Language of Instruction and Literacy Programmes forCameroon’s Becoming an Emerging Economy

By

James Wung Zeh

PhD Candidate, University of Douala

ABSTRACT

Cameroon’s socio-economic vision is that the country should by

2035 become an emerging economy. Education in general and

literacy activities in particular have a crucial role to play

for this goal to be achieved. With illiteracy rates currently

very high among Cameroonians aged at least 15 years, a paradigm

shift in the medium of instruction is necessary for rural

segments of the country’s population to fully participate in

the development process. In a country with former colonial

languages as the principal media of instruction, the

interdependence and common underlying proficiency theories are

employed to suggest that a switch to mother tongue-based

bilingual education in primary schools and literacy centres

will fast-track the involvement of such rural and semi-rural

populations in the country’s development process, thus

contributing to the country’s economic emergence by 2035.

1. Introduction

This paper discusses the importance of using a first languagetogether with a language of wider diffusion for teaching andlearning in primary schools and functional literacy centres.The aim is to establish the connections between the languagesof instruction and participation in an economy’s developmentprocess. The polity under discussion is Cameroon in the lightof research and economic experiences at global and locallevels, relating to skills acquisition in educationalinstitutions for employment and wellbeing in a multilingual anddeveloping country. Many languages exist in the country(Ethnologue identified 286 in 2009) but only a limited number,if any, are used in formal and nonformal educationalestablishments. This work dwells on language policy ineducation which facilitates teaching and learning to create apositive impact on the population as it strives to achieveeconomic emergence by 2035. Firstly, the article givesbackground information on Cameroon, describes the theoreticalframework and discusses the research methodology. Finally, thedata collected or results are analyzed and discussed, andpolicy recommendations are made. The paper concludes that therural and semi-rural populations of Cameroon need to be taughtin languages they are familiar with so they can concentrate on

acquiring skills for employment and better life-styles in orderto contribute their fair share to the country’s futureemergence.

2. Background Information on Cameroon’s Economy andLiteracy

Between 2006 and 2011, the Cameroon Government implemented aneducation sector strategy based on guidelines proposed in thePoverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). Cameroon’s economybarely improved as growth was limited and regression waswitnessed in the first decade following the year 2000.Moreover, there was no significant poverty alleviation and theGovernment reviewed its economic policy choices.

And so the Government adopted the Growth and EmploymentStrategy Paper (GESP) to promote robust growth as a means ofcreating wealth and employment whose dividends would beredistributed with a view to poverty alleviation. However, forthe GESP to be successfully implemented there is need to reviewall the sector strategies that have been designed and used inCameroon. The education sector strategy is no exception andmust be tailored to the new economic strategic thrusts. One ofthe key components of such harmonization is matching the natureof training and curricula, the methods of organizing theeducation system, and the values imparted on learners forCameroon to become a medium-income country by 2035.

According to the draft education sector strategy paper for 2012– 2020, the sector strategy design process is divided into twophases: diagnosis and formulation of strategic thrusts. Thisarticle contributes both to the diagnostic phase and thestrategic thrusts formulation phase. It makes suggestions forsuccessful implementation of the GESP. It focuses on theweaknesses of the education system relating to the language(s)of instruction.

In 2005, Cameroon conducted its 3rd General Population Census.As at 2010, the country’s population stood at 19,406,060

inhabitants of whom 48.8% lived in urban areas and 51.2% inrural areas. The population was described as particularly youngwith 52.7% of people aged less than 19 years. The country’sdemographic figures are such that they point to a high socialdemand for education. In 2011, more than three million childrensought admission in primary schools and 70, 000 learnersattended functional literacy centres. Generally, the mainsubjects in both types of learning institutions areEnvironment, Civics, Reading, Writing, Numeracy, income-generating activities and other skills enhancing areas. Thesesubjects are all taught almost exclusively in English or Frenchwithout any consideration for Cameroonian indigenous languages.

The document notes that the languages of instruction (Frenchand/or English) currently in use limit learner interest,overburden and overstretch the learning process as learners arebound to sufficiently acquire French or English skills firstbefore learning the other subjects. This is critical sinceskills such as reading, writing and income-generatingactivities help learners to be actively involved in thedevelopment process of communities. On the whole, literacyactivities in Cameroon do not fully address the needs. In 2011,it was estimated that some 3,295,819 people were illiterate inCameroon whereas only 2.1% of them were registered inFunctional Literacy Centres (FLCs). If one goes by thehypothesis that it takes one year to make a person literate, itwill take 47 years to eradicate illiteracy.

Illiteracy is more common in rural than in urban areas. TheECAM 3 survey shows that 40.1% of adults are illiterate inrural areas as against 10.1% in urban areas. An interregionalcomparison of illiteracy rates shows that the East region isseriously affected with over 71.7% of the adult populationreported as illiterate. Illiteracy is also a serious issue inthe Littoral region where 51.3% of adults cannot read or write.

To combat this phenomenon, the Government established theNational Literacy Programme in 2005. The programme is

consistent with Education for All (EFA) and MillenniumDevelopment (MD) goals. It aims to meet the educational needsof young people and adults by providing equitable access tothis programme assigned to impart the knowledge and skillsrequired for daily life. In greater detail, the programme seeksto improve adult literacy levels by 50%, particularly amongwomen, by 2015 and ensure equitable access to basic educationand continuing education programmes. The specific objectives ofthe programme are as follows:

- rehabilitate national literacy facilities;- set up an appropriate technical and pedagogic

organization, coordinated by experienced and high-levelnational experts, for the effective implementation of theprogramme;

- turning at least 105,000 illiterate citizens of both sexesto literate Cameroonians during the pilot phase.

An evaluation of the programme conducted by a private firmshows that literacy activities had a positive impact on thesocio-economic situation of learners. Learners’ families werebetter managed (93.5%), learners were self-employed (45.2%) andassigned responsibility in social, political and communitylife. There were also reports of learner drop-out standing atabout 18% partly due to frustration from failure.

According to Law No. 2004/18 of 22 July 2004 to lay down therules applicable to councils, local authorities are responsiblefor:

- implementing illiteracy elimination plans in conjunctionwith the regional administration; and

- participating in providing and maintaining educationalfacilities and instructional equipment.

With literacy and universal primary education still to be fullyachieved, the language of instruction, among other parameters,needs to be reviewed. The situation is even more serious in theFar North, North, Adamawa and East regions where the European

languages (English and French) are not common. Specificpolicies must be developed to keep learners in the schoolsystem and impart the necessary skills on adults in literacycentres who will use them for development purposes uponcompletion of their courses. To address the language ofinstruction issue, we found the following theoreticalframework.

3. Theoretical Framework

Literacy is the most fundamental skill required by a citizen toeffectively participate in both formal and non-formal educationfor national development. The choice of language for literacyis a thorny issue in multilingual and developing societies. Itis in this light that this paper describes the interdependencetheory as propounded by (Kosonen 2004, Cummins 1991, 1999, etc)and the common underlying proficiency concept, both of whichare the theoretical base for this study.

The interdependence theory draws on the Piagetian perspectiveswhich suggest that when learners work in teams socio-cognitiveconflict occurs and creates cognitive disequilibrium thatstimulates perspective-taking ability and reasoning (Johnson,Johnson & Holubec 1998). The same scholars state thatinteraction with other people is essential for human survival.They specify that, in an education setting, socialinterdependence refers to students’ efforts to achieve, developpositive relationships, adjust psychologically, and show socialcompetence.

In other words, the social interdependence perspective ofcooperative learning argues that the way social interdependenceis structured determines the way people interact with eachother. Therefore, one of the cooperative elements to bestructured in the classroom is positive cooperation. When thistakes shape, interdependence or cooperation results inpromotive interaction as group members encourage and ease eachother’s learning efforts.

Thus, it is established that the use of a mother tonguealongside another language very often leads to the inclusion ofmore local content in the curriculum, making the educationalexperience more relevant to learners and their community.According to a World Bank publication (2005), first-languagebased bilingual education opens up the possibility for parentsand community members to better participate as classroomresources. Similarly, Baker (2001: 138) suggests that wheninstruction takes place in the mother tongue teachers andlearners can interact more naturally and negotiate meaningstogether, and that greatly improves the effectiveness of thelearning process.

In another World Bank publication (2007), the common underlyingproficiency theory is explained. It is argued that the use of afamiliar language to teach beginning literacy facilitatesunderstanding of “sound-symbol” or “meaning symbol”correspondence. Explicit teaching of the second language (L2),beginning with oral skills, enables students to learn the newlanguage through communication rather than memorization. Also,the transfer of linguistic and cognitive skills is eased inbilingual programmes. Once learners have acquired basicliteracy skills in the first language (L1) and communicationskills in the second language (L2), they can begin reading andwriting in the L2, thereby efficiently transferring theliteracy skills they have acquired in the first or familiarlanguage to the second language. The pedagogical conceptsunderpinning this positive transfer of skills are what Cummins(1991, 1999) refers to as interdependence theory and common underlyingproficiency.

According to both principles, the knowledge of language,literacy and concepts learned in the L1 can be accessed andused in the L2 once oral L2 skills are developed, and no re-learning is required. This relates to the affective domainwhere confidence, self-esteem and identity are strengthened byuse of the L1, increasing motivation and initiative as well ascreativity. Benson (2005) concludes that although changing the

language of instruction without resolving other pedagogical,social and political issues is unlikely to result insignificant improvement in knowledge and skills acquisition,first language-based bilingual programmes, even when minimallyimplemented, have the potential to reach population segmentsthat have traditionally been left behind by L2 submersionschooling (Skutnabb-Kangas 2002).

4. Methodology

This paper is a qualitative research endeavour. It studiedlanguage of instruction discourses and experiences atinternational and national levels. After describing thepolity’s sociolinguistic, socio-economic, educational andliteracy context, it investigated the current trajectory forlanguage of instruction policymaking in Cameroon in the lightof global trends to make proposals for Cameroon’s economicemergence by 2035. This could be realized, the article argues,through an appropriate language of instruction policy inprimary education and literacy programmes.

The informants for this article were linguists, sociolinguists,educationists, teachers, policymakers, students and opinionleaders. The ideas and opinions supported by this populationwere found in Internet, book and article publications. Hence weread, analyzed, interpreted and drew on that documentation toinform the topic of the research paper. At the internationallevel, the paper considered some research projects on mothertongue-based bilingual education worldwide and recorded theresults obtained. At the domestic level, the projectsimplemented by the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), otherNon-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and linguists in thecountry were revisited with a view to identifying theirsuccesses and failures. The selected theories were used todiscuss the findings and make proposals for a language-in-education policy in Cameroon’s primary schools and functional

literacy centres, especially those located in rural and semi-rural areas.

5. International Evidence

There is convincing international evidence that initialeducation in the mother tongue or first language rather thanthe second language has educational advantages (Akinnaso 1991,1993; Dutcher 1982, Gonzales 1990, Hornberger and King 1996,Hornberger 2002, Taylor-Leech 2007). Also, additive bilingualeducation programmes have been demonstrated to have pedagogicaladvantages over transitional programmes (Baker 2001 and Cummins1999, 2000). Additive bilingual programmes facilitate thetransfer of literacy skills from the first language to thesecond language as per the interdependence theory or concept ofcommon underlying proficiency (Cummins 1991, 1999). On thewhole, the introduction of first language-based bilingualeducation policies addresses social and political objectiveswith both negative and positive implications.

First language literacy programmes were used in Britishcolonies to promote separate but unequal development. In India,Indian languages were marginalized with regard to power(Annamalai 1995). In South Africa, unequal development evolvedinto a low-quality Bantu education system under Apartheid(Heugh 2003). Also, bilingual schooling based on endogenouslanguages for political reasons rather provoked resentment inGuinea, Malawi, China, Vietnam and the former Soviet Union. Thecommunist or dictatorial governments of those countries did notfollow suit with the equitable distribution of resources,despite aims of comradeship and equality (Kosonen 2004).

On a positive note, the use of local languages by missionariescontributed to the development of orthographies, grammars andbasic literacy materials in many of the world’s languages(Grimes 2000). The growth of Swahili in Tanzania under the“Education for Self-Reliance” campaign was not only a reaction

to the colonial system but an empowerment endeavour (Benson2005). In Mexico, endogenous children transferred literacyskills from the first to the second language and outperformedmonolingual Spanish speakers in the Chiapas Highlands (Modiano1973). In addition, a full six years of primary education inthe mother tongue with the second language taught as a subjectproduced better results than all-English teaching in a Yorubamedium primary project (Adegbija 2003, Akinnaso 1993). Finally,bilingual schooling showed a positive correlation betweenachievement in the two languages and poor performance was notthe result of bilingual education but of other factors such aspoor teacher training in a Filipino-English bilingual schoolingresearch project in the Philippines (Gonzales & Sibayan 1988,and Benson 2005).

A general assessment of the literature shows that bilingualeducation facilitated bilingualism and bi-literacy (Hovens 2002and Ouane 2003), improved classroom participation and self-esteem (Dutcher 1995 and Richardson 2001), upgraded the valueof home languages and culture (Benson 2005), increased parentparticipation (Cummins 2000 and Dutcher 1995), and increasedgirls’ participation in education (Benson 2005). The literatureconsistently indicates that first language-based bilingualeducation not only increased access to skills but also raisedthe quality of general education through improved classroominteraction and integration of prior knowledge and experiencewith new learning (Benson 2005). Related evidence has beenrecorded in Cameroon.

6. Evidence from Cameroon

Today, PROPELCA (Programme de Recherche Opérationelle pour l’Enseignementdes Langues du Cameroun) has been active since 1977 working onmother tongue education in Cameroon. Other bodies include theSummer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) – Cameroon, the CameroonAssociation for Bible Translation and Literacy (CABTAL), andthe National Association of Cameroon Language Committees(NACALCO). The home or vernacular languages carry with them avery high number of dialects created by migration,

intermarriage, and urbanization (Koenig et al. 1983). Anequally significant step has been the harmonization of thewriting system of Cameroonian languages in 1979, a factor thathas contributed immensely to the standardization of someindigenous languages. Evidence from the above projects ispresented below.

Tadadjeu (2004) presented the results of an experiment carriedout in four Cameroonian languages: Ewondo, Duala, Fe’efe’e andLamso’. Over 3,000 children went through the experiment ineleven schools between 1981 and 1987. This led to PROPELCA’sdevelopment of a model for optimal mother tongue initialeducation at the primary level, especially in rural areas.Though Tadadjeu (1990) commended the success of thisexperiment, he argued that use of the model in other areas wasnot known due to the linguistic complexity of Cameroon. Hesuggested the introduction of an extension phase with abroadened project base to guarantee the success of the model atnational level.

In a final evaluation of the experimental phase in 1986 and1987, the PROPELCA team set up an extension phase of theproject, with its objectives including the increase of thenumber of informants from 3,000 to 30,000 and of the languagesfrom four to twelve. Such increase would help test thetransferability of the model from one language to another.However, Tadadjeu (2004), on the basis of provisional results,makes a strong point about African development. He suggeststhat African development and education should be set on theright track as three decades of development efforts based onnon-African models have resulted in regression rather thandevelopment. Tadadjeu (ibid) argues that African society is aviable economic development hub if only it is not denigrated byoutsiders through capitalist or socialist orientations. Africansociety should healthily combine the two philosophies and hingeits development on African culture and languages.

A recent evaluation of a SIL mother tongue education programmein Cameroon reveals that children who were taught in theirmother tongue, Kom, performed significantly better -125% onaverage – in multiple subjects (including Mathematics andEnglish) than a control group of peers who attended schoolswhere English was the medium of instruction (Chuo and Walter

2011). Unlike mother tongue education in formal education usingthe model described above, adult literacy has evolveddifferently.

It is within the framework of language committees that adultliteracy classes in mother tongues are organized in languagecommunities. Chiatoh (2004) note that local language committeeshave become reference institutions for adult literacy so thatany other institution such as churches, NGOs and evenministries recognize the fact that literacy cannot besuccessfully conducted out of this framework. Two approacheshave ensued from this practice. One is the use of mothertongues in the teaching of reading, writing and numeracy skillsto non-literate people. The other is teaching reading andwriting to people already literate in one or both of theofficial languages but not in their home language. The secondhas been referred to as the adult literacy transition model andapplied in both villages and towns. Classes are held duringcertain hours of specific weekdays. The adult literacytransition model has been helping to enhance cultural identityand attachment to ethnic group cultures (Tadadjeu & Chiatoh2005).

Concerning non-literate adult learners, many would like tolearn reading and writing in both their mother tongue and anofficial language. That means they will require bilingualmother tongue/official language literacy learning, anopportunity of which they have so far been deprived inCameroon. This is even more serious when account is not taken,in functional literacy programmes, of specific categories oflearners with special needs such as the marginalized minoritygroups, women and girl children. Tadadjeu and Chiatoh (2005)encourage the motivation of women to enrol in mixed literacycentres. The need to incorporate mother tongue education inboth formal and non-formal circles, especially in rural andsemi-rural areas, requires that those languages should havesolid modernized corpuses.

7. The Corpus Perspective

There are generally three ways in which the corpus of alanguage can be developed to meet its written requirements.

These are translation, terminology and writing. Africanlanguages have been developed over the years through the aboveprocesses.

As regards translation, the Summer Insititute of Linguistics(SIL) has facilitated the translation of the Holy Bible andother Christian documents into some Cameroonian home languagessuch as Bafut and Mungaka (Mforteh 2006). In 2006, there were166 standardized Cameroonian languages of which 36 were taughtin primary schools. Also, both the Old and the New Testamentsof the Holy Bible had been translated into 18 Cameroonianlanguages, the New Testament into 40 indigenous languages, andportions of the Scriptures into 30 Cameroonian languages. It isobvious that many more languages now have translations of theBible as SIL has been working hard in that domain. However,there has been a general outcry for literature other thanChristian and Jewish to be translated into the mother tonguesfor the translations to have more inclusive educational value.

As for terminology, in the 1980s, the new linguistic orderintroduced a situation in which African languages and Frenchwould be recognized as playing complementary roles in anequation involving language and development (Antia 2000). TheCultural and Technical Cooperation Agency (ACCT), one of theFrancophonie’s specialized agencies, has had the mandate ofimplementing this body’s programme of linguistic cooperation.

ACCT’s first generation projects included lexis-orienteddocumentation (the thematic lexica of Central Africa). In 1984,second generation projects included specialized lexica(‘LEXIS’). The objective of ‘LEXIS’, as stated in the project,was to more broadly expose African Creole and Arabic languagesto contemporary, scientific and technical terminology in orderto introduce them into, or improve their use in professionalactivities, different kinds of training programmes, as well asgive them standardized equivalents of scientific vocabulary inFrench, English, etc. The LEXIS projects were also meant toaddress the needs of participating countries in the areas ofinformation, communication and knowledge popularization.

The African part of the project involved sixteen countriesbelonging to the three working zones of West Africa, CentralAfrica and East Africa/Indian Ocean. Centres of AppliedLinguistics of universities and Language Directorates in

participating countries were the principal bodies entrustedwith the actual task of producing the specialist lexica(Halaoui 1990). ACCT 1989 indicates that fields such as thefollowing were chosen by participating national teams: Publiclife, Social life, Health (including Trado-medicine),Agriculture, Pisciculture, Cattle rearing and War. Cameroonchose the following fields: History (465 terms), Geography (236terms), Technology (967 terms), Accounting (180 terms), Biology(742 terms), Grammar (250 terms) and Law (375 terms). Work byuniversity centres and individuals continues (Yameni 1984, BotBa Njock 1986, Clinton 1986, Wiesemann 1999, Ndongo Semengue2001, Nanfah 2009, etc). However, the general criticism hasbeen the difficulty involved is integrating some of the termsinto effective discourse. Nanfah (2009) and Antia (2000)suggest that the newly created terms must be effectively usedand incorporated into the writing system of the languageconcerned.

From the writing perspective, primers are being designed tointroduce the alphabet and phonetic charts of various otherlanguages that have formed committees that work incollaboration with NACALCO and SIL facilitators and researchers(Mforteh 2006). Much still remains to be done with regard toscientific and literary publications, not ensuing fromtranslations, in Cameroonian indigenous languages.

Considering the socio-cultural and economic context ofCameroon, the findings from various experiments in mothertongue-based education, the ensuing theories and prevailingsituation, this paper comes up with recommendations.

8. Recommendations and Conclusion

It is suggested that functional literacy programmes in Cameroonshould be guided by a first-language-based bilingualeducational approach. This should hold both in the education ofcitizens who are not literate in any language and that of adultcitizens literate in either or both of the official languagesbut illiterate in their mother tongue. However, a meaningfulfirst language-based bilingual education, with eitherendogenous or community languages as basis, would not be

possible without significant corpus planning or standardizationactivities in those languages to modernize them. Much hasalready been done in that regard, making it possible for firstlanguage-based bilingual literacy programmes to be implementedin Cameroon. Besides, first language-based bilingual educationmust be complemented by the equitable distribution of resources(teachers, infrastructure, teaching aids, subjects, etc.).

The advantages of such a policy will be manifold. First, timewill be better managed through the elimination of thedifficulty involved and the time spent in first learning aforeign language before learning the skills required forpersonal and national development. Second, the community willbe able to contribute, through its culture and language, inadvancing the students’ learning process. Third, the learner’sself-esteem and creativity will be enhanced. Fourth, parentswill be able to participate in their children’s learningprocess. Fifth, there will be better teacher-learnerinteraction necessary for mastering the skills imparted. Sixth,previous knowledge will be enhanced in schools and literacycentres. Seventh, knowledgeable or gifted individuals,illiterate in the European languages, but who mastertraditional skills will be able to contribute to the skillsdevelopment of learners for the economic development ofCameroon. Eighth, learners will be able to pick up or learn theofficial languages to a more acceptable level than is the casetoday with official language submersion programmes. Ninth,indigenous people and other minority groups in the country willnot be left behind in the educational system, as is the case inthe Northern and East regions of the country because they lackofficial language skills. Overall, first language-basedbilingual literacy programmes will ensure both the endogenousand exogenous development of Cameroonian citizens. The citizenswill participate in fast-tracking the socio-economicdevelopment of the country and enable it to reach the status ofan emerging economy by 2035.

References

Adegbija, E. (2003) Central Language Issues in Literacy andBasic Education: Three Mother                            TongueExperiments in Nigeria. In A. Ouane (ed), Towards a Multilingual

Culture of Education (pp. 167 – 182), Hamburg: UNESCO Institute forEducation.

Akinnaso, F. (1991). On the Mother Tongue Education Policy inNigeria. Educational                               Review, 43 (4), 255 – 285.

Akinnaso, F. (1993). Policy and Experiment in Mother TongueLiteracy in Nigeria.                              InternationalReview of Education, 43 (1), 89 – 106.

Annamalai, E. (1995). Multilingualism for all – An Indianperspective. In T. Skutnabb-kangas                            &O. Garcia (eds), Multilingualism for All (pp. 215 – 219). Lisse:Swets and                            Zeithinger.

Antia, B. (2000). Terminology and Language Planning: An Alternative Framework of                             Practice and Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism.Clevedon:                            Multilingual Matters.

Benson, C. (2005). The Importance of Mother Tongue-basedSchooling for Educational                             Quality.Commissioned Study for EFA Global Monitoring Report.

Bot BaNjock, H. (ed) (1986). Acte du premier colloque nationalsur la terminologie en                        languesafricaines. Yaounde, 30 June – 4 July 1986.

                           Chiatoh, B. (2004) Assessing Community Response to Literacy in a MultilingualContext: The                               Case of Cameroon. PhD Thesis, University of Yaounde I. University of                               Yaoundé,Cameroon.

Chuo, G. & Walter, S. (2011). The Kom Experimental Mother Tongue Education Project for                             2011.Clinton, R. (1986). Etapes à suivre dans la recherché d’unebonne terminologie.                                               Communication présentée lors du premier colloque national surla terminologie                        en langues africaines.Yaounde, 30 June – 4 July 1986.

                                

Cummins, J (1999) Alternative Paradigms in Bilingual Education Research. Does Theory                       Have a Place? The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,10(1).

Cummins, J (2000) Language Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire.                             Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Cummins, J. (1991) Interdependence of First and Second LanguageProficiency in BilingualChildren. In E. Bialestock (ed.), Language Processing in BilingualChildren (pp. 70 – 89). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Draft Education Sector Strategy Paper for 2012 - 2020. Preparedby the Cameroon                       Government, 2011 Version.              Dutcher, N. (1982). The Use of First and Second Languages inPrimary Education: Selected                            CaseStudies (Vol. 504) Washington DC: World Bank.

Dutcher, N. (1995). The Use of First and Second Languages inEducation. A Review of                            InternationalExperience. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

Ethnologue (2009). Ethnologue: Languages of the World. SIL: Dallas,Texas.

Gonzales, A. & Sibayan, B. (1988). Evaluating Bilingual Education in thePhilippines (1974–                          1985). Manila: Linguistic Society of thePhilippines.

Gonzales, A. (1990) Evaluating Bilingual Education in thePhilippines. In R. Baldauf & A.                          Luke(eds) Language Planning and Education in Australasia & the SouthPacific (pp. 319 – 334), Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Grimes, B. (ed.)(2000). Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 14th edition.  Dallas & Texas:                            SIL International.

Growth and Employment Strategy Paper (GESP) (2010). In Econbiz.Washington, DC: IMF.

Halaoui, N. (1990). “Questions de methode en terminologie des langues africaines”.                           Terminologie nouvelles 3, 5 – 25.

Heugh, K. (2003) Language Policy and Democracy in South Africa:The Prospects of                       Equality within Rights-based Policy and Planning. Stockholm: Centre forResearch on Bilingualism.

Hornberger, N. (2002). Multilingual Language Policies and theContinua of Bi-literacy: An                          EcologicalApproach. In Language policy, 1, 27 – 28.

Hornberger, N. & King, K. (1996) Language Revitalization in theAndes: Can Schools                             Reverse LanguageShift? Journal of Multilingual andMulticultural Development, 17 (6), 427 – 441.

Hovens, M. (2002). Bilingual Education in West Africa: Does itWork? International Journal                          of  Bilingual Education. 5 (5), 249– 266.   

Johnson, R.; Johnson, D.; Holubec, E. (1998). Cooperation in theClassroom. Boston: Allyn                          and Bacon. Pp.4, 7 – 8.    

Koenig et al (1983) A Sociolinguistic Profile of Urban Centres in Cameroon.Los Angeles:                             Crossroads Press.

Kosonen, K. (2004). Local Languages in Education in SoutheastAsia: Comparative                        Analysis: Paperpresented at the CIES Conference, Salt Lake City, UT. March9 -12. Retrieved on 14 April 2004 fromhttp://www.cies.byu/papers.aspx.

Mforteh, S. (2006). Cultural Innovations in Cameroon’s Linguistic Tower of   Babel.                     Available on http://www.in st. at/trans/16Nr/03_2/mforteh16.htm.

Modiano, N. (1973). Indian Education in the Chiapas Highlands. New York:Rinehart &             Wilson.

Nanfah, G. (2009). Modernising the Terminology of Education in African   Languages at the               Wake of Globalisation: Stakes and  Challenges: In Harrow, K. &

Mpoche, K.                Language, Literature and Education in Multilingual Societies.                Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Ndongo S. (2001), L’importance du sens dans la traduction desdocuments technico-                       scientifiques versles langues africaines dans AJAL, No 2, pp. 335- 361,ANACLAC, Yaoundé.

Ouane, A. (ed) (2003) Towards a Multilingual Culture of Education (Vol.2006). Hamburg:                        UNESCO Institute forEducation. Retrieved on 21 February 2007 fromhttp://www.unesco.org/education.

Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) (1999). Prepared by theGovernment of Cameroon                       – online.

Richardson, V. (ed) (2001). Handbook of Research on Teaching.Washington, D.C.:                        American EducationalResearch Association.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2002). Language Policies and Education: The Role of Education in                       Destroying orSupporting the World’s Linguistic Diversity.   Report at theWorld Congress on Language Policy. Barcelona, 16-20 April2002.

Tadadjeu, M (1990) Le defi de Babel au Cameroun. Collection PROPELCA 53.

Tadadjeu, M and Chiatoh, A (2005) Mother Tongue-focusedBilingual Education in          Cameroon. In Alexander, N.(ed.) Mother Tongue-based Bilingual Education in          Southern      Africa: TheDynamics of Implementation. Project for the Study ofAlternative Education in South Africa (PRAESA), University ofCape Town.

Tadadjeu, M. (2004). Language, Literacy and Education in African Development: APerspective from Cameroon. Washington, D.C: SIL International.

Taylor-Leech, K.J. (2007) The Ecology of Language Planning inTimor-Leste: A Study of                         Language

Policy, Planning and Practices in Identity Construction. PhDThesis.                         Griffith University.

                         Wiesemann, U. (1999). Manuel de sémantique et de traduction.Collection PROPELCA.                        Yaounde, Niamey.

World Bank (2005). In Their Own Language… Education for All. Washington,D.C.:                        Education Notes.

World Bank (2007). Annual Report. Available online.

Yameni, F. (1984). Le développement des langues africaines etl’expression des concepts                        non-traditionnels: le cas des Feá’ Feá. Doctorat de 3ème CycleThesis,                        University of Yaounde.