DESCRIPTORS:  Language of instruction, quality learning, rights in education, Africa, curriculum reform, language policies.
SYNOPSIS: This article will explore the policies and practices of language choice in education in Africa and will give special attention to The United Republic of Tanzania which has a history of debates about language politics and the choice of language in education. Tanzania made an early choice to use Kiswahili as the language of instruction (LoI) in primary grades, but that policy has been contested for many years, partly due to pressure from bilateral donors. Zanzibar which is part of the United Republic of Tanzania is now retreating  from its Kiswahili LoI policy in primary grades 5 and 6 in Mathematics and Science subjects. This paper will analyze the debates on LoI and their consequences for quality learning, cultural identity and rights in education.

Introduction

In this paper I will review the debates on the choice of Language of Instruction (LoI) in formerly colonized countries, giving special attention to the United Republic of Tanzania. I will explore the relationship of LoI to local debates on quality learning, cultural identity, as well as the influence of global actors and development discourses on LoI choices. A particular attention is given to:

1. The strong evidence for superior learning when the medium of teaching and learning is a local language;
2. The implications of these LoI policies for quality education, cultural identity and rights in education.

The paper is based on empirical research in Tanzania made in 2007 to 2012. My focus in this paper will be on the recent changes in LoI in Zanzibar2. In 2010, Zanzibar began the implementation of a policy that will change important aspects of the curriculum in primary and secondary education, which among other changes will replace the current LoI, Kiswahili3 with English in the subjects of Mathematics and Science from Grade 5. Tanzania made an early choice to use Kiswahili as the LoI in primary grades, but that policy has been contested for many years, partly due to pressure from global agents such as the World Bank and other international institutions such as IMF, British Council and donors mainly from English speaking countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States. In the United Republic of Tanzania, I have interviewed government officers, academicians, policymakers, NGOs’ staff and journalists to elicit their understanding of the aims of language and educational policies. I have also observed teaching and learning in classrooms with a focus on how the LoI affects the quality of both.

Background on the debates of language instruction in Tanzania

Before the colonization of Africa, the usual practice was that each social group educated its children in its own language. Throughout the colonial period (1885-1962), education was formalized and the use of the colonial language as a LoI was promoted by both colonial administrations and Christian missionaries (Kimizi, 2007, p. 1). In East Africa, a movement to promote Kiswahili began in the 1930s. Between 1930 and 1964 an Inter-territorial Language Committee promoted the standardization and development of Kiswahili in Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda. A few years after Tanzanian independence, “In 1967 Kiswahili became the medium of instruction throughout the primary school system in Tanzania” (Brock-Utne, 2008, p. 104).

Today, Kiswahili is the principal means of communication among different ethnic groups in Tanzania and in the government. In spite of several research projects and evaluations of quality learning in Tanzania (Vuzo, 2007; Brock-Utne, 2008; Qorro 2009; Babaci-Wilhite, 2010) all of which have recommended continuing Kiswahili through secondary education, a recent decision by the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT) orders a switch from Kiswahili to English as a LoI for Mathematics and Science studies from Grade 5 in primary schools in Zanzibar which will start in 2014. The background for the new policy was that the educational program had achieved a number of successes but was unable to resolve such problems as quality education, pre-primary childhood education and literacy. To what extent is valuation of local contexts and cultures dependent on learning in a local language?

I address this question in the next section, drawing on research based on interviews with teachers, parents, students, governmental officials, NGOs and academics in Tanzania, as well as on my own classroom observations and a review of official documents. In Zanzibar two schools were selected in an urban area (Stone Town) and two in a rural area (one in the North and one in the South). The studies involved Grade 1 teachers in 2010, Grade 2 teachers in 2011 and Grade 3 teachers in 2012. A total of 49 teachers were selected for in-depth interviews. Interviews were set up with each of the school’s headmasters and with a sample of four teachers from each school who were teachers of Kiswahili, English, Mathematics and Science the first year. The headmasters organized group interviews consisting of six teachers in each group. The headmasters of each school were also interviewed each year, and the interviews became more fluid each time they were conducted. Visits to Ministries were essential to get a holistic overview of the education sector in Zanzibar. Government officials and academics were also interviewed. Lecturers and researchers were interviewed at the State University of Zanzibar (SUZA), chosen purposively according to their fields. Most of these interviews were informal and conversational, but they provided very valuable information. Four teacher trainers were interviewed at the Training of Trainers College in Zanzibar in order to explore their involvement with the new curriculum. The findings take up issues related to the preparations for the implementation, the capacity for teachers to create a quality learning environment and how the new curriculum will affect equal access and quality education.

For observations on language use and proficiency in the classroom, I gave particular attention to which language was used in various classroom situations and how this affected student interest, participation and comprehension. Among other important findings, the observation revealed that the teachers were heavily relying on the curriculum guidebook, often reading from it verbatim in order to ensure that they taught according to the new curriculum. The times for observations were synchronized according to the Grades taught (i.e 1, 2, 3) as well as between the different schools, which had different teaching times, some conducted in the morning and others as afternoon sessions. The observation enabled me to understand more clearly that the language of interaction was not English. In most situations, teachers refused to answer my questions in English. They clearly preferred to express themselves in Kiswahili, and this included the teachers of English.

My research was also based on literature review such as the new policy entitled “Zanzibar basic education of improvement project” (ZABEP), the 1996 to 2006 Zanzibar Education Master Plan (ZEMAP) Midterm Review (2006), the Zanzibar Education Sector Review (2003) at the Ministry of Education (MoE), Culture and Sports (MECS), which in turn initiated several follow-up studies.

Theories on Quality Learning

In order to address claims about the importance of English and other global languages in education, it is important to look at the ways globalizing forces (political and economic) manifest themselves in particular cultural settings. Freire’s (1970) theory on formal versus informal learning and the role of schooling in education is important in this context. He views learning as a critical process consisting of reflection, unlearning conventional truths, and relearning, a process in which the valuation of local knowledge is important. This point is also echoed in Chamber’s (1997) theory on “Whose knowledge counts?” as well as Sleeter’s (2001) related work on changing definitions and interpretations of "knowledge" belief and culture, and their implications for pedagogy. Bishop & Glynn (1999) argue along the same lines that culture and the range of socially constituted traditions for sense-making are central to learning. Since culture, sense making and language are intimately related, there are strong arguments for using a local language in learning. Many educational practitioners continue to ignore culture as a central ingredient in education. Bishop & Glynn’s (1999, p. 148) model implies “that it is essential that communities acknowledge their own diversity as they reflect on and develop their knowledge-of-practice”. The reasons for this have to do with misplaced associations of development with modernization, where emulation of Western development and Western educational systems are regarded as the way forward for Africa. As Mushi (2011) argues, there is a new demand that the educational policy tends to embrace more of the traditional values (2011, p. 5) but the “curriculum developers find it difficult to design flexible inclusive curriculum, responsive to the multivariable economic and cultural ventures” due to the absence of formally trained experts (ibid, p. 6) in curriculum development appropriate. Furthermore, Mushi (2011, p. 7) notes that “the reform in classical education depreciated local languages and culture, while excluding the minority local children from education.” It is time to recognize the wealth of African knowledge and to promote its languages in education. This would make a significant contribution to African development in general and will benefit the majority of Africans. 

Language learning has a chronological sequence according to Skutnabb-Kangas & Phillipson (1995, p. 10) “the mother tongue, the first language, the second language, a second variety,  and a foreign language.” Many studies show that one’s mother tongue is an education in itself and brings quality learning. The language carries with it a way of thinking, a way of doing and a way of feeling that cannot be obtained in another language. “Beyond pedagogic and psychological reasons…language is inextricably linked to identity, ideology and power” (Makalela, 2005, p. 163). Whichever context a child is in, s/he can hardly achieve quality learning when there are identity problems. Identity is strongly connected to parent’s attitudes, to the language spoken at home and to cultural understanding. If this is ignored, children can become drop-outs or “outsiders” in the society, and on top of that, the society will blame them as being responsible for their own difficulties. Moreover, Kosonen (2010) argues that improved quality is substantiated in the better learning results in all school subjects, including the dominant national/official language. He states further more that improved quality also reduces repetition and dropout. 

To summarize, important theoretical considerations are often ignored on debates about LoI: one can question what happened to the beginning of the realistic revolutionary approach to the curriculum reform that the revolutionary government of Zanzibar could adopt in order to improve the quality learning in its education reform. “Designing contextualized competence based curriculum at the same time maintaining a harmony to the common areas of curriculum” (Mushi, p. 13) can be a reality if building teachers’ capacity is effectively made through a language they master and that the students master best. Teachers should be included in the whole process of reform which was not the case in Zanzibar and as Mushi (2011, p. 17) argues, teachers in Tanzania were “the most embittered as they thought they were excluded from the whole process of reform.”  This process can be easily achieved through workshops or seminars and conferences. I agree with Mushi (ibid, p. 18) when he notes that “one of the roles of a curriculum is to translate the relevant national policies into classroom teaching and learning” which has not been the case in Zanzibar.

Cultural Identity and Quality Education

Kiswahili was chosen in Tanzania as the national language to unite the linguistically diverse groups. This choice has contributed to the formation of a national identity incorporating these languages. There is evidence that having one common language helps in bridging the gap among people from different ethnic groups (David, 2007).

The use of a local language in the educational system also contributes to self-respect and to pride in local culture. By reinforcing the importance of local languages, one reinforces the interest in local knowledge and culture. Ideally, one would choose a non-dominant local LoI, but in cases in which this is expensive and practically difficult to implement, a local language such as Kiswahili, with local roots and widely used in public spaces is a good second choice. The policy of switching from Kiswahili to English midway through the schooling process, gives the impression that Kiswahili is inferior to English and that the local language is somehow inadequate in engaging with complex concepts. This reinforces the sense of inferiority of local culture and at the same time is disadvantageous for children of the lowest socio-economic strata who have had little exposure to English at home. I agree with Brock-Utne (2006, p. 141) who wrote, “What does it mean for the development of self-respect and identity that the language one normally communicates in does not seem to be deemed fit for a language of instruction in school?” Language is part of one’s identity and part of  one’s culture and should be a right to use in order to develop oneself through schooling.

Semali & Metha (2012, p. 6) argue that “rethink science education in Tanzania…requires knowledge translation where learners connect what is being learned to make sense of the world around them…through continuous exposure to real-life problems.” These examples conclude that applying indigenous knowledge to promote the teaching and learning of science is important in an indigenous language. The teacher describing the examples above did not know a single word of English. An important finding from interviews with teachers was that they were deficient in English skills. Even English teachers (i.e. teachers of the English language) had difficulties communicating in English. Many teachers felt that teaching and learning in English was an overwhelming challenge. All of the Mathematics and Science teachers interviewed disagreed with the curricular change requiring Mathematics and Science to be taught in English. They believe that the principles of Mathematics can be better explained with reference to local context. Teacher involvement has been underestimated in Africa and this is part of the reason behind a neglect of the problem of teacher competence in English (Qorro, 2009). I have pointed out that this is a major problem in Zanzibar. A number of studies (Lwaitama & Rubagumya, 1990) have analyzed the causes of poor quality learning and they all highlighted the lack of qualified teachers (especially in rural areas), inadequate planning of headteachers and teachers, large classes, as well as lack of material and absenteeism of teachers and headteachers (Babaci-Wilhite, 2012). An important finding from the interviews with teachers is that the teacher preparation for the transition to English as a LoI is poor. The second year teachers drew attention to the challenges of having only a teacher guidebook and were impatiently awaiting the books that they had not received at the start of the third year. A switch of LoI to English in 2014 will require thorough preparation. A group interview of English teachers revealed other challenges relating to more detailed English subject content that the teachers will find more difficult to teach as they are not competent in the language.

Education Policies on Language Instruction

In Tanzania, the National Kiswahili Council, in Kiswahili Bakita (Baraza la Kiswahili la Taifa) was founded in 1967 by a government act. It was given a budget and a staff with the mandate to develop Kiswahili and make sure the language is used properly in the media. However, the promotion of Kiswahili had begun much earlier, in the early 1930s. It had been given the status of the official language for the inter-territorial East African Language Committee in Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda. After independence, the work of promoting the language was  continued at the Institute of Kiswahili Research (IKR-TUKI) at the University of Dar es Salaam. In the 1980s, the government gave consideration to implementing Kiswahili as a loI, but in the end did not follow through and do it at all levels. The arguments were that Kiswahili was not ready to be a LoI because of a lack of books and terminology. The Chief Academic Officer at the National Kiswahili Council told me in November 5th, 2008, that “In the 1980s those arguments were ok, but now they are using the same argument even if everything is ready”. Since 1980s both book publishers and the National Kiswahili Council have engaged in the development of scientific terminology. She concluded, “We have enough dictionaries now, and we try to convince the government.” This raises the question of why the country would not use its language, Kiswahili, when it has National Kiswahili Councils (in Dar es Salaam and in Zanzibar) that has developed all the necessary terminology.

Parents are choosing English schools even if neither they nor their children understand English. Most parents do not understand the implications for their children of learning in a language that is not their own. One of the important findings from my research  is that parental decisions between public versus private schools and between Kiswahili and English are made on the basis of imperfect information about the learning implications of these choices. It is essential that the government provide better information on the role of the language of instruction in the learning process and on the advantages of Kiswahili as a LoI. When confronted with this, government officials responded that it should be the parents’ responsibility to seek out this information, and that the government should respect parental choices since Tanzania is a democracy. However, based on my results, the problem is that the parental misunderstanding about language and learning is based on a myth. Parents believe that having English as the LoI will improve student’s learning abilities and their opportunities in life. The myth has to be deflated in order for parents to make informed choices.

I found resistance to accepting these findings on language and learning in the MoE. The resistance is remarkable because of the consensus both within Tanzanian academia and abroad that the choice of a local LoI is important for good learning. In my research in Tanzania, I found that this policy is partially based on a misunderstanding among both government agencies and parents; the belief that using English as a LoI is the best way to improve English skills. Mushi (2011. P. 9) confirms that “Tanzania experienced the influence of economic superpowers (The World Bank) in education” in line with Mulokozi who does research at the Institute of Kiswahili at the UDSM during an interview, argues that:

There is too much meddling in our educational and economic affairs by organizations such as the World Bank (WB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the UK institutions, such as the British Council. They give some financial assistance with conditionality, including demands that the English language must be retained and used in education and other spheres. The WB and IMF often advise our countries in East Africa that it is not cost effective to use Kiswahili, that it is cheaper to use English (October, 2008).

In order to examine whether these changes in the new curriculum of Zanzibar will truly fulfill the intentions of the Human Rights perspective, and advance the quality of teaching and learning, Geo-JaJa & Azaiki (2010) argue for an alternative comprehensive approach that refers to a variant of Human Rights in development, directing strategies to the prevailing social, economic and political positions on education that exist in localities. Furthermore, they argue that this alternative comprehensive approach will draw from the capability approach in combining different delivery mixes and methodologies which ensures agency and well-being among the poor and in local institutions that creates capabilities to improve livelihood functions. Language as part of culture should be part of what Skutnabb-Kangas (2000) calls language as a human right in the education sector. Human rights are defined as entitlements that belong to all human beings regardless of race, ethnicity, or socio-economic class (Geo-JaJa & Yang, 2003; Nussbaum, 1998, p. 273). All humans, therefore, are rights holders, and it is someone’s duty to provide these rights. “Human rights in education” is a powerful notion as it is intimately connected to the social, occupational, political, cultural, religious and artistic life of the people (Babaci-Wilhite and Geo-JaJa, 2011). According to Samoff (2007, p. 60), “effective education reform requires agendas and initiatives with strong local roots.” In other words, indigenous knowledge should be included in the curriculum (Odora, 2002; Lwaitama, 2004; Semali, 2009; Breidlid, 2009; Geo-JaJa, 2013), and indigenous language is critical to the preservation and development of indigenous knowledge. Africa will not achieve human rights in education until and unless it acknowledges that local languages, identity and culture are to be respected and fulfilled in local curriculum.

Conclusions

Language plays a critical role in cognitive learning and in the development of logic, reason, critical thinking, and new knowledge (Bostad, 2012; Babaci-Wilhite, 2012). This curriculum reform in Zanzibar is ill founded and needs to be reassessed. The government should reconsider its decision to institute English as the LoI in Grade 5 and 6 and institute Kiswahili in secondary schools. As I have argued, this would help students to develop their learning and problem-solving skills, which together contribute to the development of critical thinking and observational skills. The acquisition of knowledge and confidence related to use of Kiswahili will contribute to sustainable development. This reconsideration would be going in the opposite direction of the proposed reform but would give a basis for evaluating performance and making a decision about whether Kiswahili improves or negatively impacts learning. The PITRO4 II project has prepared the teaching materials needed for teaching in Kiswahili in Form 1 and 2. A possible way further could be to encourage a wide-scale educational campaign to inform developing communities of how language choice in education can affect personal and economic development. In order to make any change possible, one would need to question both the causes and the effects of such harmful language choices and educational policies at every level, from government officials and policy makers down to the poorest participants in education. The demand for English has created a considerable industry within Tanzania with the rise of English medium nursery and primary schools where the commodity English is sold. Likewise, teachers employed in these schools are better remunerated. This change is happening now in Zanzibar through the LoI in Mathematics and Science.

The evidence thus far indicates that these changes will not contribute to an improvement in the learning of Zanzibari children. First, it goes against the solid research findings from Africa in generally and Tanzania especially which show that learning in a local language improves uptake of knowledge. Secondly, teachers are not competent enough in English to make the change to English language teaching. The teacher program is inadequate to prepare teachers to teach in English and the new curriculum is very challenging. In order to be confident, teachers would like to have advice and have their knowledge updated since they are confused about the content. This analysis goes along with Semali & Mehta (2012, p. 3) analysis that “the challenges and barriers that prevent teachers from engaging students in a science curricula and instructional strategies that align with local needs and consequently become culturally relevant” which question why Zanzibar has not reflected on the local context.

The success of implementing a new curriculum reform will depend on the extent to which policy makers and planners take school realities into account (Heneveld and Craig, 1996). As shown in the case of Zanzibar, the policy seems to have been driven by political imperatives which had little to do with classroom realities. Teachers and principals should be given more control in curriculum development. Ensuring that aid as well as international partnerships results in quality education requires the designing of more innovative frameworks that fit the uniqueness and realities of localities. Policy makers are in a position to work towards a high quality education for all. Retaining local languages as a LoI will provide a sustainable benefit for the country. For the reasons I have outlined, children of all backgrounds will be able to perform better in school and the changes now being carried out in Zanzibar are in violation of children’s rights in education. As I have argued, the use of Kiswahili should be extended and brought to secondary schools, including teaching of Mathematics and Science subjects. This will contribute to improved learning, to children’s pride and confidence in their community as well as their ability to understand and engage with the world on their own terms.

References

1. Babaci-Wilhite, Z. (2010). Why is the choice of the language of instruction in which students learn best seldom made in Tanzania? In Educational Challenges in multilingual societies: LOITASA Phase Two Research,  B. Brock-Utne; Z. Desai & Qorro M. A. S.  (Eds.); African Minds: South Africa, Cape Town. Pp.281-305.
2. Babaci-Wilhite, Z. & Geo-JaJa M. A. (2011). A Critique and Rethink of Modern Education in Africa’s Development in the 21st Century. Dar es Salaam, The United Republic of Tanzania: Papers in Education and Development (PED).
3. Babaci-Wilhite, Z.; Geo-JaJa, M.A.; Shizhou, L. (2012). Education and language: A human right for sustainable development in Africa. International Review of Education, 58 (5) 619-647. DOI: 10.1007/s11159-012-9311-7.
4. Babaci-Wilhite, Z. (2012). A right based approach to Zanzibar’s language-in-education policy. 1st Special Issue on Right based Approach and Globalization in Education, World Studies in Education Journal, 13 (2) 17-33.
5. Bishop, R. & Glynn T. (1999). Culture Counts: Changing Power Relations in Education. Whose knowledge counts? How is knowledge constructed? Dunmore Press. Retrieved at http://www.instep.net.nz/knowledge_and_theory/how_is_knowledge_constructed/whose_knowledge_counts (retrieved the 18/01/2010).
6. Bostad, I. (2012). Existential Education and the Quest for a New  Humanism: How to Create Disturbances and Deeper Thinking in Schools and Universities? In Enlightenment, Creativity and Education - Polities, Politics Performances. L. Wikander, Gustasson C. and Riis, U. (Eds.); Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
7. Breidlid, A. (2009). Culture, indigenous knowledge systems and sustainable development: A critical view of education in an African context. International Journal of Educational Development, 29, 140-148. Doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2008.09.009.
8. Brock-Utne, B. (2006). Whose Education For All? The Recolonization of the African Mind. Home Publishing Co. : Seoul, South Korea.
9. Brock-Utne, B. (2008). The effect of the neo-liberal agenda on education in some African countries. Power, Voice and the Public Good: Schooling and Education in Global Societies. Advances in Education in Diverse Communities: Research Policy and Praxis, 2008. (6) 91-116..
10. Chambers, R. (1997). Whose reality counts? : Putting the First Last. Intermediate Technology Development Group Publishin: U.K., London.
11. David, M. K. (2007). Changing language policies in Malyasia: Ramifications  and Implications. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Language, Education and Diverstiy held at the Unversity of Waikato- Hamilton, New Zealand, on the 21-24 November 2007).
12. Freire, P. (1970, Reprinted in 1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Penguin Books, Ltd: U. K., London.  
13. Geo-JaJa, M. A. & Yang, X. (2003). Rethinking globalization in Africa. Chimera, 1(1) 19-28.
14. Geo-JaJa, M. A. and Azaiki S. (2010). “Development and Education Challenges in the Niger Delta in Nigeria.” In Education, Language, and Economics, Growing National and Global Dilemmas, Macleans A. Geo-JaJa and Suzanne Majhanovich (Eds.) ; Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Pp. 53-69.  
15. Geo-JaJa, M. A. (2013, Forthcoming). Education Localization for Optimizing Globalization’s Opportunities and Challenges in Africa. In Globalization, Education and Development, Macleans A. Geo-JaJa and Suzanne Majhanovich (Eds.) ; Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
16. Heneveld, W. and Craig. H. (1996). Schools Counts. World Bank Project Designs and the Quality of Primary Education in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Bank Technical Paper, 1996, no. 303. The World Bank, Washington D.C.
17. Kimizi, M. (2007). Why has the LoI policy in Tanzania been so ambivalent over the last forty years? A Study eliciting views from government policy-makers, international donors to Tanzania, University academics and researchers, and the general public. Master thesis. Faculty of Education, University of Oslo, Norway. Retrieved from http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-16663
18. Kosonen, K. 2010. “Cost-effectiveness of first language-based bilingual & multilingual education.” In Multilingual Education in Nepal Kathmandu: Language Development, Kadel Pushker. (ed); Nepal, Centre-Nepal. Pp. 27-33.
19. Lwaitama, A. F. and Rubagumya. C. M. (1990). “The place of English in Tanzanian education system: the political and economic dimensions to the current and alternative language policy options.” Journal of Linguistics and Language Education, Vol. 4(4). The United Republic of Tanzania: The University of Dar es Salaam.
20. Lwaitama, A. F. (2004). Local knowledge and Indigenous Science: Nyerere’s Philosophy of Education and Poverty Alleviation. In Education, Poverty and Inequality, Justinian Galabawa & A. Norman (eds.); Dar es Salaam, BERRIPA Project: Faculty of Education of the University of Dar-es- Salamm: The United Republic of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam.
21. Makalela, L. (2005). We speak eleven tongues. Reconstructing multilingualism in South Africa. In Languages of instruction for African emancipation: Focus on postcolonial contexts and considerations, B. Brock-Utne & R. Hopson(Eds.) ;CASAS: South Africa, Cape Town. Pp. 147-175.
22. Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports Zanzibar (MECS). (2003). Mid-term Review of the Zanzibar Education Master Plan -1996-2001- Interim Report. Presented to the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports Government of Zanzibar and UNESCO; IIEP-UNESCO: Paris, France, 2003.
23. Ministry of Educational and Vocational Training.  Zanzibar Education Development Program (ZEDP). (2008/09–2015/16); IIEP UNESCO: Paris, France, 2007. Available online at: http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Tanzania%20UR/Zanzibar/Zanzibar_ZEDP_2007.pdf (accessed on 6 June 2012).
24. Mulokozi, M.M., Rubanza Y., Senkoro F.E.M.K., Kahigi K.K. and Omari S. (2008). Report of the 3rd Secondary School Kiswahili Language Textbooks Writing Workshop- [Arts Books Workshop], held at Amabilis Catholic Center, Morogoro, 14-17/11/2008. TUKI/TATAKI.
25. Mushi, Paul. S. (2011). Capacity Plunder in the Educational Reform Process in the Regional Africa: The Need for Intercession in Curriculum. Tanzania Institute of Education (TIE) ttp://www.tie.go.tz).
26. Nussbaum, M. 1998. Capabilities and Human Rights. Fordham Law Review 66 (2). http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/flr66&div=18&g_sent=1&collection=journals.
27. Nyerere, Julius K. 1967, Reprinted in 1968. “Education for Self-Reliance.” In Ujamaa, Essays on Socialism. Dar es Salaam: Oxford University Press. Pp. 44-75.
28. Odora, C. H. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and the integration of knowledge systems. Towards a philosophy of articulation. New Africa Education: South Africa, Claremont.
29. Puja, G. K. (2003). Kiswahili and Higher Education in Tanzania: Reflections Based ona Sociological Study from three Tanzanian University Campuses. In The language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa (LOITASA) B. Brock-Utne;  Z. Desai and Qorro, M. S. (Eds) ; E & D Pubishers: The United Republic of Tanzania,  Dar es Salaam. Pp. 113-129.
30. Qorro, M. (2009). Parents and Policymakers Insistence on Foreign Languages as Media of Education in Africa: restricting acess to quality education. – for whose benefit? In Languages and Education in Africa – a comparative and transdisciplinary analysis, B. Brock-Utne, Birgit and Skattum I. (Eds). ; Oxford: Symposium Books. Pp. 57-83.
31. Roy-Campbell., Z. M. & Qorro M. (1997). Language crisis in Tanzania. The myth of English versus education. Mkuki Na Nyota Publishers: The United Republic of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam.
32. Samoff, J. (2007). Institutionalizing International Influence. In Comparative education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local, R. F. Arnove and Torres, C. A.  (Eds.) ; Rowman & Littlefield Publishers: Lanham, MD. Pp. 52-91.
33. Semali, L. M. (2009). Indigenous pedagogies and language for peace and development. In Language and Power: The implications of language for peace and development, B., Brock-Utne and Garbo, G. (Eds.); Mkupi na Nyota: The United Republic of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam. Pp. 196-207.
34. Semali, L. M. & Mehta, K. (2012). Science Education in Tanzania: Challenges and Policy Responses. International Journal of Educational Research (53) 225-239.
35. Skutnabb-Kangas T. &  Phillipson R. (1995). Linguistic Human Rights, Overcoming Linguistic Discrimination. Walter de Gruyther: New York.
36. Skutnakk-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic Human Rights and Teachers of English. In The Socio Politics of English Language Teaching, J. K. Hall and  W.G. Eggington (Eds.) ; Multilingual Matters Ltd.: Clevedon.
37. Sleeter, C. (2001). Culture, difference, and power (CD-ROM edition). Teachers College Press: New York.
38. Vuzo, M. (2007). Revisiting the language of instruction policy in Tanzania: A comparative study of geography classes taught in Kiswahili and English. Doctoral dissertation. The Educational Faculty of the University of Oslo, Norway.
39. http://www.duo.uio.no/sok/search.html?hits=40&sort=published&start=21&q=phd&absize=2000Norway
40. Zanzibar Education Master Plan (ZEMAP). (2006, 2007). Situation Analysis of Children in Tanzania 2006; Zanzibar and IIEP-UNESCO: Paris, France, 2007. Available online at: http://books.google.no/books?id=JEQUAQAAIAAJ&q=ZEMAP+2006&dq=ZEMAP+2006&hl=no&sa=X&ei=PO7aT_jNLseE4gTTyYHNCg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA (accessed on 12 June 2012).
41. Zanzibar Education Sector Review. (2003). Zanzibar Education Policy; Zanzibar and IIEP-UNESCO: Paris, France, 2004. Available online at: http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Tanzania%20UR/Zanzibar/Zanzibar%20Education%20Policy%20Final.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2012).
42. Zanzibar Basic Education of Improvement Project (ZABEIP).  (2007). A World Bank Group project (approved in April, 24. 2007 - July 31. 2013); World Bank: Washington D.C., USA, 2008. Available online at:  http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P102262/zanzibar-basic-education-improvement-project?lang=en (accessed 17 December 2012).