Determinants and Consequences of Language-in-Education Policies: Essays in Economics of Education

Garrouste, Christelle (2007): Determinants and Consequences of Language-in-Education Policies: Essays in Economics of Education. Published in: Studies in International and Comparative Education No. 74 (2007): pp. 1-141.

Abstract

This thesis consists of three empirical studies in economics of education on the determinants and consequences of language-in-education (LiE) policies. The “Environmental settings – Inputs – Processes – Immediate outcomes – Long-term outcomes” (EIPOL) evaluation model is applied to LiE policies and programs and serves as the overall framework of this research (see Introductory Chapter). Each study then targets at least one stage of the EIPOL framework to test the validity of the “green” vs. “free-market” linguistic theories. Whereas the two first studies derive models tested empirically in the African context, the third is tested on a sample of countries from the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS). The first study, Rationales to Language-in-Education Policies in Postcolonial Africa: Towards a Holistic Approach, considers two issues. First, it explores the factors affecting the choice of an LiE policy in 35 African countries. The results show that the countries adopting a unilingual education system put different weights on the influential parameters than countries adopting a bilingual education system and that both groups of countries validate somehow both the “green” and the “free-market” approaches. Second, the article investigates how decision makers can ensure the optimal choice of language(s) of instruction by developing a non-cooperative game theoretic model with network externalities. The model shows that it is never optimal for two countries to become bilingual, or for the majority linguistic group to learn the language of the minority group, unless there is minimum cooperation to ensure an equitable redistribution of payoffs. This finding confirms the “free-market” theory. The second study, The Role of Language in Learning Achievement: A amibian Case Study, investigates the role played by home language and language proficiency on mathematics scores of 5048 Grade-6 learners in 275 Namibian schools, via the second survey data by the Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ). Hierarchical linear modeling is used to partition the total variance in mathematics achievement into its within- and between-school components. Results of the analysis show that although home language plays a limited role in explaining within- and between-school variations in mathematics achievement, language proficiency, when proxied by reading scores, plays a significant role in the heterogeneity of results. Thus, confirming the role of language skills in learning achievement and so validating the “green” theory. Finally, the third study, Language Skills and Economic Returns, investigates the economic returns to language skills, assuming that language competencies constitute key components of human capital. It presents results from eight countries enrolled in the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS). The study finds commonalities between countries in terms of the valuing of language skills, independent of the type of language policy applied at the national level. In each of the eight countries compared, skills in a second language are estimated to be a major factor constraining wage opportunities. This study validates the “free-market” theory.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Language-in-education policies, decision making analysis, non-cooperative game, language skills, hierarchical linear modeling, human capital theory, rate of return analysis, postcolonial Africa, IALS, SACMEQ
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C5 - Econometric Modeling > C51 - Model Construction and Estimation; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Institutions > I21 - Analysis of Education; D - Microeconomics > D3 - Distribution > D31 - Personal Income, Wealth, and Their Distributions; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D71 - Social Choice ; Clubs ; Committees ; Associations; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Institutions > I28 - Government Policy; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D61 - Allocative Efficiency ; Cost-Benefit Analysis; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C0 - General > C01 - Econometrics; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games

References

Apple, M.W. (1990). Ideology and Curriculum (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Beaton, A. E., Postlethwaite, T. N., Ross, K.N., Spearritt, D., & Wolf, R.M. (1999). The Benefits and Limitations of International Educational Achievement Studies. Paris: UNESCO, IIEP.

Bhola, H. S. (1990). Evaluating "Literacy for development" projects, programs and campaigns: Evaluation planning, design and implementation, and utilization of evaluation results. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education; DSE [German Foundation for International Development].

Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bray, M., & Thomas, R.M. (1995). Levels of Comparison in Educational studies : Different Insights from Different Literatures and the Value of Multilevel Analyses. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 472-490.

Burstein, L. (1980). Analysis of multilevel data in educational research and education. In D. Berliner (Ed.), Review of research in education, (Vol. 8) (pp.158-233). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Burstein, L. (1988). Units of analysis. In J. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research,methodology and measurement: an international handbook (pp. 775-781). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Coenen-Huther, J. (1989). Sociologie et interdisciplinarite: modalites, problemes, perspectives. Revue Suisse de Sociologie, 15, 1-13.

Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Cronbach, L. (1976). Research on classrooms and schools: Formulation of questions,design and analysis (occasional paper). Stanford, CA: Stanford Educational Consortium.

Fishman, J.A. (1979). Bilingual Education: What ad Why? In H.T. Trueba and C.Barnett-Mizrahi (Ed.), Bilingual Multicultural Education and the Professional. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers, pp. 11-19.

Goke-Patriola, A. (1993). The Role of Language in the struggle for Power and Legitimacy in Africa. African Studies, (Vol. 31). Lewinston: The Edwin Mellen Press.

Goldstein, H. (1987). Multilevel models in educational and social research. New York: Oxford University Press.

Grin, F. (1999). Competences et recompenses: La valeur des langues en Suisse. Fribourg : Editions Universitaires Fribourg Suisse.

Haugen, E. (1966). Language Conflict and Language Planning: The Case of Modern _orwegian. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Kaplan, R.B. and Baldauf, R.B. (1997). Language Planning from Practice to Theory. Multilingual Matters (Series), (Vol. 108).

Kibbee, D.A. (2003). Language Policy and Linguistic Theory. In J. Maurais and M.A.

Morris (Eds.), Languages in a Globalising World. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kloss, H. (1969). Research Possibilities on Group Bilingualism: a Report. Quebec: International Center for Research on Bilingualism.

Leclerc, J. (2006). L’amenagement linguistique dans le monde, Quebec : TLFQ, Universite Laval. [URL : http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/europe/danemark.htm].

Lewis, E.G. (1980). Bilingualism and Bilingual Education: A Comparative Study. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Mackey, W.F. (1992). Mother tongues, other tongues and link languages: What they mean in a changing world. Quarterly Review of Education, XXII (1), 41-52.

Malmkjar, K. (1991) Bilingualism and Multilingualism. In K. Malmkjar (Ed.), The Linguistics Encyclopedia. New York: Routledge.

Pattanyak, D.P. (1984). Language policies in multilingual states. In A. Gonzales (ed.), Panagani. Language planning, implementation and evaluation. Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines. (Quoted in T. Kutnabb-Kangas and O. Garcia, 1995).

Raudenbush, S.W., and Willms, J.D. (1991). Schools, classrooms and pupils: International studies of schooling from a multilevel perspective. San Diego: Academic Press.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. and Garcia, O. (1995). Multilingualism for All – General Principles? In T., Skutnabb-Kangas (Ed.), Multilingualism for All. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.

Statistics Canada (2002). International Adult Literacy Survey: Microdata User’s Guide. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

Trueba, H.T. (1979). Bilingual-education models. In H.T. Trueba and C.Barnett-Mizrahi (Ed.), Bilingual Multicultural Education and the Professional. (pp. 54-73). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.

Wallerstein, I. (1989). The Modern World-System III: The Second Era of Great Expansion of the Capitalist World-Economy, 1730-1840s. San Diego: Academic Press.

Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Durham: Duke University Press.

Williams, R. (1976). Base and Superstructure in Marxist Cultural Theory. In R. Dale et al.(Eds.), Schooling and Capitalism: A Sociological Reader. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.