing errors and be laughed at by their peers. This is
captured in the following excerpt from one of the lecturers:
The poor socio-cultural and financial backgrounds of our students make it difficult for them to fluent in English.
Most of their parents do not speak English so they do not use the language at home. Even here at NUL, they always use
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
1159
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
Sesotho among themselves because that is the language they are comfortable with. We the lecturers are also not helping
them because we also speak Sesotho among ourselves and even to the students all the time.
Another lecturer said the following:
It is true that the society in which our students live is predominantly Sesotho but the students themselves are not
making any effort to speak English. When you ask them a question in class, they do not respond not because they do not
know the answer but simply because they do not want to speak English. If you ask them the same thing in Sesotho, they
quickly respond. I think they are afraid that if they commit errors they will be mocked at by their classmates. As a
lecturer, I do not even know how to help them since they do not want to speak the language.
The educational system in Lesotho is another factor which affects the teaching of English language at NUL. It is
common knowledge that there exist four main skills the learning of English language namely: the Listening, the
Speaking, the Reading and the Writing skills. The educational system in Lesotho seems to concentrate more on the
writing skills and probably some little reading, while neglecting and ignoring the Listening and the Speaking skills
which play a greater role in communication. Most of the examinations the students do are not language-oriented in
terms of testing all the four language skills. Listening is the one basic skill which makes speaking easy. There is no one
who can pretend to speak a language without haven listened to it. The lecturers of English and even the students
acknowledged during the interview that very little or nothing is done toward the teaching of the listening and speaking
skills. This can be seen from the following excerpt by one lecturer.
I think the way we teach English at NUL is also a serious handicap to the students. Although we have a course that is
meant to cater for the four language skills, in effect only two of the skills are being taught namely reading and writing.
The other two skills, listening and speaking, are not taught partly due to the lack of audio-video material and a
language laboratory; and partly because lecturers are not innovative enough to improvise. This is why even the
examination paper has nothing to do with listening and speaking skills.
Most of the students had similar views as indicated in the excerpt below.
One of the reasons why I am not confident in speaking English is because I do not trust my speaking skills. In fact, I
was never taught speaking skills and so I do not even know what is expected of me. If we can be taught well in all the
four language skills, most of us will have the confidence to speak English. So, please, tell our teacher to teach us
listening and speaking skills. We do not have a problem with the reading and writing skills because they are taught to
us.
One of the lecturers raised the following concerns:
How do I teach the speaking skills to a class of more than 200 students? I cannot get more than 200 students to speak
in one class. It cannot work. In fact, even the reading and writing skills are mainly theoretical. It is difficult to do any
practical teaching in a large class like mine.
From the above excerpts, it is clear that NUL students are disadvantaged of their speaking abilities due to lack of
proper guidance with regards to the teaching of the listening and speaking skills. This may be one of the reasons why
they have not been able to speak English in a proper manner. The Department of English should come up with a well-
designed and comprehensive course for the teaching of the listening and speaking skills. The NUL management should
see to it that lecture halls are equipped with language teaching materials. Lecturers should encourage speaking in the
classroom and make sure that the Student Talking Time (STT) is maximized. As Hornberger and Vaish (2008) put it,
“insufficient mastery of written and oral expression, inherent in the difficulties arising in respect of language and
enhanced by the lack of opportunities for total immersion in a language will lead to inefficient learning” (p. 308).
Another major challenge that emerged from the interviews is that of large numbers of students in the English
Language class at NUL. At NUL, most of the practical English Language classes range from 180 to 300 students. This
makes the teaching of such classes practically impossible. With a class of these numbers, it is difficult to get a
satisfactory knowledge of student’s needs. Lecturers of such classes find it difficult to have any close relationship with
the students thereby making it impossible to monitor students’ progress. Lecturers actually find it difficult to engage all
the learners actively in the learning process. Most English language lecturers at NUL therefore are not able to measure
the effectiveness of their lessons as well as the degree to which students grasp what is being taught. This remains a
major challenge and causes serious problems as far as teaching English at NUL is concerned. The above arguments are
supported by the following excerpt from one of the lecturers.
My classes are too big – not less than 200 any given year. With this kind of class, how do you expect me to teach
effectively to the satisfaction of all the students? I find it difficult to monitor them, or even assist them since I do not
even know their needs. Most often, I do the talking because there is no way I can get all of them to talk. I don’t even
know most of them, except for the few ones who are always at the front of the class and respond to questions from time
to time. I have tried to use several techniques to see how I can solve this problem of class size but my efforts have not
been fruitful. If my class is divided into smaller groups of about 50, I will be able to interact with the students and even
identify their specific needs. I can then be in a better position to address their individual needs.
Lastly and perhaps the more prominent challenge of teaching English at NUL is the way in which the education
system in Lesotho high schools is organized and regulated. Most NUL lecturers of English and those of the Faculty of
Education are lamenting on the quality of students received from Lesotho high schools with regards to their knowledge
of English. It is a general concern that the English Language syllabus at Lesotho high schools does not equip the
1160
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
students with the skills they need to grasp what is taught at the university level. NUL English Language lecturers are
therefore of the view that the English language curriculum of Lesotho high schools should be subject to review by the
English language Department of NUL, in collaboration with the members of the B.ED programme in the Faculty of
Education as seen in the following excerpt.
The level of English of the students we admit into NUL is very low and I believe this is not just because of the
teachers and their teaching methods and other factors. I think the English syllabus used in Lesotho high schools needs
to be reviewed. That syllabus should be given to us here at NUL for review because we know what we expect of the
students when they get here. We will be able to guide them on what they should teach so that they prepare the students
well enough for the English taught here at NUL.
V. DISCUSSION
Before delving into this section, it is important to note that it is somehow the responsibility of the teachers to see to it
their learners are given the assistance they need in order to become skillful in the English language. Several things can
be done at various levels to make the teaching of English at NUL more effective, efficient and productive. There are
things that need to be done by the lecturers, students, NUL community as a whole and finally the Lesotho government
through the ministry of education.
As already mentioned, it is the responsibility of NUL English Language lecturers to see to it that the language is
taught effectively and efficiently. They have to look for means of addressing the challenges and difficulties mentioned
in the previous section.
Beginning with the issue of class size, it is undoubtedly very difficult for any teacher to deal with large classes.
Lecturers of English at NUL have tried several techniques to remedy the problem of large classes, but the efforts have
most often been less fruitful as most of the lecturers said during the conversations. None the less, the intensity of the
situation can be alleviated if NUL English language lecturers can train their students to work in small groups where
each of them could have a chance to participate in an activity, either inside or outside the classroom setting. These
groups should include fewer members to avoid any of the students coasting, and they should be given active roles so
that they do not rely on other students to do the work and thus become lazy. In practical English language lessons, pair
work is a good alternative to practice conversations, exercises and other language activities. NUL English language
lecturers should therefore pair their students so that they spur each other to speak. The lecturers might decide to pair the
weaker students with the stronger ones while at the same time making sure that the weaker students are not or do not
feel intimidated by the stronger one(s). In this way, the idea of class size being a handicap to the teaching of speaking
skills can be alleviated.
NUL lecturers of English have to understand the needs of each of the students they are teaching. While teaching
English as a Second language, it is very common to find that the English language proficiency and academic experience
of the students varies greatly. In order to help every student improve, NUL English Language lecturers have to
understand every individual student's level of language proficiency and educational history. This will enable them to
know how to adapt their teaching material, and also the pedagogical method to use while teaching so that none of the
students will feel being left out.
It is also very important for NUL English language lecturers to establish a more personal relationship with every
student. By simply making each student aware that you as a lecturer are taking interest in their studies, you are in effect
creating an enjoyable learning environment which serves as a motivation for the student. Despite the large classes at
NUL, English language lecturers can still have this personal relationship with their students through the use of
technology which will ensures that every student has time to connect with the teacher. This can be done through the use
of a blog or email, WhatsApp, and particularly through THUTO – the intranet system developed by NUL. This will
give the students the opportunity to express themselves without fear of committing errors. It will also go a long way to
help shy students and others who are usually reserved to express themselves more freely and open up to the lecturer as
they become more and more comfortable
Lecturers of English at NUL should make sure that the students they teach are aware of what is actually happening in
each lesson. Some NUL students may not be able to understand certain instructions that are provided by their teachers
due to their limited knowledge of the English language. They may therefore not be aware of what is actually taking
place in a particular lesson or class. It is a very common phenomenon that NUL students shy from asking questions in
class. NUL English Language teachers have to encourage their students to interact in class by asking for clarification
when they do not understand certain instructions. Hongmei (2013), “by reminding the students of noticing the
communication obstacles and providing enough repetitions of knowledge about language, the teacher and students can
collaborate well to realize the teaching aim through classroom interaction” (p. 124). Classroom interaction is very
important as it helps the students to use the language they are being taught and also enables the teacher to see if the
students are grasping what is being taught. This is supported by Walsh (2006: 130) who claims that Possessing
Classroom Interactional Competence becomes one essential language capability for a lecturer who is teaching English
as a foreign or second language. NUL English language lecturers should use reflective and exploratory teaching as good
ways to build the knowledge on English for classroom interaction. They should make the students aware of the vital
information they are passing across in each lesson and allow enough time for questions from the students. The lecturers
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
1161
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
should request the students to present in writing what they understood in each lesson, and also what they did not
understand. The information given by the students can be used as a starting point for the subsequent lesson. This will
not only enable NUL lecturers of English to have control of the class, but will also serve as a motivating factor to the
students.
Learning a second language requires an ability to overcome a fear of saying the wrong thing. Students are afraid to
speak because they do not want to commit mistakes. As a result they are often speechless even when they have
something to say. To make speaking much easier for NUL students, the lecturers should make the classroom a
comfortable setting. This is because once the students feel threatened or intimidated, they will resort to silence. The
correction of students’ errors should therefore be done cautiously, so as not to scare them from speaking. Also, the
listening and speaking skills should be taught irrespective of the challenges. Lecturers should be innovative and creative
enough to come up with solutions on how to teach these skills.
NUL English language lecturers do not have to attempt to abolish accents when teaching pronunciation of English
words to their students. What is essential is for the students to be able to speak lucidly. The lecturers themselves must
communicate clearly and reiterate on those words that are problematic to articulate. They should be able to assist their
students with how specific sounds (particularly the difficult ones) are produced. Encouraging learners to speak slowly
may go a long way in making them pronounce words in the correct way.
There is no way NUL students can make a better progress in the learning of English, if they are not encouraged to
converse more frequently in English. NUL Lecturers of English should request their students to communicate more in
the English Language outside the classroom and where possible participate in those activities that require the use of
English. The lecturers should give the students as much reading exercises as possible as well as oral presentation
exercises to enable them express themselves in English as frequently as possible.
NUL staff members as a whole should help NUL students to speak English more often and comprehensibly. There is
a tendency at NUL for staff members (both teaching and non-teaching) to speak Sesotho (their native language) all the
time. Both the academic and non-academic staffs as well as the students seem to be intimidated by the English language
and therefore have developed an attitude towards the language. This attitude should be discouraged by making English
the official working language at NUL. This will give the students of NUL the opportunity to have a population with
whom they can regularly speak English (especially those ones who come from backgrounds where English is never
spoken), and put into practice what they have learned.
NUL students on their part should develop a positive attitude towards the English Language. They should be aware
of the fact that English, not Sesotho, will open many doors for them into the world at large and should therefore
embrace the language with determination and commitment. They should be equally active in developing successful
language learning strategies. NUL students should adopt learning strategies that involve the use of minimal teaching
resources and which can support their learning of English as a second or foreign language and at the same time serve as
a tool for reflective language learning. By so doing, they will as Dhillon and Wanjiru (2013) put it, “promote self-
motivation, autonomy and inventiveness amongst themselves and hence support their development as learners as well
as their proficiency as language users” (p. 23).
In addition to the above suggestions, the issue of the English language curriculum and syllabus at Lesotho high
schools should be taken seriously. It is important to note that education is not just about teaching and learning, but is
most often the best and essential means of laying the foundations for any economic, social or cultural development of a
nation vis-à-vis other nations. This is supported by Rassool and Edwards (2010: 279) who say that an education system
accordingly develops in accordance with not only the specific characteristics of its own country but also international
norms as reflected in the system of some other country. The English language syllabus in Lesotho high schools should
be developed according to a frame of reference that extends beyond the nation and the region taking into consideration
the knowledge and savoir-faire existing in the immediate environment.
The education system in Lesotho should not be based on an approach to the organization of school work and a rate of
learning centred on the teacher, who is regarded as the learners’ only interlocutor. The system should put in place
mechanisms that will encourage usage of the English both in and out of classroom situation, by organizing for instance
regular after class activities such as debates and others that will give the learners the opportunity to use English as often
as possible.
The Lesotho education system, like most others in Africa, is mostly centered on teaching toward passing an
examination. The teachers at high school therefore use teaching methods that lead students develop cramming and
memorising tactics. These tactics do not encourage students to think on their own. Rather, they rely on notes given by
the teachers. This should be discouraged at all cost. Creative thinking in classroom should be introduce right from high
schools so that by the time the students get to the university they are already independent thinkers who do not have to
rely strictly on the lecturer. Urging students to think helps them to implement a skill that will undoubtedly benefit them
even after their studies.
VI. CONCLUSION
This article has highlighted and discussed the challenges involved in teaching English as a second language at the
National University of Lesotho (NUL). The discussions are based on teachers and students perception of the teaching of
1162
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
English at NUL. The findings show the intricate and varied challenges for teaching English at NUL. The English
language foundation that NUL students come with from high school was found to be one of the main contributing
factors to the challenges faced by NUL lecturers in the teaching of English. It is observed that there is a conflicting and
un-enforced school language policy in Lesotho in general which leads students to seem to prefer using Sesotho (their
Mother Tongue) to English at school, and this adds to the complexity of the challenges faced by lecturers of English at
NUL.
Moreover, an examination-oriented educational system, like the one found in Lesotho leads to what Dhillon and
Wanjiru (2013) refer to as, “instructional pressure and literacy focused learning of English leaving little space for
creative and innovative communicative language learning opportunities”. At NUL, the situation is compounded by the
improper staff versus student ratio. Because of the high numbers, lecturers are not able to focus on the four basic skills
of English language – Listening, Reading, Speaking and Writing. These challenges may suggest that the teaching and
learning of English at NUL is languorous. However, the lecturers are making tremendous efforts in finding successful
strategies for the teaching of English at NUL. This includes the use of varied instructional approaches, the creation of a
convenient and suitable classroom environment and making the students to be psychologically contented and prepared
to engage in all the activities of language learning including seeking assistance from their lecturers even outside the
classroom. Lecturers of English at NUL are also encouraged to introduce creative thinking in their classroom. This
could be done through group projects where students can create concepts of their own all in English and present them to
their classmates, or simply by asking questions that drive them to think beyond their common opinions.
The paper has equally shown that classroom interaction goes a long way to help students in mastery what they are
being taught, as well as helping the teachers to assess the teaching/learning situation in their classes. Since interaction
carries more meanings in a classroom context, NUL lecturers of English should focus enough attention to it making sure
that they give the students enough opportunities to use the English language in classroom through interaction. The
classroom interaction will prepare the students for public speaking and give them enough practical knowledge of the
language.
REFERENCES
[1] Asfaha, Y. M., and Kroon, S. (2011). Multilingual education policy in practice: Classroom literacy instruction in different
scripts in Eritrea. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 41(2), 229-246.
[2] Baker, Colin; Prys Jones, Sylvia (1998). Encyclopedia of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Multilingual Matters Ltd: UK
[3] Clegg, J., and Afitska, O. (2011). Teaching and learning in two languages in African classrooms. Comparative Education, 47
(1), 61-77.
[4] Dalby, Andrew (2004) [1998]. Dictionary of Languages: The Definitive Reference to More Than 400 Languages. New York:
Columbia University Press.
[5] Deprez, Kas; Du Plessis, Theo; Teck, Lut (2001). Multilingualism, the Judiciary and Security Services: Belgium, Europe,
South Africa, Southern Africa. Van Schaik.
[6] Dhillon, J. K. and Wanjiru, J. (2013). Challenges and strategies for teachers and learners of English as a Second Language: the
case of an urban primary school in Kenya. International Journal of English Linguistics; Vol. 3, No. 2: 14 – 24.
[7] Hongmei Zhu (2013). Constructing EFL Classroom Interactional Knowledge in Teacher Education. International Journal of
English Linguistics; Vol. 3, No. 6: 119 - 127
[8] Hornberger, N. H., and Vaish, V. (2008). Multilingual language policy and school linguistic practice: Globalization and
English-language teaching in India, Singapore, and South Africa. Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education, 39 (3), 305-
320.
[9] Johansson, I. and Jonsson, B. (2006). Effects of Teaching in English at Swedish Universities. Proceedings of the EDU-COM
2006 International Conference. Engagement and Empowerment: New Opportunities for Growth in Higher Education, Edith
Cowan University, Perth Western Australia, 22-24 November 2006. Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ceducom/80 on 4th
September 2014 at 10am.
[10] Legère, Karsten; Fitchat, Sandra; Akindele, Femi Dele, eds. (2002). Talking freedom: Language and democratisation in the
SADC Region. Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan.
[11] Lewis, M. Paul (ed.), (2009). Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Sixteenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International.
Retrieved from http://www.ethnologue.com/16 on 7th September, 2014 at 3pm.
[12] Mazrui, A. M., and Mazrui, A. A. (1992). Language in a multicultural context: The African experience. Language and
Education, 6 (2-4), 83-98.
[13] Rassool, N., and Edwards, V. (2010). Multilingualism in African schools: Constraints and possibilities. Language and
Education, 24 (4), 277-81.
[14] Rosenberg, Scott; Weisfelder, Richard F.; Frisbie-Fulton, Michelle. (2005). Historical dictionary of Lesotho. Lanham,
Maryland: Scarecrow Press.
[15] The Constitution of Lesotho" (PDF). ACE Electoral Knowledge Network. (1993). Retrieved from
http://www.ecs.sc/pages/legislations/constitution.aspx on 8th August 2014 at 4pm.
[16] Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating the Classroom Discourse. Routledge: New York.
[17] Webb, Victor N., ed. (1995). Empowerment through language: a survey of the language situation in Lesotho and selected
papers presented at the Second International LiCCA Conference, the LiCCA (Lesotho) report. LiCCA Research and
Development Programme.
[18] Yang, X.-Y. (2003). The review of western researches on foreign language classroom interaction. Foreign Language Teaching,
1, 51-62.
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
1163
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
Beatrice Ekanjume-Ilongo was born in Cameroon in 1974 and did her tertiary education in the University of Yaounde 1
Cameroon where she obtained a PhD in Linguistics in 2006.
She is an Associate Professor of Linguistics in the Department of English and the Dean of the Faculty of Humanities at the
National University of Lesotho. She has previously worked in the universities of Yaounde 1 Cameroon and Burundi. Her research
interests include Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology, Sociolinguistics, African Linguistics, Error Analysis, Onomastics,
Communication and Pragmatics.
Prof. Ekanjume-Ilongo is a member of the West African Linguistic Society, Names Society of Southern Africa, AILA Africa ReN
(Applied Linguistics and Literacy in Africa and the Diaspora), Linguistic Association of SADC Universities, and Cameroon
Association of African Linguistics. She has published in several accredited journals in her areas of research interest, including a book
on Phonology and a forthcoming one on Phonetics.
1164
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND RESEARCH
© 2015 ACADEMY PUBLICATION
