Evaluating the Language-in-Education Policy of 1997: Advancing inclusivity and multilingual education

Abstract

This paper is a critical analysis of the Norms and Standards for Language Policy in Public Schools in terms of the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996. The evaluation focuses on its objectives, implementation, and impact on promoting inclusivity and linguistic diversity in education. The study was prompted by the persisting disparities in access to quality education based on linguistic backgrounds in post-apartheid South Africa. Using a conceptual framework based on theories of inclusive education, translanguaging pedagogy, and policy implementation, this study explores the policy's objectives, scope, and how it addresses equity and access for diverse language groups. Additionally, it assesses implementation strategies and evaluates the policy's strengths and weaknesses in promoting inclusive education and multilingualism. The article recommends establishing specific, measurable objectives and targets, formulating an action plan for consistent implementation, prioritising teacher training and support programs, and encouraging community involve-ment. By addressing these shortcomings, South Africa can advance inclusivity and multilingualism in its public schools, fostering an equitable and enriching learning environment for all learners.

Full text

Journal for Language Teaching 58(2) 2024, 27 pages
https://doi.org/10.56285/jltVol58iss2a6163
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
© Copyright belongs to the authors under the Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Evaluating the Language-in-Education Policy
of 1997: Advancing inclusivity and
multilingual education
Lebohang Victoria Mulaudzi
University of the Free State, South Africa
E-mail: munyailv@ufs.ac.za
ABSTRACT
This paper is a critical analysis of the
Norms and Standards for Language
Policy in Public Schools in terms of the
South African Schools Act 84 of 1996.
The evaluation focuses on its objectives,
implementation, and impact on promot-
ing inclusivity and linguistic diversity in
education. The study was prompted by
the persisting disparities in access to
quality education based on linguistic
backgrounds in post-apartheid South
Africa. Using a conceptual framework
based on theories of inclusive education,
translanguaging pedagogy, and policy
implementation, this study explores the
policy's objectives, scope, and how it
addresses equity and access for diverse
language groups.
Additionally, it assesses implementation
strategies and evaluates the policy's
strengths and weaknesses in promoting
inclusive education and multilingualism.
The article recommends establishing
specific, measurable objectives and
targets, formulating an action plan for
consistent implementation, prioritising
teacher training and support programs,
and encouraging community involve-
ment. By addressing these shortcomings,
South Africa can advance inclusivity and
multilingualism in its public schools,
fostering an equitable and enriching
learning environment for all learners.
Keywords: policy implementation; multilingual
education; equity; inclusive education;
diversity; translanguaging
CITATION
Mulaudzi, L. V. (2024). Evaluating the Language-in-Education Policy of 1997: Advancing
inclusivity and multilingual education. Journal for Language Teaching, 58(2), Article 6163.
https://doi.org/10.56285/jltVol58iss2a6163

Mulaudzi 2 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Introduction
South Africa has remarkable diversity, with over 20 indigenous spoken languages and
11 official languages (Chitapi, 2018; Simons & Fennig, 2017; The Constitution of the
Republic of South Africa, 1996 – hereafter Constitution). In addition, South African
Sign Language (SASL) was recognised as the twelfth official language of South Africa
in July 2023 (Constitution Eighteenth Amendment Act, 3 of 2023 [CEAA]). This
inclusion emphasises the country’s commitment to inclusivity and the recognition of
the rights of the Deaf community. Thus, South Africa will have 12 official languages,
pending the promulgation of the CEAA. Therefore, authors such as Khan (2016) and
Juvonen et al. (2019) argue that education should foster cohesion and build an inclusive
society (Khan, 2016; Juvonen et al., 2019).
In South Africa’s post-apartheid era, the Norms and Standards for Language Policy in
Public Schools – hereafter Norms and Standards – (Department of Education, 1997)
emerged during a significant historical period of societal transition as a crucial
document when South Africa sought to dismantle apartheid and address the linguistic
disparities inherent in the education system (Khan, 2016; Juvonen et al., 2019;
Wildsmith-Cromarty, & Balfour, 2019).
The Norms and Standards (Department of Education, 1997) are made up of two policies,
the
• Language in Education Policy (LiEP) in terms of the National Education Policy
Act 27 of 1996 (section IV)
• Norms and Standards Regarding Language Policy (NSRLP) in terms of the
South African Schools Act 84 of 1996 (section V).
The two policies differ in their objectives but must be studied concurrently as they
complement each other (Department of Education, 1997, section II). The Norms and
Standards aim to protect and promote individual language rights and communication in
education, facilitate national and international communication through bi- or
multilingualism, and address the neglect of historically disadvantaged languages in
school education through cost-efficient and effective mechanisms (Department of
Education, 1997, section V, A[1-3]). According to two Department of Basic Education
reports on the status of the language of learning and teaching (LoLT) in South African
public schools(2010; 2023), bi- or multilingualism “refers to the ability to communicate
effectively in two or more languages, with more or less the same degree of proficiency

Mulaudzi 3 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
in both languages. The two terms are often used interchangeably in the literature”
(Department of Basic Education, 2010, p.3; 2023, p. 8).
The South African Schools Act 84 of 1996 (SASA) and the Constitution of the Republic
of South Africa, 1996, provide the foundation for the language policy in schools
(Department of Basic Education, 2010). Apartheid policies marginalised certain
linguistic communities, leading to unequal access to quality education. Hence, when
entering the new constitutional democracy, education policies had to change. The
language policy had to change because according to section 6.1 of the Constitution
“[t]he official languages of the Republic are, Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, Siswati,
Tshivenda, Xitsonga, Afrikaans, South African Sign Language, English, isiNdebele,
isiXhosa and isiZulu”. The state must take measures to advance the use of, specifically
the historically marginalized languages, by promoting equitability of use and esteem.
In addition, the Constitution (1996, section 29.2) also states that “Everyone has the right
to receive education in the official language or languages of their choice in public
educational institutions where that education is reasonably practicable”, and the South
African School Act (SASA) (section 5.1) adds that “A public school must admit learners
and serve their educational requirements without unfairly discriminating in any way”.
SASA section 6.23 also states that “No form of racial discrimination may be practised
in implementing policy determined under this section”. This Act also declared SASL as
an official language for the purposes of learning and teaching in a public school. In
actuality, a lot of students might not have just one favourite language – rather, they
might have several. Thus, multilingual education is a reality in South African schools,
one that has been gradually addressed since 1994 (Department of Basic Education,
2023). As such, the language policy responded to historical injustices and represented
a transformative effort to embrace linguistic diversity and multilingualism and promote
equitable access to quality education for all language communities (Wildsmith-
Cromarty & Balfour, 2019).
Savaera (2023) attests that multilingual education aims to help students become
proficient in several languages by recognising and utilising linguistic diversity in
educational environments. It highlights the use of many languages, including native
tongues, in the educational process to improve language proficiency and comprehension
of academic material. Hence, this article examines the policy’s effectiveness in
achieving its objectives and advancing inclusivity and multilingual education in South
African public schools. Various studies have been conducted on the implementation
and impact of the Norms and Standards (Department of Education, 1997). Ikwuemesim
(2021) noted that foreign learners who could not cope with the school’s language were

Mulaudzi 4 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
withdrawn from schools. The study showed the importance of understanding
inclusivity, participation and the roles of teachers and learners in achieving and
implementing a workable language policy. Graven and Robertson (2020) argued that
allowing students to utilise their native language in addition to English aided their
mathematical sense-making. Their recommendation is supported by the evaluation of
data from an extensive development initiative investigating strategies to improve
primary mathematics instruction and learning quality. They called for a more persistent
and severe examination of multilingual approaches’ pedagogical and epistemological
usefulness in South African classrooms. Chitapi (2018) argued that public attitudes
against the extended use of African languages and the inadequate resourcing of
multilingual projects concerning teacher and materials development are constraints that
limit the implementation of the LiEP (Department of Education,1997, section IV). He
concluded that the solution lies in the completion of the LiEP, its integration into the
Department of Basic Education’s main programmes, and the overt promotion of African
languages within and beyond education.
None of the studies mentioned has focused on the current state of implementation and
the policy’s impact since its inception in 1997. In multilingual societies, issues
pertaining to the use of the language of learning and teaching (LOLT) in schools have
become extremely significant, particularly for parents, educators, and policymakers
(Department of Basic Education, 2010). Additionally, the emphasis on offering
multilingual education in schools by offering numerous monolingual classes may need
to be adjusted in light of the research, which demonstrates how more flexible language
use can very successfully enhance learning in multilingual (Department of Basic
Education, 2023). Hence, this study argues for a recent analysis of the overall umbrella
Norms and Standards policy (Department of Education, 1997).
The study uses a conceptual framework to explore the effectiveness of the policy
(Department of Education, 1997) in addressing emerging issues related to linguistic
diversity, inclusive education, and access to quality education in South Africa. The
conceptual framework used in the article combines theories of inclusive education,
linguistic diversity and policy implementation. While the conceptual framework draws
upon established theories, the specific application of these theories to the analysis of the
language policy in the article is an original contribution to the critical analysis. The
study aims to explore the policy’s effectiveness in promoting equitable access to quality
education for all language communities. Despite the policy’s aspirations, persistent
disparities in access to quality education based on linguistic backgrounds continue to

Mulaudzi 5 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
exist. There is a need to critically assess the policy’s implementation, identify
challenges, and explore opportunities for improvement.
Theoretical framing
The theories underpinning the study are the theories of inclusive education, linguistic
diversity, and policy implementation. Since the study uses assumptions from the three
theories, the study utilises a conceptual framework. The conceptual framework
emphasises the significance of embracing multiple languages in education and
recognises the value of mother tongue-based instruction in early grades. The major
developers of the mentioned theories, together with the assumption of each theory, are
discussed.
Inclusive pedagogy/education
Inclusive education has evolved through contributions from various researchers and
practitioners. According to UNICEF (n.d.) The best approach to ensure that each child
has an equal opportunity to attend school, study, and acquire the skills necessary for
success is through inclusive education. All students should attend the same schools and
classrooms to practice inclusive education. It entails actual educational possibilities for
historically marginalised groups, including minority language speakers and children
with disabilities. Diverse groups can flourish alongside one another in inclusive systems
because they recognise and value the distinct contributions that students from different
backgrounds make to the classroom. Notable pioneers in the field include Lev
Vygotsky, Jean Piaget, and Maria Montessori (Al-Shammari et al., 2019). The
Salamanca Statement also significantly promoted inclusive education globally
(UNESCO, 1994), and this paper only focuses on the inclusive theory of inclusive
education through the lens of the Salamanca Statement (1994).
The Salamanca Statement recognises that every child has a fundamental right to
education and must be allowed to acquire and maintain an appropriate level of learning.
Every child has unique features, interests, abilities, and learning requirements .
Education services should take these features and requirements into account, and special
education students must be able to attend mainstream schools (UNESCO, 1994,
3[VIII]). Schools with an inclusive mindset are the most effective in eliminating
discriminatory attitudes, building inviting communities, and accomplishing education
for all. Such schools deliver effective education to most children while increasing
efficiency and cost-effectiveness (UNESCO, 1994, 3.VIII). In the context of the critical
analysis of the language policy in South African public schools, the assumptions of the

Mulaudzi 6 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Salamanca Statement are relevant in evaluating the policy’s alignment with principles
of inclusive education, equitable access, and recognition of linguistic diversity. It
provides a valuable framework to assess the extent to which the policy promotes an
inclusive learning environment and supports the educational rights of all learners,
including those from diverse linguistic backgrounds.
Translanguaging
Linguists, sociolinguists, and education academics all contribute to the field of
linguistic diversity. Its growth cannot be attributed to a single person; however,
prominent academics such as Joshua Fishman, Jim Cummins, and Ofelia García have
substantially contributed to our understanding of linguistic diversity in education. As
such, this article focuses on the linguistic diversity theory by Ofelia García, known as
the translanguaging pedagogy. The term refers to the systematic and intentional
switching of input and output languages in bilingual education. García (2009)
broadened the concept of translanguaging to characterise the dynamic heteroglossic
integrated linguistic practices of multilingual people and to emphasise the legitimacy of
bilingual instruction that integrates rather than separates languages. García and
colleagues focused on the theoretical features of translanguaging and examined with
educators how translanguaging theory may be implemented in classroom contexts
(García, 2009; García, Flores & Woodley, 2012; García & Leiva, 2014; García & Wei,
2014; García & Lin, 2016; García & Klein, 2016; García, Johnson & Seltzer, 2017;
Vogel & García, 2017). A translanguaging pedagogy is formed when translanguaging
theory is the basis, and translanguaging practice is the goal in the teaching and learning
arena (Seals, 2021).
Translanguaging challenges traditional views of bilingualism and multilingualism,
emphasising language use as dynamic and fluid (García, 2014). According to García,
language is a fundamental aspect of identity, and people’s linguistic practices are deeply
tied to their sense of self and community (García, 2014). In the context of education,
translanguaging advocates for recognising and valuing students’ entire linguistic
repertoires rather than segregating languages and promoting monolingual instruction
(García & Wei, 2014; García & Lin, 2016). Furthermore, multilingualism is the norm,
and linguistic diversity is an asset that enriches societies (Seals et al., 2019).
Translanguaging encourages educators to create inclusive learning environments where
students can draw on all their language resources to communicate and make meaning,
ultimately leading to more effective and meaningful educational experiences (Nishanti,
2021).

Mulaudzi 7 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Translanguaging addresses the power dynamics and inequality that linguistic diversity
can bring. Dominant languages often enjoy higher status and resources, while minority
languages might be marginalised or excluded from educational opportunities (Garcia,
2014; Seals, 2021). This recognition calls for efforts to maintain and revitalise
languages, ensuring the survival and thriving of diverse languages and cultural
expressions (García & Wei, 2014; García & Lin, 2016). Translanguaging pedagogy
contributions have significantly influenced language education policies and practices,
encouraging the implementation of bilingual and multilingual approaches to teaching
and learning (García, 2009; Vogel & García, 2017; Seals, 2021). By acknowledging the
context-dependent nature of linguistic diversity, Translanguaging pedagogy prompts
educators and policymakers to adopt more nuanced and culturally sensitive approaches
to language education, empowering learners to embrace their linguistic identities and
foster a deeper appreciation for the diverse linguistic tapestry that shapes our societies
(García, 2009; Vogel & García, 2017; Seals, 2021). Analysing language policy can
provide insights into its conformity with inclusive and multilingual educational
principles by analysing these critical assumptions of translanguaging pedagogy theory.
Translanguaging pedagogy can be used as a tool to evaluate the policy’s ability to
produce a more inclusive, culturally responsive, and enriching learning environment for
all learners in South African public schools. While there may not be extensive studies
demonstrating translanguaging’s direct impact on improved language competencies in
target languages or LoLTs, existing research suggests that translanguaging has the
potential to enhance learner engagement, participation, and understanding. These
benefits are crucial for fostering an enriching learning environment (García, 2009;
Vogel & García, 2017; Seals, 2021). Additionally, the Department of Basic Education
2023 report refers to translanguaging, as the flexible use of language, which is seen as
an internal strategy by which speakers use all their linguistic resources to communicate.
Therefore “translanguaging as a teaching strategy is seen as proactive and planned”
(Department of Basic Education, 2023, p.8).
Policy implementation
Mthethwa (2012) defines policy implementation as the procedures, resources, and
connections that connect policies to program activity. Many scholars have developed
theories to demonstrate the essence of policy implementation and the factors that
contribute to success or failure, such as the various levels, processes, and stakeholders
involved in policy implementation (Thomas & Grindle, 1990; Calista, 1994; Matland,
1995; Alesch & Petak, 2001; Brinkerhoff & Crosby, 2002; Bressers, 2004; O’Toole,
2004). In addition, Kamwangamalu and Bryant (2012) specifically speak to LiEP and

Mulaudzi 8 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
highlight that the formulation and execution of policies and plans about language use in
education are intricate procedures that necessitate multiple decisions to be made for
them to be successful. Despite research pointing to the elements that produce favourable
results, governments frequently overlook these or find them too challenging to
implement, given their limited means. Inadequate preparation and learning outcomes in
language acquisition might result in resource waste.
This analysis focuses only on the policy implementation framework proposed by
Bhuyan et al. (2010), which consists of seven key dimensions that influence policy
implementation:
1. the policy, its formulation, and dissemination
2. social, political, and economic context
3. leadership for policy implementation
4. stakeholder involvement in policy implementation
5. implementation planning and resource mobilisation
6. operations and services; and
7. feedback on progress and results.
Firstly, the framework emphasises the importance of a clear policy with well-defined
objectives and effective communication with all stakeholders.
The second crucial dimension is understanding the broader social, political, and
economic context on which the policy impacts. Contextual factors can present
challenges and opportunities that must be considered during implementation.
The third dimension focuses on leadership, highlighting the critical role of effective
leadership in guiding and coordinating implementation efforts.
Engaging relevant stakeholders is the fourth dimension, recognising the value of their
involvement and support to increase the likelihood of successful policy implementation.
The fifth dimension focuses on comprehensive planning, resource allocation, and
mobilisation to support the implementation process effectively.
The sixth dimension addresses policy actions and service delivery to translate policy
intentions into tangible results.
Lastly, the framework by Bhuyan et al. (2010) underscores the importance of
continuous feedback, monitoring, and evaluation to assess progress and outcomes,

Mulaudzi 9 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
facilitating necessary adjustments for improved implementation. By considering these
dimensions, policymakers and implementers can navigate the complexities of policy
implementation and enhance the potential for successful policy outcomes.
In the education context, the above policy implementation framework proposed by
Bhuyan et al. (2010) offers valuable insights into the factors that influence the
successful implementation of language policies, such as the Norms and Standards
(Department of Education, 1997). By addressing these seven dimensions, South African
education policymakers can enhance the implementation of language policies, promote
inclusive education, and embrace the country’s linguistic diversity. By leveraging
effective leadership, stakeholder engagement, and resource allocation, the policy’s
transformative potential can be fully realised, ensuring equitable access to quality
education for all learners, regardless of their linguistic background.
The three chosen theories (inclusive pedagogy, translanguaging pedagogy, and policy
implementation framework) are suitable for this study as they provide a comprehensive
and holistic lens to evaluate the Norms and Standards. Inclusive pedagogy offers
insights into fostering an equitable and diverse learning environment while
translanguaging pedagogy sheds light on leveraging learners’ multilingualism for
enhanced learning. The policy implementation framework ensures a systematic
assessment of its effectiveness and identifies key dimensions influencing its successful
implementation. Together, these theories offer a robust analytical framework to assess
the policy’s impact on advancing inclusivity and multilingual education, facilitating
evidence-based recommendations for improvement.
Methodology
The transformative paradigm recognises the need for societal change and aims to
address social inequalities and promote inclusive practices (Yong et al., 2021). By
adopting a transformative paradigm, this study seeks to identify the limitations of the
Norms and Standards for Language Policy in Public Schools (Department of Education,
1997) and propose recommendations to enhance its impact on advancing inclusivity and
multilingual education. A qualitative approach is relevant as it allows for a detailed
exploration of the language policy’s implementation, identifies strengths and
weaknesses, and provides valuable insights into advancing inclusivity and multilingual
education in South African public schools. Using document analysis, the study can offer
a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the LiEP, drawing from primary
sources and official documents. This approach aligns with the qualitative nature of the

Mulaudzi 10 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
study, as it allows for a rich exploration and interpretation of the policy’s impact on
advancing inclusivity and multilingual education in South African public schools.
This study aims to evaluate the Norms and Standards (Department of Education, 1997),
focusing on its impact on advancing inclusivity and multilingual education. The specific
objectives of the study are to:
• Assess the policy’s objectives and aims in promoting linguistic diversity
and equitable access to quality education.
• Examine the scope and coverage of the policy and its implications for
diverse language communities.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of implementation strategies, including teacher
preparation and community involvement.
• Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the policy in achieving its intended
outcomes.
Data for this study were collected through an analysis of the Norms and Standards
document (Department of Education, 1997), official reports on its implementation, and
relevant academic literature. The document analysis examined the policy’s content,
including its stated objectives, strategies, and implementation guidelines. Additionally,
official reports on the policy’s implementation progress and academic literature on
language policy and inclusive education in South Africa were reviewed to provide
context and external perspectives. The data collected through document analysis were
subjected to thematic analysis. Themes were derived from the research questions and
guided by the conceptual framework, incorporating insights from inclusive pedagogy,
translanguaging pedagogy, and the policy implementation framework proposed by
Bhuyan et al. (2010). The analysis identified patterns, similarities, and disparities within
the policy document, official reports, and academic literature. The themes were used to
critically evaluate the policy’s effectiveness in advancing inclusivity and multilingual
education in South African public schools.
The study adhered to rigorous ethical standards. Notably, this research did not involve
human participants; therefore, issues related to informed consent, privacy, and
confidentiality did not arise. The analysis was conducted solely on public documents,
which are publicly accessible and free of confidential information. We maintained
transparency and integrity throughout our analysis, ensuring accurate and impartial
interpretations of the policy documents. The findings from the analysis were then used
to formulate recommendations to enhance the policy’s impact and promote more
equitable and enriching learning environments for all learners.

Mulaudzi 11 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Findings and discussions (policy analysis)
The analysis of the Norms and Standards (Department of Education, 1997) is presented
in this section. The critical analysis paper addresses the research objectives to convey
arguments effectively. Themes address the research questions, and suggestions are
made based on the findings and a critical policy assessment. The Norms and Standards
are made up of two policies: the Language in Education Policy (section IV) and the
Norms and Standards Regarding Language Policy (NSRLP) (section V). The two
policies differ in their objectives but must be studied concurrently as they complement
each other (Department of Education 1997, section II). As such, for this article, both
policies will be analysed as one coherent policy under the Norms and Standards.
Context and background
The Norms and Standards notice in terms of the South African Schools Act (Department
of Education, 1997) was introduced in the aftermath of apartheid. Since 1994, efforts to
address the realities of multilingual education in South African schools have been made
(Department of Basic Education, 2023), reflecting the need for an inclusive education
system that acknowledged the linguistic diversity of South Africa. Hence, one of the
paradigms it operates under, indicates that:
[I]n terms of the new Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the
government, and thus the Department of Education, recognises that our cultural
diversity is a valuable national asset and hence is tasked, amongst other things, to
promote multilingualism, the development of the official languages, and respect
of all languages used in the country, including South African Sign Language and
the languages referred to in the South African Constitution (Department of
Education, 1997, section IV A[1]).
It sought to dismantle language-based segregation and promote social cohesion through
multilingualism by calling for the school governing body to “stipulate how the school
will promote multilingualism through using more than one language of learning and
teaching, and/or by offering additional languages as fully-fledged subjects, and/or
applying special immersion or language maintenance programmes, or through other
means approved by the head of the provincial education department” (Department of
Education, 1997, section V, C[1]). However, Cele (2021) argues that the policy has
failed to effect and impact its transformation and social inclusion aspirations.

Mulaudzi 12 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Policy objectives and aims
The Norms and Standards policy (NSRLP) sets its objectives and aims in the
introduction The aim recognises that:
…diversity is a valuable asset, which the state is required to respect, the aim of
these norms and standards is the promotion, fulfilment and development of the
state’s overarching language goals in school education in compliance with the
Constitution, namely:
(1) The protection, promotion, fulfilment and extension of the individual’s
language rights and means of communication in education;
(2) the facilitation of national and international communication through
promotion of bi- or multilingualism through cost-efficient and effective
mechanisms; and
(3) to redress the neglect of the historically disadvantaged language in school
education (Department of Education, 1997, section V, A[1-3] ).
Additionally, the LiEP aims:
1. to promote full participation in society and the economy through equitable and
meaningful access to education; 2. to pursue the language policy most supportive
of general conceptual growth amongst learners, and hence to establish additive
multilingualism as an approach to language in education; 3. to promote and
develop all the official languages; 4. to support the teaching and learning of all
other languages required by learners or used by communities in South Africa,
including languages used for religious purposes, languages which are important
for international trade and communication, and South African Sign Language, as
well as Alternative and Augmentative Communication (Department of
Education, 1997, section .IV, C[1-4]).
It emphasises creating an inclusive education system accommodating learners from
diverse linguistic backgrounds. It also recognises the importance of preserving
linguistic heritage while promoting proficiency in English as the language of
communication (Department of Education, 1997, sections V, A[1-3], IV, C [1-4]).
The Department of Basic Education is tasked with recognising and valuing the linguistic
diversity within its student population. This involves creating policies that value this
diversity as a positive attribute rather than a challenge. The department must align
educational programs with the state’s language goals, protecting and promoting
language rights. It should protect each student’s right to receive education in their
language of choice, offering instruction in multiple languages and providing teacher

Mulaudzi 13 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
resources. Promoting bilingualism or multilingualism can enhance national and
international communication, and the department should address the historical neglect
of certain languages, particularly those of marginalised communities. This includes
developing curricula, training teachers, and promoting their use within schools.
Therefore, the Department of Basic Education ensures that all learners’ education is
equitable and inclusive of learners’ linguistic diversities, subsequently providing
learners with equal access to opportunities.
The policy aligns with the principles of inclusive education as argued by the Salamanca
Statement (1994) by recognising and accommodating linguistic diversity (UNESCO,
1994). Mohohlwane (2020) support the policy’s emphasis on inclusivity and
multilingualism as critical aspects of South African education. She agrees with
promoting learners’ mother tongue while gradually transitioning to English. The policy
mentions the importance of mother tongue-based bilingual education but lacks
comprehensive support for translanguaging pedagogy (Nishanti, 2020). Emphasising
translanguaging pedagogy could enhance learners’ engagement and understanding of
concepts across languages. Furthermore, the policy’s implementation strategies exhibit
gaps, particularly in teacher training and community involvement. A more
comprehensive approach to implementation, as suggested by Bhuyan et al. (2010),
would enhance the policy’s effectiveness.
Cele (2021) criticises the policy’s lack of specificity in achieving its objectives,
questioning the effectiveness of its implementation. Its lack of specificity and
challenges in implementation may hinder its full realisation of inclusive practices.
Kaschula (2004) and Kretzer & Kaschula (2021) attest that the policy has yet to be
implemented globally, and mother tongue languages are still underrepresented.
While the policy’s commitment to inclusivity and multilingualism is commendable, it
requires greater specificity and support for translanguaging pedagogy to fully capitalise
on learners’ linguistic resources. Comprehensive strategies, including teacher training
and community engagement, are essential for the policy’s successful realisation.
Continued evaluation and refinement are necessary to ensure that the policy aligns with
its objectives and positively impacts the South African education system.
Policy scope and coverage
The Language in Education Policy (LiEP) acknowledges all official languages, which
align with the South African Constitution, 1996 (Department of Education, 1997,
section IV(A[1]). It further states that “all language subjects shall receive equitable time

Mulaudzi 14 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
and resource allocation” (Department of Education, 1997, section. IV, D[3]).
Furthermore, the policy states that “[f]rom grade 3 (Std 1) onwards, all learners shall
offer their language of learning and teaching and at least one additional approved
language as subjects” (Department of Education, 1997, section IV D[2]). This means
that each learner should study in at least two languages, namely their home language
and a second language (Department of Education, 1997, section IV, D[2]). It recognises
the importance of maintaining the mother tongue language for identity and cultural
preservation. By recognising multiple official languages and promoting mother tongue-
based education, the policy aims to create an inclusive environment where learners can
develop a strong sense of identity and cultural pride. Exposure to multiple languages
can also foster cognitive benefits and enhance language proficiency.
Scholars generally support the policy’s recognition of linguistic diversity and the
importance of mother tongue education for learners’ cognitive and cultural development
(García & Lin, 2016; Nishanti, 2020). However, some argue that the policy’s focus on
majority languages might marginalise smaller language groups and hinder their
educational opportunities (Howie et al., 2017; Mohohlwane, 2020). The policy’s
recognition of multiple languages aligns with the principles of inclusive education, as
it acknowledges learners’ diverse linguistic backgrounds (UNESCO, 2009). However,
the focus on majority languages may need to be balanced to ensure equitable
representation.
The policy’s emphasis on mother tongue-based education is consistent with the
principles of translanguaging pedagogy, as it recognises the value of leveraging
learners’ linguistic repertoires for better learning outcomes (García & Wei, 2014;
García & Lin, 2016). However, the policy’s scope requires more explicit guidance on
effectively implementing multilingual practices (Rambukwella, 2021). To fully align
with the implementation theory, the policy should address the needs of smaller language
groups and provide adequate resources for implementing mother tongue-based
education (Mohohlwane, 2020). The policy’s acknowledgement of linguistic diversity
is a positive step towards inclusive education. To enhance its impact, the policy should
ensure equitable representation and resources for all language groups, allowing learners
to learn in their mother tongue while developing proficiency in other languages.
Policy implementation strategies
The Norms and Standards Regarding Language Policy (NSRLP) outlines various
strategies for implementation, including the promotion of mother tongue-based
bilingual education (Department of Education, 1997, section V, A[2]), language support

Mulaudzi 15 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
materials, and teacher development programs (Department of Education, 1997, section
V, C[1]); (Department of Education, 1997, section V, D[4]). The Norms and Standards
aim for the “facilitation of national and international communication through the
promotion of bi- or multilingualism through cost-efficient and effective mechanism”
(Department of Education, 1997, section V, A[2]). On the other hand, it requires that:
the governing body must stipulate how the school will promote multilingualism
through using more than one language of learning and teaching, and/or by
offering additional languages as fully-fledged subjects, and/or applying special
immersion or language maintenance programmes, or through other means
approved by the head of the provincial education department programs
(Department of Education, 1997, section V, C[1]).
Additionally,
[t]he provincial department must explore ways and means of sharing scarce
human resources. It must also explore ways and means of providing alternative
language maintenance programmes in schools and/or school districts that cannot
be provided with and/or offer additional languages of teaching in the learners’
home language(s). (Department of Education, 1997, section V, D[4]).
The implementation strategies are intended to create an enabling environment where
teachers can effectively use learners’ mother tongues to instruct and support their
language development. Teacher development programs are expected to equip educators
with the necessary skills to navigate multilingual classrooms successfully. Scholars
generally agree with the policy’s focus on mother tongue-based education and teacher
development (Nishanti, 2020; Mohohlwane, 2020). According to research, UNESCO
(2022) attests that teaching in the mother tongue is an essential aspect of inclusiveness
and quality learning, as well as improving learning outcomes and academic success.
Teaching in the mother tongue is critical, particularly in primary school, to prevent
knowledge gaps and accelerate learning and comprehension (UNESCO, 2022). Most
importantly, multilingual education based on the learner’s mother tongue allows all
students to participate in society (UNESCO, 2022). However, some argue that the
strategies lack specificity and may not adequately address the complexities of
multilingual classrooms.
Kaschula (2004) argues that although multilingualism is entrenched in the Constitution
(1996), the promise of a dynamic and linguistically diversified country appears to be
unfulfilled, and multilingualism implementation has been mainly unsuccessful.
Additionally, there is still a long way to go until all learners have the right to an

Mulaudzi 16 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
education in their mother tongue. Most pupils in most nations are taught in a language
different from their mother tongue, which limits their capacity to learn efficiently
(Nishanti, 2020; UNESCO, 2022).
The policy’s emphasis on teacher development aligns with inclusive education
principles, as it recognises the importance of well-prepared educators in meeting
learners’ diverse needs (UNESCO, 2009). However, explicit guidance on inclusive
teaching practices in multilingual settings may benefit the policy. The policy’s
promotion of mother tongue-based education is consistent with translanguaging
pedagogy, which advocates for the meaningful use of learners’ languages in the learning
process (García, 2014). However, further support for teachers in adopting
translanguaging pedagogy techniques could enhance its implementation.
The policy acknowledges the significance of teacher development, which is crucial for
effective implementation (Bhuyan et al., 2010). However, more comprehensive training
on translanguaging pedagogy would strengthen the policy’s alignment with
implementation theory. The policy’s focus on teacher development is vital for
successful implementation. To fully align with inclusive education and translanguaging
pedagogy, the policy should provide more explicit guidance on inclusive practices and
support teachers in effectively using learners’ languages to enhance learning.
Policy equity and access
The policy emphasises providing equal educational opportunities to all learners,
irrespective of their linguistic backgrounds (Department of Education, 1997, section IV,
C[1]). Norms and Standards indicate that the policy in language education aims to
“promote full participation in society and the economy through equitable and
meaningful access to education” (Department of Education, 1997, section IV, C[1]). By
promoting equitable access to education, the policy seeks to address historical
disparities and create a level playing field for all learners. It recognises the importance
of accommodating linguistic diversity to foster a supportive and inclusive learning
environment. Cele (2021) supports the policy’s emphasis on equity and access.
However, some argue that the policy’s implementation faces challenges, and learners
from marginalised language groups may still experience disparities in educational
opportunities (Kretzer & Kaschula, 2021). The policy’s focus on equitable access aligns
with inclusive education principles, which advocate removing barriers and providing
support to meet the diverse needs of all learners (UNESCO, 2021).

Mulaudzi 17 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
However, the policy’s implementation challenges must be addressed to achieve true
inclusivity. The policy’s recognition of linguistic diversity aligns with translanguaging
pedagogy, which values learners’ linguistic repertoires and advocates for meaningful
use in learning (García & Kleyn, 2016). The policy’s efforts to address equity and
access demonstrate alignment with the implementation theory (Bhuyan et al., 2010).
However, more targeted measures may be needed to bridge the gap between policy
intentions and outcomes. The policy’s commitment to equity and access is
commendable, but its effectiveness in addressing disparities must be closely monitored.
To fully align with inclusive education and Implementation theories, targeted
interventions and support for marginalised language groups are essential for achieving
accurate equity in education.
Policy language of learning and teaching
The policy (Department of Education, 1997) advocates using the learners’ home
language as the language of learning and teaching during the foundation phase (Grades
1 to 3) and gradually transitioning to English as the language of learning and teaching.
The document highlights that
(1) All learners shall offer at least one approved language as a subject in Grade 1 and
Grade 2.
(2) From Grade 3 (Std 1) onwards, all learners shall offer their language of learning and
teaching and at least one additional approved language as a subject.” (Department of
Education, 1997, section 1V, D[1-2]).
The policy recognises the value of the mother tongue in early learning and aims to create
a supportive learning environment by using a familiar language for instruction.
Gradually transitioning to English prepares learners for later stages of education and
enhances their proficiency in the dominant language. In order to support the bridging
of racial, linguistic, and regional divisions and to foster respect for other languages, the
LiEP aims to both ensure that students acquire an additional language of communication
and to encourage the use of their home languages in the classroom (2010). Nishanti
(2020) generally supports the policy’s emphasis on mother tongue-based education
during the foundation phase. They acknowledge the cognitive and academic advantages
of using the mother tongue for early instruction (UNESCO, 2022). However, Bayeni
and Bhengu (2018) caution that the policy’s implementation may be challenging
without sufficient resources and teacher training (Kangira, 2016; Bayeni & Bhengu,
2018). In real life, there is sometimes a discrepancy between the home languages of
teachers and students and the LoLT of the school. This is due to two factors: first, a

Mulaudzi 18 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
learner may attend a school where the language of instruction is not their native tongue.
This may occur as a result of the school's placement within the community; for parents,
this is an important factor in their decision on which school to send their kids. In
actuality, learner populations differ depending on the communities in which they are
situated; some communities are more diverse than others. Second, a growing number
of South African students and educators speak multiple languages while interacting in
metropolitan and peri-urban settings (Department of Basic Education, 2023).
The policy’s recognition of the mother tongue as the language of learning and teaching
during the foundation phase aligns with inclusive education principles, as it respects
learners’ linguistic diversity and promotes inclusive practices (UNESCO, 2009).
However, the policy could further strengthen its alignment by providing additional
support for teachers to implement translanguaging pedagogy effectively. The policy’s
promotion of using the mother tongue aligns with the translanguaging pedagogy, which
emphasises the value of learners’ multilingual resources in learning (García & Wei,
2014). The policy’s approach to using the mother tongue aligns with the implementation
theory’s emphasis on practical strategies for policy execution (Bhuyan et al., 2010).
However, successful implementation may require additional support for teachers in
adopting translanguaging pedagogy. The policy’s recognition of the mother tongue
during the foundation phase is a positive step towards inclusive education. However,
the policy’s effectiveness hinges on providing adequate resources and support to
teachers to implement translanguaging pedagogy successfully. This approach would
maximise learners’ linguistic resources and improve educational outcomes.
Policy teacher preparation and support
The policy acknowledges the importance of teacher preparation and development for
effective language instruction:
[t]he provincial department must explore ways and means of sharing scarce
human resources. It must also explore ways and means of providing alternative
language maintenance programmes in schools and or school districts which
cannot be provided with and or offer additional languages of teaching in the home
language(s) of learners (Department of Education, 1997, section V, D[4]).
Teacher preparation and support are critical in ensuring that educators can effectively
implement the policy’s language strategies and address the diverse linguistic needs of
their students. Well-prepared teachers are better equipped to create an inclusive and
supportive learning environment. Chisholm (2019) agrees with the policy’s recognition
of teacher preparation. However, Goldhaber (2019) expresses concerns about the

Mulaudzi 19 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
adequacy of the training provided and the need for ongoing support to address the
complexities of multilingual classrooms. The policy’s emphasis on teacher preparation
aligns with inclusive education principles, as it acknowledges the importance of well-
trained educators catering to learners’ diverse needs (UNESCO, 2009). The policy’s
recognition of the role of teachers in implementing language strategies aligns with
translanguaging pedagogy, which emphasises the centrality of educators in leveraging
learners’ linguistic repertoires (Vogel & García, 2017). The policy’s acknowledgement
of teacher preparation and support aligns with the implementation theory, which
emphasises the significance of equipping educators with the necessary skills for policy
execution (Bhuyan et al., 2010). Teacher preparation and ongoing support are crucial
for successful policy implementation. Adequate training and resources are needed to
effectively empower teachers to navigate multilingual classrooms. By investing in
teacher development, the policy can enhance the quality of education and foster an
inclusive learning environment that celebrates linguistic diversity.
Not all students are taught in their home language or even the language of their choice,
despite a policy that encourages multilingualism and Foundation Phase instruction in
all of South Africa's official languages (Department of Basic Education, 2023). The
policy assumes that LoLT and instructors' and students' home languages match;
however, this may not always be the case, and teachers may require assistance to
improve their instruction in multilingual settings. Therefore, difficulties that develop in
multilingual classrooms must be considered in teacher preparation programs and in-
service teacher education opportunities.
Policy parent and community involvement
The policy recognises the significance of involving parents and communities in
supporting learners’ language development. Parents are involved in these decisions
through the school governing board, and schools make LoLT selections based on the
LiEP (Department of Basic Education, 2023). The Norms and Standards (Department
of Education, 1997) argues that “[t]he parent exercises the minor learner’s language
rights on behalf of the minor learner. Learners who come of age, are hereafter referred
to as the learner, which concept will include also the parent in the case of minor
learners” (Department of Education, 1997, section V, B[1]). Furthermore,
[s]ubject to any law dealing with language in education and the Constitutional
rights of learners, in determining the language policy of the school, the governing
body must stipulate how the school will promote multilingualism through using
more than one language of learning and teaching, and/or by offering additional

Mulaudzi 20 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
languages as fully-fledged subjects, and/or applying special immersion or
language maintenance programmes, or through other means approved by the head
of the provincial education department (Department of Education, 1997, section
V, C[1]).
In addition, “In the case of a new school, the governing body of the school in
consultation with the relevant provincial authority determines the language policy of
the new school in accordance with the regulations promulgated in terms of section 6(1)
of the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996” (section V, D[2]). Further steps include:
(1) Any interested learner, or governing body that is dissatisfied with any decision
by the head of the provincial department of education, may appeal to the MEC
within a period of 60 days.
(2) Any interested learner, or governing body that is dissatisfied with any decision
by the MEC, may approach the Pan South African Language Board to give advice
on the constitutionality and/or legality of the decision taken, or may dispute the
MEC’S decision by referring the matter to the Arbitration Foundation of South
Africa (Department of Education, 1997, section V, E[1-2]).
Engaging parents and communities in education can enhance language learning and
cultural preservation. Parents and community members can contribute valuable
insights, creating a supportive and inclusive learning environment. Sanders and Sheldon
(2009) agree with the policy’s recognition of parent and community involvement. They
emphasise the importance of creating partnerships between schools and communities to
strengthen learners’ language skills and cultural connections (Sanders & Sheldon, 2009;
Đurišić & Bunijevac, 2017). The policy’s emphasis on involving parents and
communities aligns with inclusive education principles, which recognise the
significance of collaboration in fostering an inclusive education system (UNESCO,
2009).
The policy’s recognition of the role of parents and communities is consistent with
translanguaging pedagogy, which values learners’ linguistic and cultural resources in
the learning process (Wei & García, 2022). The policy’s acknowledgement of parent
and community involvement demonstrates alignment with implementation theory,
which emphasises the importance of community engagement in successful policy
implementation (Bhuyan et al., 2010). Parent and community involvement are
invaluable for creating a supportive learning environment. By actively engaging with
parents and communities, the policy can leverage their resources to enrich language
learning experiences and promote cultural preservation. However, in actuality, learner

Mulaudzi 21 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
populations differ depending on the communities in which they are situated because
some communities are more diverse than others (Department of Basic Education, 2023).
Policy assessment and evaluation
The policy mentions the need for ongoing assessment and evaluation of language
policies and practices. It notes that “[t]his Language-in-Education Policy Document
should be seen as part of a continuous process by which policy for language in education
is being developed as part of a national language plan encompassing all sectors of
society, including the deaf community” (Department of Education, 1997, section IV,
A). A robust assessment and evaluation framework are essential for determining the
policy’s effectiveness in achieving its objectives. The education system can make
informed decisions and refine the policy by monitoring outcomes and gathering data.
Griessel et al. (2019) support the policy’s emphasis on assessment and evaluation.
However, some highlight the need for a more comprehensive evaluation framework to
accurately capture the policy’s impact (Cele, 2021). The policy’s focus on assessment
and evaluation aligns with inclusive education principles, which emphasise evidence-
based decision-making and continuous improvement (UNESCO, 2009). The policy’s
recognition of the importance of data collection aligns with translanguaging pedagogy,
which advocates for research-based practices to inform language instruction (Liu et al.,
2020; García, 2014). The policy’s emphasis on assessment and evaluation is consistent
with the implementation theory, which highlights the significance of monitoring
outcomes for effective policy execution (Bhuyan et al., 2010).
On the other hand, when a policy is explored, the results will be incomplete and
unreliable due to the traditional constraints (temporal, human, and financial). The
functioning of the policy cycle will likewise be defective in this instance, and policies
will be unable to pursue the intended aims optimally (Ghazinoory & Aghaei, 2021). A
comprehensive assessment and evaluation framework are vital for refining the policy
continually. By leveraging data to inform decision-making, the policy can adapt to meet
the evolving needs of learners and ensure its alignment with its objectives and
theoretical principles.

Mulaudzi 22 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Conclusion
Through a transformative paradigm and qualitative document analysis, this study
critically examined the Norms and Standards for Language Policy in Public Schools in
South Africa (Department of Education, 1997). The analysis revealed its potential to
advance inclusivity and multilingualism in South African public schools, representing
a critical step toward these goals in the country's education system.
The policy’s objectives align with promoting inclusivity and a certain view of
multilingualism in education, but its lack of specificity and implementation challenges
hinders its full potential. The policy can be strengthened by embracing inclusive
education, translanguaging pedagogy, and implementation theories to promote
equitable access to education and celebrate linguistic diversity. Specific objectives and
indicators for practical assessment will maximise its impact.
Balancing the focus on majority and minor languages will ensure equitable
representation and support for all language groups. In the early grades (Grades R to 3),
it is policy for learners to be taught in their home language where possible. However,
from Grade 3 onwards, there is a significant shift towards English and, to a lesser extent,
Afrikaans as the primary language of instruction. The use of indigenous languages as
mediums of instruction beyond the foundation phase remains limited, although there
are ongoing efforts to promote multilingual education. Strengthening teacher training
in translanguaging pedagogy and inclusive practices will empower educators to
leverage learners’ linguistic resources effectively.
Additionally, based on the findings, greater community engagement is crucial for
cultural preservation and a supportive learning environment. To continually refine the
policy, a comprehensive evaluation framework is needed. Future research on
implementation challenges, academic achievement, and the experiences of marginalised
language groups, including the deaf and sign language users, will contribute to creating
a more inclusive and transformative education system in South Africa. By embracing
these recommendations and future studies, the policy can play a pivotal role in fostering
an education system that celebrates linguistic diversity and empowers all learners.

Mulaudzi 23 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
References
Alesch, D. J., & Petak, W. J. (2001). Overcoming obstacles to implementing
earthquake hazard mitigation policies: Stage 1 report. Buffalo, NY:
Multidisciplinary Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research, State
University of New York.
Al-Shammari, Z., Faulkner, P. E., & Forlin, C. (2019). Theories-based inclusive
education practices. Education Quarterly Reviews 2(2), 408-414.
https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-600823
Bayeni, S. D., & Bhengu, T. T. (2018). Complexities and contradictions in policy
implementation: Lived experiences of three school principals in South Africa.
Sage Open, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018792037
Bhuyan, A., Jorgensen, A. & Sharma, S. (2010). Taking the pulse of policy: The
policy implementation assessment tool. Washington, DC: Futures Group,
Health Policy Initiative, Task Order 1.
Bressers, H. (2004). Implementing sustainable development: How to know what
works, where, when and how. In W. M. Lafferty (Ed.), Governance for
sustainable development: The challenge of adapting form to function (pp.284-
318). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Brinkerhoff, D. & Crosby, B. (2002). Managing policy reform: Concepts and tools for
decision-makers in developing and transitioning countries. Bloomfield, CT:
Kumarian Press.
Calista, D. (1994). Policy implementation. In S. Nagel (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of policy
studies (pp.117-155). New York: Marcel Dekker.
Cele, N. (2021). Understanding language policy as a tool for access and social
inclusion in South African Higher Education: A critical policy analysis
perspective. South African Journal of Higher Education, 35(6), 25–46.
https://doi.org/10.20853/35-6-3730
Chisholm, L. (2019). Dismantling and reconfiguring the system: 1994–2018. In L.
Chrisholm, L. (Ed.), Teacher preparation in South Africa (pp. 153–165).
(Emerald studies in teacher preparation in national and global contexts.)
Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78743-694-720191017
Chitapi, I. T. (2018). Analysis of the constraints to the realisation of the aims of the
Language-in-education Policy of South Africa [Doctoral dissertation,
University of the Witwatersrand].

Mulaudzi 24 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
Department of Basic Education, South Africa (2010). The status of the language of
learning and teaching (LOLT) in South African Public Schools: A quantitative
overview. https://bit.ly/4h6yAo1
Department of Basic Education, South Africa (2023). The status of the language of
learning and teaching (LoLT) in schools: A quantitative overview: 2008-2016.
https://www.education.gov.za/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/The%20Status%20of%2
0LoLT%20In%20Schools%202023.pdf
Department of Education, South Africa. (1997). Norms and Standards for Language
Policy in Public Schools in terms of the South African Schools Act 84 of 1996
(Notice 1701). Government Gazette 18546, 19 December 1997.
Đurišić, M., & Bunijevac, M. (2017). Parental involvement as a [sic] important factor
for successful education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal 7(3),
137–153
García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective.
Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
García, O. (2014). Countering the dual: Transglossia, dynamic bilingualism and
translanguag-ing in education. In: R. Rubdy & L. Alsagoff, (Eds.), The global-
local interface and hybridity: Exploring language and identity (pp.100–118).
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
García, O., & Kleyn, T. (Eds.). (2016). Translanguaging with multilingual students.
New York: Routledge.
García, O., & Leiva, C. (2014). Theorising and enacting translanguaging for social
justice. In A. Blackledge & A. Creese (Eds.), Heteroglossia as practice and
pedagogy (pp. 199–216). New York: Springer.
García, O., & Lin, A. (2016). Translanguaging and bilingual education. In O. García,
A. Lin, & S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education (pp. 117–130).
(Encyclopedia of Language and Education 5.) New York: Springer.
García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education.
London: Palgrave Macmillan.
García, O., Flores, N., & Woodley, H. (2012). Transgressing monolingualism and
bilingual dualities: Translanguaging pedagogies. In Y. Androula (Ed.),

Mulaudzi 25 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Rethinking education, Vol. 5: Harnessing linguistic variation to improve
education. Bern: Peter Lang.
García, O., Johnson, S., & Seltzer, K. (2017). The translanguaging classroom:
Leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Philadelphia: Caslon.
Ghazinoory, S., & Aghaei, P. (2021). Differences between policy assessment & policy
evaluation: A case study on supportive policies for knowledge-based firms.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 169, 120801.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120801
Goldhaber, D. (2019). Evidence-based teacher preparation: Policy context and what
we know. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(2), 90–101.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118800712
Graven, M. & Robertson, S. A. (2020). A mathematics teacher’s response to a
dilemma: ‘I’m supposed to teach them in English but they don’t understand’.
South African Journal of Childhood Education, 10(1), pp.1–11.
https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v10i1.800
Griessel, A., Dumisa, S., Ishmail, Z., Adams, C., Waller, C., Robertsen, J., ... & Wilson,
G. (2019). Evaluation – Evaluating the national evaluation system in South
Africa: What has been achieved in the first 5 years? African Evaluation Journal
7(1), 1–11.
Howie, S., Combrinck, C., Roux, K., Tshele, M., Mokoena, G., & Palane, N. M. (2017).
PIRLS Literacy 2016: Progress in international reading literacy study 2016:
South African children’s reading literacy achievement. Pretoria: Centre for
Evaluation and Assessment.
Ikwuemesim, L. I. (2021). Educators’ experiences of the implementation of language
policy affecting foreign nationals [Doctoral thesis, University of Pretoria].
Juvonen, J., Lessard, L. M., Rastogi, R., Schacter, H. L., & Smith, D. S. (2019).
Promoting social inclusion in educational settings: Challenges and opportunities.
Educational Psychologist 54(4), 250–270.
Kamwangamalu, K., & Bryant, P. (2012). Language planning in primary schools in
Asia. R. B. Baldauf, & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.). New York: Routledge.
Kangira, J. (2016). Challenges of the implementation of language policies in southern
Africa: what is the way forward? Inkanyiso, 8(2), 156–161.

Mulaudzi 26 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Kaschula, R. H. (2004). South Africa’s National Language Policy revisited: the
challenge of implementation. Alternation 11(2), 10–25.
Khan, Z. N. (2016). Role of education in building social cohesion.Online Submission
4(2), 23–26.
Kretzer, M. M., & Kaschula, R. H. (2021). Language policy and linguistic landscapes
at schools in South Africa. International Journal of Multilingualism, 18(1), 105–
127.
Liu, J. E., Lo, Y. Y., & Lin, A. M. (2020. Translanguaging pedagogy in teaching English
for academic purposes: Researcher-teacher collaboration as a professional
development model. System 92, 102276.
Matland, R. (1995). Synthesising the implementation literature: The ambiguity-conflict
model of policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory I(2), 145–74.
Mohohlwane, N. (2020). Mother-tongue instruction or straight-for-English? The
primary education policy dilemma. RESEP working paper.
Mthethwa, R. M. (2012). Critical dimensions for policy implementation. African
Journal of Public Affairs, 5(2), 37–47.
Nishanthi, R. (2020). Understanding of the importance of mother tongue learning.
International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 5(1),
77–80.
O’Toole, Jr. L. J. (2004). The theory-practice issue in policy implementation research.
Public Administration 82(2), 309–329
Otheguy, R., García, O. & Reid, W. (2015). Clarifying translanguaging and
deconstructing named languages: A perspective from linguistics. Applied
Linguistics Review 6(3), 281–307.
Rambukwella, H. (2021). The politics of language scholarship: There are no truly global
concerns. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2021 (267–268),
253–257.
Saraeva, N., Saraev, A. P., & Zimina, M. M. (2023). Digitalisation in the field of
polylingual education. In 3rd International Conference on Technology
Enhanced Learning in Higher Education (TELE), 14-16 June (pp. 266–269).
IEEE.

Mulaudzi 27 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
Sanders, M. G. & Sheldon, S. B. (2009). Principals matter: A guide to school, family,
and community partnerships. Corwin: A SAGE Company.
Seals, C. A. (2021). Benefits of translanguaging pedagogy and practice. Scottish
Languages Review 36, 1–8.
Seals, C. A., Pine, R., Ash, M., Olsen-Reeder, V. I., & Wallace, C. (2019). The use of
translanguaging to bridge sociocultural knowledge in a puna reo. In: C. A. Seals
& V. I. Olsen-Reeder, (Eds.), Embracing multilingualism across educational
contexts (pp.39–68). Wellington: Victoria University Press.
Simons, G. F., & Fennig, C. D. (Eds.). (2017). Ethnologue: Languages of the world
(20th ed.). http://www.ethnologue.com
South African Schools Act 84 of 1996. Government Gazette 17579.
Thomas, J. W. & Grindle, M. S. (1990). After the decision: Implementing policy reform
in developing countries. World Development 18(8), 1,163–1,181.
UNESCO. (1994, 7–10 June) The Salamanca statement and framework for action on
special needs education: Adopted by the World Conference on Special Needs
Education; Access and Quality. Salamanca, Spain. https://www.european-
agency.org/sites/default/files/salamanca-statement-and-framework.pdf
UNICEF. (n.d.). Inclusive education: Every child has the right to quality education
and learning. Retrieved October 20, 2024, from
https://www.unicef.org/education/inclusive-education
Vogel, S., & García, O. (2017). Translanguaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of
Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.181
Wei, L., & García, O. (2022). Not a first language but one repertoire: Translanguaging
as a decolonising project. RELC Journal 53(2), 313–324.
Wildsmith-Cromarty, R., & Balfour, R. J. (2019). Language learning and teaching in
South African primary schools. Language Teaching 52(3), 296–317.

Mulaudzi 28 of 28
Journal for Language Teaching | Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi | Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig
ISSN: 0259-9570 | eISSN: 2958-9320
https://www.journals.ac.za/jlt
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Lebohang Victoria Mulaudzi
University of the Free State, South Africa
Email: munyailv@ufs.ac.za
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7513-4482
Lebohang Mulaudzi is a dedicated and motivated research officer with a strong
academic background specialising in policy analysis, governance, and law. She is a
Ph.D. candidate and holds a master’s in education focusing on the constitutional
evaluation of educational programmes. She is proficient in research methodologies,
data analysis, and scholarly communication.