Journal of Research in Reading, ISSN 0141-0423
Volume 30, Issue 1, 2007, pp 38–58
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00333.x
Playing football without a ball:
language, reading and academic
performance in a high-poverty school
Elizabeth J. Pretorius
Department of Linguistics, University of South Africa
Deborah Maphoko Mampuru
Department of African Languages, University of South Africa
Second language (L2) reading research suggests that there is a complex interplay
between L2 proficiency, first language (L1) reading and L2 reading. However, not
much is known about the effect of L1 proficiency on L1 reading, and of L1 reading on
L2 reading, or vice versa, in bilingual settings when readers have few opportunities
for extensive reading in their L1. The relationships between L1 (Northern Sotho) and
L2 (English) proficiency and L1 and L2 reading were examined in Grade 7 learners
attending a high-poverty primary school in South Africa, during the course of a year
when a reading intervention programme was implemented. The effect that attention to
reading and accessibility of books had on the learners’ reading proficiency in both
languages was examined, and the factors that predicted academic performance were
analysed. When the learners were engaged in more reading, L2 reading contributed
more variance to L1 reading than L1 proficiency. Reading in both languages also
contributed significantly to academic performance. The study highlights the need for
more cross-linguistic reading research in different educational settings.
One of the central issues in second language (L2) reading research, first articulated by
Alderson (1984), revolves round the question: to what extent is L2 reading a language or
a reading problem? The African continent is characterised by linguistic diversity but due
to its colonial past, the majority of learners in Sub-Saharan Africa do not do their
schooling in their home language but through the medium of a former colonial language.
If schooling does occur in the home language, it does so for a few years only, before
switching to the former colonial language. Schooling in Africa tends therefore to be
characterised by literacy acquisition in an L2, or by some form of bilingual schooling
where initial literacy is acquired in the home language and a switch is later made to L2
literacy. Africa thus offers an ideal setting for studying the language/reading questions
that preoccupy much of L2 reading research. Yet surprisingly little research has emerged
from this rich context.
In this article, we examine these language/reading questions from an African perspective,
using data from a high-poverty primary school in an urban South African setting. To this
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road,
Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
39
debate we also add a rather perverse question, namely, to what extent is reading in a home
language in the African context a language or a reading issue? Before moving on to the
study itself, we first look at some of the issues in the bigger literacy landscape.
Literacy assessments and reading research
Worldwide, reading is used as an index of how well an education system is delivering on
its mandate. There is a long and rich tradition of reading and literacy assessment and
research in the developed world. Various linguistic, sociocultural, socioeconomic and
developmental factors in home, school and classroom contexts have been identified that
impact directly or indirectly on language development and reading achievement. The
sheer number of academic journals in the English-speaking world dedicated to reading
and writing research attest to this deeply embedded history of literacy research and the
research-based knowledge that has mushroomed in the past six or so decades.
In contrast, there has been relatively little research on literacy development in Africa,
and no academic journal on the continent dedicated to reading. This is starting to change;
the last decade has seen an increasing number of individual studies as well as large-scale
national assessments being undertaken. Many of these findings point to much the same
conclusion: the formal accomplishment of literacy does not happen easily for many
learners in Africa. For example, the Southern African Consortium for Monitoring
Educational Quality (SACMEQ) study compared literacy and numeracy levels of Grade 6
learners across 14 African countries between 2000 and 2002. The percentage of learners
achieving minimal levels of literacy across the 14 countries was 44.1%. South African
learners came 8th of the 14 countries, with only 36.7% of learners reaching minimum
levels of mastery in reading at Grade 6 level (Mothibeli, 2005).
The language factor is regularly cited as a reason for literacy underachievement in
developing countries. By Year 6 most children in Sub-Saharan Africa have already
switched over to an L2 as the language of learning and teaching (LoLT) if they have not
already been using it since Year 1. There is indeed overwhelming research from both
developed and developing countries that supports the position that schooling in the home
language puts children at an advantage, especially in the early stages of literacy learning
(e.g. Cummins, 2000; Thomas & Collier, 2002). Williams (1996), for example, compared
the reading abilities of Malawian and Zambian children in the local language and in
English at Year 5. The results showed that learning to read in their local language gave
the Malawian children an advantage, while going straight for English and 5 years of
exposure to literacy in English did not give the Zambian children an English reading edge
over their Malawian peers. Such findings are consonant with research findings elsewhere.
Cummins (2000) points out that there have been close to 150 empirical studies in the past
30 years that ‘show beneficial effects of additive bilingualism on students’ linguistic,
cognitive or academic growth’ (2000, p. 37).
However, studies of literacy in African home languages may paint a rather bleak
picture. For example, the Eritrean survey of reading achievement in Grades 1, 3 and 5 in
all eight languages of the country found that two-thirds of Grade 1 children could hardly
read in the local languages used for instructional purposes at the elementary level. By
Grade 5, while local language decoding skills were fairly competent, comprehension
skills were not well developed (Walter & Davis, 2005). Similarly, in an audit by the
Department of Education in 2001 across all nine provinces in South Africa, Grade 3
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
40
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
learners had a mean of 38% on a reading comprehension test in their home language
(Education Library Information and Technology Services, 2003).
In all these studies, the language factor becomes submerged by a host of other factors.
Variables such as poorly resourced schools, inappropriate instructional methods, printpoor environments, overcrowded classrooms, reduced time-on-task and poorly trained
teachers are consistently identified as impacting negatively on literacy accomplishment
(e.g. Grade 6 Systemic Evaluation Report, 2005; Walter & Davis, 2005). A further issue
is the way in which the complex linguistic situation affects literacy development. For
many children, the local language may not be their ‘real’ mother tongue. Geographic and
social varieties considered non-standard are not used as media of instruction, and so only
children familiar with the standard variety may be advantaged.
Given the importance of the learning context, discussions of literacy accomplishment
in Africa must take into account three important macro variables, namely, the complex
linguistic fabric of African states and communities, widespread poverty and generally
low adult literacy levels. All these variables impact on the educational context and give it
diverse shapes and outcomes, depending on local conditions.
Language diversity
The African continent has a rich language heritage. Although many of these languages
have developed orthographies, their written usage often does not extend to civic and
social functions but is restricted to religious and educational texts, especially in the early
grades. Invariably, the majority of learners do not have the advantage of being able to do
all – or even some of – their schooling in their home language.
South Africa, for example, has 11 official languages: Zulu, Xhosa, Swazi and Ndebele
(which belong to the Nguni language group), N. Sotho, S. Sotho and Tswana (which
belong to the Sotho language group) and the smaller language groups of Tsonga and
Venda, as well as English and Afrikaans. Literacy is usually first developed in the home
language in Grades 1–3, with English introduced as an additional language in Grade 1 or
2 and becoming the LoLT in Grade 4 in most schools. African languages are not used as
LoLTs after Grade 3 or 4, but African children are expected to continue studying their
home language as a school subject until Grade 12. Although initial schooling in the home
language is encouraged by the Department of Education, school governing bodies have a
choice and can opt for a ‘straight for English’ policy. Because English is regarded as the
language of status, opportunity and education, the misperception often persists among
parents that primary schools that offer ‘straight for English’ will provide a good
education for their children.
Poverty
Africa in general has been experiencing economic problems for decades and has difficulty
competing in the global economy. Poverty is widespread. Worldwide, research shows that
it is not easy to educate poor children. The variables that co-occur with poverty do not
create enabling contexts for literacy development. Formal learning environments in Africa
tend to be framed by disadvantage: schools have inadequate physical resources,
overcrowded classrooms and inadequate supplies of learning materials and books. Many
children come to school hungry, and many schools in South Africa have feeding schemes
where they supply one meal a day to children. Taken together, these conditions are not
conducive to promoting literacy development in classrooms.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
41
Literacy levels
Although at 85.6% the adult literacy rate in South Africa (age 15 and above) seems
relatively healthy, this reflects a basic literacy rate, i.e. being able to read and write with
understanding a simple statement in relation to a person’s life (United Nations Report,
2003). Although schooling is now compulsory until Grade 9, only 51% of the South
African population has reached high school. Co-occurring with poverty and low literacy
levels is a print-poor environment and a vulnerable publishing industry which, as
elsewhere on the continent, relies primarily on the education market for its survival.
According to Wafawarowa (2000), up to 95% of all books sold in Africa are education
books, compared with 35% in Europe. Reading for pleasure is not common. For many
children from disadvantaged communities, literacy experiences mainly occur in the
schooling context and even that does not generally provide a print-rich environment. In
South Africa, only 27% of schools have school libraries. There are also relatively few
children’s books printed in the African languages, and many of them are translations from
English. There are even fewer non-fiction books. Publishers are reluctant to print books in
African languages for which there is not a market.
Even when African learners have the advantage of acquiring initial literacy in their
home language, they do so in a print-poor environment. To use a rather crude analogy,
this is akin to learning to play football without a ball. While studies in developed
countries have found that L1 reading is an important predictor of L2 reading, the nature
of, and the relationships between, learners’ language and reading abilities in their L1 and
L2 become rather muddied in the African educational playing fields.
Revisiting the language/reading issue in L2 reading research
Two main hypotheses (cf. Bernhardt & Kamil, 1995; Cummins, 2000) underlie the
language/reading questions in L2 reading research.
The Linguistic Interdependence Hypothesis (or Common Underlying Hypothesis): This
position holds that literacy operations and constructs transfer across languages and do not
have to be ‘relearned’ in the other language. This type of linguistic transfer relates more
commonly to cognitive/academic aspects of L1 and L2 proficiency, although transfer of
communicative competence across languages has also been reported for children in
Spanish–English, Japanese–English and Turkish–Dutch (cited in Cummins, 2000, p. 184).
Cummins (2000) reports extensively on the consistent empirical support for this
hypothesis, both in the USA and elsewhere. For example, a Californian study (California
State Department of Education, 1985, cited in Cummins, 2000, p. 183), found higher
correlations between L2 English and L1 Spanish reading skills than between English
reading and English oral language skills. However, it was also found that the strength of
L1/L2 reading relationship increased as English communicative skills increased.
Although the hypothesis is couched in general terms so as to allow for the possibility of
bidirectional transfer, it is generally assumed that the direction of transfer is from the L1
to the L2. Studies examining the reverse situation are rare. Serpell (1989) noted that
educated Zambians who were skilled readers in English often had difficulty reading in the
local languages that they spoke. However, his comments were based on anecdotal, not
empirical, evidence. A longitudinal study by Wagner, Spratt and Ezzaki (1989, cited in
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
42
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
Williams and Cooke, 2002) found that L1 Berber students became proficient readers in
Arabic L2 after 5 years. The researchers argued that children who are obliged to learn to
read in an L2 are not necessarily disadvantaged. However, as Williams and Cooke (2002)
point out, the Berber children had the advantage of being heavily exposed to Arabic
outside school hours.
The Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis (the ‘short-circuit’ hypothesis): According to this
position, a threshold level of L2 proficiency is necessary for L1 reading skills and
knowledge to transfer to L2 reading. A lack of L2 knowledge will short-circuit the use of
L1 reading skills. As Bernhardt and Kamil (1995, p. 17) point out, this hypothesis
assumes that ‘language is the key factor in reading activities . . . in order to read a
language, one has to ‘know’ the language’.
Several studies have examined the effects of L1 reading and L2 proficiency on L2
reading. For example, Bossers (1991) found that Dutch L2 proficiency accounted for 54%
of the variance in L2 reading among L1 Turkish students, with L1 reading contributing
only 19%. However, reliance on L2 proficiency decreased as L2 reading ability
increased; for the skilled L2 readers, L1 reading was the only significant predictor. Using
L1 English students learning French as L2, Brisbois (1995) found that L1 reading
knowledge can transfer, but only after learners attain a threshold of L2 knowledge. She
found that L2 vocabulary contributed more of the variance in L2 reading than did L2
grammar. Like Bossers, she also found support for the Interdependence Hypothesis, in
that the upper-level students used their L1 reading skills for L2 reading comprehension,
In their study of 187 L1 English students reading in L2 Spanish, Bernhardt and Kamil
(1995) concluded that while L2 language proficiency accounted for a greater proportion
of the variance (around 30–38%), L1 reading also made a contribution (about 16%). They
rephrase the questions around this topic as: how literate does an L2 reader need to be to
make the L2 work, and how much L2 language knowledge does an L2 reader need to
make L2 reading work? (Bernhardt & Kamil, 1995, p. 32).
From the above brief sketch of the L2 reading research domain, it could be argued that
research into differences between reading in a first and second language does not always
throw light on literacy (under)achievement in developing countries, for three main reasons:
1. Much of the research assumes reading ability in the first language and examines
transfer to the second language. As we have seen, many readers in Africa may never
acquire literacy in their own language. Even when they do, there may be few
opportunities for extensive reading in their own language. For many learners, reading
skills may become more strongly developed in the L2, not in the L1. Although
Cummins’ interdependence hypothesis allows for this in theory, the possible transfer
effect from L2 reading to L1 reading is an under-researched domain.
2. In most of the research, the notion of reading in the first language is treated as
unproblematic. However, as Williams (1996, p. 184) points out, ‘the question of the
extent to which L1 reading predicts L2 reading can only be validly posed . . . where the
putative L1 is the L1 of the readers’. In Africa, even though many children are initially
taught to read in an African language, they themselves may speak another language,
another dialect or a non-standard variety. Furthermore, in most studies on L1/L2 reading
transfer, the L2 proficiency of the subjects is measured but not their L1 proficiency.
However, if there are educational contexts in which the notion of L1 proficiency is not
unproblematic, then L1 proficiency levels also need to be factored into the equation.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
43
3. It is by now axiomatic that the context in which literacy is acquired is vitally important.
Many of the reading studies cited in the research literature involve educational contexts
in developed countries where educational resources, literacy levels, instructional
methods and availability of L1 texts are not really ‘issues’. Does the transfer of L1
reading to L2 still occur when the educational context is less than ideal?
In sum, there is a large body of research that shows that reading skills do transfer from L1
to L2, but the extent to which this happens depends on the L2 proficiency of the readers.
There is also overwhelming evidence of the importance of developing literacy skills in
the L1 before changing over to an L2 as the LoLT. However, there is a need for more
cross-linguistic reading research in different educational settings.
In this study we examine this view of L1 and L2 literacy with a very different, and
younger, set of learners in a very different literacy context. We compare, over an 8-month
period, the language proficiency and reading abilities of Grade 7 learners, in the local
school language, Northern Sotho (henceforth N. Sotho), and in English. We examine the
relationships between language proficiency and reading skill in both these languages as
well as their relationship to the learners’ academic performance. It is hoped that the
findings from this research can add to the growing body of research into reading in
developing countries where the educational, sociopolitical and sociolinguistic contexts
differ so strikingly from those in developed countries.
Rationale for current study
Research over a 3-year period (2002–2004) in high-poverty high schools in a South
African township revealed that the majority of Grade 8 learners were coming into high
school with very poor reading skills, regardless of whether they were reading in their
home language or in English (Matjila & Pretorius, 2004). The findings suggested, inter
alia, that inadequate attention was being given to the development of reading in the
primary schools, in both the African languages and in English.
On hearing about the high school reading study, the principal of a neighbouring
primary school contacted the first author of this article and asked if a reading project
could be initiated at her school. It was decided to pilot a 3-year reading project in this
primary school, to examine more closely the nature of reading problems in the school, to
make books available and to see how reading challenges could be addressed. Aspects of
this project during its first year of implementation are described and the broader school
context in which reading is developed is sketched out.
Research questions
The research reported here is exploratory. The specific research questions that inform this
paper are:
1. What are the differences in language and reading test scores in the local school
language, N. Sotho (L1), and in English (L2)?
2. Does attention to reading and greater access to books improve reading test scores
among the Grade 7 learners in N. Sotho and in English?
3. What is the relationship between language and reading ability in N. Sotho and in
English, and does it change during the course of the year?
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
44
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
4. What is the relationship between L1 and L2 language, L1 and L2 reading ability and
school performance (as measured by the final examination results)?
Method
Design and aims of project
The reading project was launched in 2005 at Batho Pele Primary School.1 The basic aims
of the project are to create a culture of reading at the school, to raise reading levels in the
local school language and in English, and thereby ultimately improve school
performance. A multi-level approach has been adopted that involves the participation
of the learners, teachers and parents. The project includes building resources as well as
building capacity. The resource-building component entails making books readily
accessible to learners and teachers by building up the school library and establishing
collections of books in classrooms. The capacity-building component includes building
capacity among teachers (by raising awareness of the importance of reading, and
introducing them to various reading methods), learners (by encouraging them to read and
instilling in them an enjoyment of reading) and parents (by encouraging them to take an
interest in their children’s literacy development).
Broader school context
In the high-density urbanised townships in Gauteng Province there are mixed and
complex linguistic communities. African language teachers often complain that their
learners do not speak their home languages ‘properly’ but speak a mixture of African
languages. In the township where this study is being conducted there are 26 primary
schools, of which 10 are predominantly N. Sotho speaking, 9 Tswana, 3 Zulu, 2 Tsonga,
1 Venda and 1 South Sotho.
School context
The school has over 600 learners and a staff of 16 teachers plus the principal. The school
serves a socioeconomically disadvantaged community and school fees are R120 (about
$20) per annum. Only about 40% of the parents pay full school fees. The school has a
feeding scheme, where 400 children ranging from Grades R to 7 are fed once a day.
There are two classes at each grade level. In the Foundation Phase, there are about 35
children per class. This increases to about 54 per class in Grade 7. N. Sotho is the initial
language of learning and teaching from Grade R to Grade 3, after which English becomes
the LoLT. N. Sotho then becomes a subject of instruction from Grades 4 to Grade 7.
About 70% of the learners at this school come from primarily N. Sotho-speaking homes.
Reading context before intervention
Initial observations of the classrooms revealed that very few books were visible. There
were no bookshelves or storybooks in any of the classrooms. Besides school textbooks
and exercise books, additional access to print material of an educational or recreational
nature was almost non-existent. Although a small room was officially designated the
library, it was used as a storeroom and as an office by a senior teacher. It contained rows
of dusty shelves stacked with old textbooks and some children’s books, mainly in
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
45
English, many outdated and many age inappropriate. There was no cataloguing or lending
system. The school had appointed a library committee the previous year and although
these teachers had tried to ‘sort out’ the library, they felt ‘lost’ as they had never before
been involved in such a task.
Before the start of the project the teachers were asked to fill in a questionnaire that
investigated their perceptions of and attitudes to reading and their home and school
reading practices. Of the 17 members of staff, 15 had a post-Grade 12 2-year primary
school teacher’s certificate qualification, and 3 had a postgraduate honours degree (the
principal, vice-principal and one of the N. Sotho teachers). Several teachers were
studying to upgrade their qualifications. None of the teachers was a member of a
community library and 11 of the teachers indicated that they had 10 or fewer books in the
home. In sum, there was a feeling at the school that learners at all grade levels struggled
with reading but the teachers did not know how to address this problem.
Building up resources
Because the learners came from a disadvantaged community, priority was given to
establishing a ‘proper’ school library. A computer and library software programme were
purchased. An unemployed young man from the community with basic computer skills was
appointed as school librarian and trained to catalogue and enter all the books on the computer
system. New books were purchased in N. Sotho and English with project funding. Learners
were encouraged to become members of the local community library in the township and
teachers were encouraged to build up collections of reading material in their classrooms.
After 9 months, all the learners and teachers were issued with school library cards. There
is at present a collection of over 2,500 books in the library. Of these, 168 books are in
N. Sotho (109 titles), and the rest are in English. All the non-fiction and reference books are
in English (with the exception of N. Sotho dictionaries). There are no non-fiction books
available in N. Sotho, and most of the 109 N. Sotho titles are storybooks for children ranging
from preschool to about 10 years. There are very few storybooks in N. Sotho for teenagers.
Building teacher capacity
Regular workshops were held one afternoon a fortnight for all members of staff, to raise
awareness of the importance of reading in the school context, to acquaint teachers with a
broader frame of reference with regard to reading accomplishment and the factors that
impact on its development, to acquaint them with sound instructional practices and to
familiarise them with library practices and information literacy.
Involving parents: the family literacy component
Many parents in high-poverty areas have low literacy levels, are not familiar with the
formal school context and often feel diffident about talking to teachers about their
children’s progress at school. A series of Family Literacy workshops were held for
parents in order to draw parents’ attention to the importance of reading and to encourage
them to read to their children and/or to listen to them reading. The principal and teachers
also attended the workshops. The head librarian at the local community library also
addressed the parents at the workshop; she explained how the library works and how
families can become members. Refreshments were served after each workshop to give
parents an opportunity to talk to teachers in an informal context.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
46
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
Monitoring and assessment
In order to assess the efficacy of the programme it was important to determine baseline
entry and exit reading levels during the first year of the project. Assessments were thus
done at Grade 1 (N. Sotho) and Grade 7 levels (N. Sotho and English), soon after the start
of the project in May (the pre-tests), and again in the last quarter in November (the posttests). The results of the literacy assessments were discussed with the principal and
teaching staff after each round of assessment. Owing to space limitations, only the results
of the Grade 7 assessments are reported here.
Test design
All the Grade 7 learners (n 5 104) were assessed. To facilitate comparisons across
languages, the same tests were given in English and in N. Sotho. The tests were first
developed in English from Grade 7 English books, then translated into N. Sotho, the
translations being agreed by a team consisting of five specialists in language and
education. Because the tests were the same in both languages, different sets of pre- and
post-tests were designed. The N. Sotho tests were administered 4 weeks after the English
tests. The time lag between testing in both languages in the pre- and post-tests was
deemed long enough to minimise memory effects.
Language test
N. Sotho and English language proficiency were operationally defined as language
proficiency obtained in a dictation test in the respective languages. There are at present no
standardised language tests in any official languages in South Africa for different age
groups. It was felt that a dictation test would tap into ‘school’ language proficiency in
both languages without requiring the learners to read a text. Even though learners may
speak a mixture of African languages on the playgrounds and streets, they are taught
standard N. Sotho in their language classes.
To ensure that the level of difficulty of the dictation test was in line with the age group,
the dictation passages were taken from approved textbooks currently available for Grade 7
N. Sotho and English classes. A set of criteria was drawn up by the English and N. Sotho
team members for marking the dictation passages. These were based on a cross-section of
good, average and weak responses that were examined and discussed in a joint workshop.
The learners were told beforehand that they needed to first listen to a passage read to
them, and then write it down in their ‘best’ English/N. Sotho, paying attention also to
spelling and punctuation. The passage was first read to the class at normal conversational
pace while they simply listened. The second time it was read at conversational pace, but
chunked into sections of about five to six words, which the learners wrote down. The
chunks were not repeated. This kind of task meets the two naturalness criteria for
pragmatic natural processing language tasks, viz. it requires the processing of temporally
constrained sequences of linguistic material and, in order to divide the stream of speech
into identifiable chunks for writing down, it also requires, to a large degree,
understanding the meaning of what was heard (Oller, 1979, p. 39). Oller further argues
that despite criticism of the use of dictation as a language test, ‘it does correlate at
surprisingly high levels with a vast array of other language tests’ (Oller, 1979, p. 58).
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
47
Reading tests
N. Sotho and English reading proficiency were operationally defined as proficiency
obtained in a reading comprehension test. Two different tests were used for the pre- and
post-tests. To try to maintain similar levels of difficulty between the pre-and post-tests,
the text passages in both tests were taken from Grade 7 textbooks currently used in South
Africa. The test passages were taken from the English Grade 7 language textbooks
written for L2 students in South Africa. The tests were originally designed in English and
then the passages and the questions were translated into N. Sotho by specialists in the
Department of African Languages at the University of South Africa (including the second
author of the article, who is also an experienced N. Sotho translator). The question
formats were also identical. Finally, to allow for some kind of benchmark comparison, a
12-mark section of a test used to assess the reading levels of Grade 8 learners entering
high school (Matjila & Pretorius, 2004), was also used for the Grade 7 post-test.
All question formats were explained to the learners before they started the reading test
and examples were given on the chalkboard, in the language of the comprehension test.
The question formats were as follows:
Inference questions. The ability to answer text-based inference questions rather than
literal questions is a reliable indicator of how well a reader understands a text (e.g.
Oakhill & Cain, 1998). There were no literal questions (i.e. direct matching of questions
with information in the text), interpretive or creative comprehension questions.
Cloze items. In each case, a modified cloze task was set, with approximately every ninth
word deleted, if it was appropriate and could be inferred from the text. Although the same
passages were used in English and N. Sotho for the cloze activities and the same number
of deletions was designed, the same linguistic items were not deleted. Deletions were
guided by the textual clues provided by the morphosyntactic and semantic features of
each language text.
Anaphoric resolution. The ability to resolve anaphoric references in a text is an integral
part of reading skill (e.g. Webber, 1980). Specific anaphoric items were identified and the
learners were required to underline the referents to which they referred.
Reading rate
With each expository passage, an informal measure of the learners’ reading rate was
taken to determine, more or less, at what pace they were reading. After the test
preliminaries, the learners were all told to start reading at the same time, and after a
minute, they were stopped and asked to circle the word they had been reading when they
were stopped. Thereafter, they continued reading the passage and answered the questions
that followed. The number of words read within the minute gave the researchers a rough
indication of the learners’ range of reading rate, as a group. Because it is difficult to
accurately assess reading rate in large groups, the scores are treated with caution.
Administrative procedures
The English tests were administered first. The pre-tests were administered in May 2005,
while the post-tests were written in November 2005. Both sets of tests were written
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
48
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
during two periods allocated during school hours and administered by the project
researchers. No specific time limits were set for completion of the tests.
Results
The test data were entered on SPSS. Using the Cronbach alpha model, the reliability
scores for the English pre- and post-tests were .77 and .74 respectively, while the alpha
scores for the N. Sotho pre- and post-tests were .73 and .75, respectively. These alpha
scores are regarded as acceptable (George & Mallory, 2003, p. 231).
The mean age of the Grade 7 learners was 13.1 years (the youngest was 11 and the
oldest 16). The majority had N. Sotho as their home language, with a minority of learners
(18%) with different home languages (9% spoke a Sotho-related language, 6% spoke a
Nguni-related language and 3% spoke the minority Venda and Tsonga languages).
Research question 1: What are the differences in language and reading test scores in N.
Sotho and English?
Table 1 shows mean differences in language, reading and reading rate scores in N. Sotho
and in English in the pre- and post-tests. Four interesting trends emerge from these
descriptive results. Firstly, mean reading comprehension scores on the pre-test results
were particularly low, and they were very similar in both N. Sotho and English,
irrespective of the language proficiency scores in both languages. Secondly, reading
comprehension scores were higher in L2 than in L1 at the end of the year. Thirdly, there
was a large gap between language scores and reading scores in both languages; the gaps
narrowed somewhat in the post-tests. For example, even though learners scored quite
high for L1 language, their reading scores in L1 were low; the gap between L1 language
and L1 reading reduced from about 40% to 30% in the post-test, even though this was a
fairly homogeneous group of learners, linguistically, who had acquired literacy in the L1
from Grade 1. Fourthly, although reading rates were slow, the learners were reading
slower in N. Sotho than they were in English at the end of the year. This is consistent with
Table 1. Mean scores (SD in parentheses) for language, reading comprehension and reading rate in English
and N. Sotho.
2005
Language (%)
(SD)
Minimum
Maximum
Reading comprehension (%)
(SD)
Minimum
Maximum
Reading rate (wpm)
Minimum
Maximum
2005
English
pre-tests
English
post-tests
Gains
N Sotho
pre-tests
N Sotho
post-tests
60.2
(22.07)
2.9
92.6
29.5
(13.7)
3.8
62
98
49
167
62.7
(24.6)
0
97
42
(18.7)
4.7
88.1
106
46
166
2.5
70.8
(16.7)
1.8
94.5
30
(12.6)
0
71.4
–
–
–
68
(12.6)
1
95
37.2
(17.3)
3.2
84.7
93
21
177
12.5
Gains
2.8
7.2
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
49
Table 2. Differences between pre- and post-test scores.
Batho Pele
Pre/post
Pre/post
Pre/post
Pre/post
differences
differences
differences
differences
in
in
in
in
L1
L1
L2
L2
language
reading
language
reading
T
df
Significance
(two-tailed)
0.98
6.26
2.99
10.61
98
98
96
96
.327
.000
.004
.000
results from the high school study, where Grade 8 reading rates in the African languages
were consistently lower than English reading rates (Matjila & Pretorius 2004).
Research question 2: Will attention to reading and greater access to books improve
reading test scores in both languages?
As shown in Table 1, reading comprehension scores increased from pre- to post-tests in
both languages, while language scores did not. Paired sample t-tests showed significant
differences between pre- and post-test L2 proficiency scores (a small but significant gain
of 2.5%) and reading scores (a significant gain of 12.5%). While L1 reading scores also
showed a significant difference between pre- and post-test times (a 7.2% gain), L1
proficiency dropped slightly ( 2.8%). The paired t-test results are shown in Table 2. The
fact that there was only a small gain in English language proficiency and no significant
change in N. Sotho language proficiency during the same time period suggests that the
changes in reading performance cannot simply be ascribed to maturational changes over
time, as the language measures were not similarly affected by maturation.
What was striking about the pre-test results was the large number of very low scores
achieved by Grade 7 students (several of whom were over-age for their grade). For
example, in the pre-tests there were 31 learners scoring under 20% for reading
comprehension. (According to McCormick [1995], readers who achieve 60% or less for
comprehension on standardised reading tests are reading at ‘frustration level’.) By
November the number of very weak readers had dropped to six, and whereas only one
student scored above 60% in L2 reading in the pre-test, by November there were 18
students who scored above 60% for L2 reading.
Research question 3: What is the relationship between language and reading ability in
N. Sotho and in English, and does it change during the course of the year?
To explore the relationship between language and reading, Pearson Product Moment
correlations between language proficiency and reading ability in N. Sotho and in English
in pre- and post-tests were performed. These correlations are shown in Table 3.
Although all the correlations were significant, it is interesting to note that L1 language
did not show a strong link with L1 reading at the pre-test stage (r 5 .38); this increased to
a moderate correlation by November (r 5 .54). In contrast, L2 language and L2 reading
correlated strongly at both the pre- and post-test stages (r 5 .62 and r 5 .70, respectively).
With regard to reading relationships, while pre- and post-test L1 reading scores
correlated strongly (r 5 .65), this correlation was much stronger with pre- and post-test
L2 reading scores (r 5 .76). Initially L1 reading showed a moderately low correlation
with L2 reading (r 5 .41), but by the end of the year this relationship had strengthened
considerably (r 5 .79).
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
50
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
Table 3. Correlation matrix showing relationships between language and reading comprehension in N. Sotho
and English.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Pre-L1 language
Pre-L1 reading
Pre-L2 language
Pre-L2 reading
Post-L1 language
Post-L1 reading
Post-L2 language
Post-L2 reading
Note:
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
.380**
–
.546**
.466**
–
.287**
.415**
.616**
–
.636**
.478**
.388**
.388**
–
.473**
.648**
.598**
.598**
.544**
–
.597**
.502**
.888**
.594**
.678**
.623**
–
.597**
.582**
.681**
.759**
.497**
.792**
.696**
–
**
Correlation is significant at the .01 level two-tailed.
Table 4. Simultaneous multiple regression predicting L2 reading.
Pre-test
b
Significance
.581
.182
.0005
.047
Predictor variables
L2 language
L1 reading
96 5 21.532, po.0005
Adjusted R2 5 .384
F3,
Post-test
F3,
b
Significance
.606
.350
.0005
.0005
Predictor variables
L1 reading
L2 language
91 5 68.813, po.0005
Adjusted R2 5 .684
Table 5. Simultaneous multiple regression predicting L1 reading.
Pre-test
Predictor variables
L1 language
L2 reading
F2,
5 15.934, p o .0005
Adjusted R2 5 .232
96
b
Significance
.286
.333
.002
.000
Post-test
Predictor variables
L1 language
L2 reading
F2,
5 93.000, po.0005
Adjusted R2 5 .644
98
b
Significance
.192
.696
.006
.000
Multiple regression analyses were used to tease apart these relationships more clearly
to see which variables predicted L2 reading at both the pre- and the post-test stages. The
dependent variable was L2 reading, and the predictor variables were L1 language, L1
reading and L2 language. Because the study was exploratory, the enter (simultaneous)
method was used. As shown in Tables 4 and 5, significant models emerged for both the
pre-test and the post-test stages, but the strength of the models and the contributions of
the variables changed over time.
The first regression explored the predictors of L2 reading at pre- and post-test (see
Table 4). This analysis revealed that while L2 language accounted for 58% of the L2
reading variance at the start of the reading project (thus providing support for the
Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis), by the end of the year the situation had flipped, and L1
reading now contributed 60% of the variance, with language only contributing 35%
(thereby providing support for the Interdependence Hypothesis).
However, given that L1 reading lagged behind L2 reading, and given too that the
learners had far greater exposure to L2 texts than to L1 texts, it was decided to explore the
data further by using a regression analysis to determine which variables predicted L1
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
51
Table 6. Simultaneous multiple regression predicting academic performance.
Pre-test
Predictor variables
L2 language
L2 reading
L1 reading
F4,
5 39.869, p o .0005
Adjusted R2 5 .613
94
b
Significance
.408
.381
.177
.000
.000
.018
Post-test
F4,
Predictor variables
L2 language
L2 reading
L1 reading
5 40.483, po.0005
Adjusted R2 5 .629
89
b
Significance
.401
.279
.235
.000
.016
.030
reading, at both the pre- and post-test stages. These analyses are shown in Table 5. Using
the enter method, significant models emerged for both the pre-test and the post-test
stages, but again the model only accounted for a small amount of the variance initially,
and the contributions of the variables changed over time.
This analysis revealed that at both pre- and post-test stages, L2 reading contributed
more to the variance in L1 reading than did L1 language. While the L1 contributed 28%
of the variance initially, this dropped to 19% at the post-test stage, when L2 reading
became a very strong predictor, accounting for 69% of the variance by the end of the
year. By this stage, the learners’ reading skills had improved in both languages, but they
had had more exposure to a variety of L2 texts than to L1 texts. These results indicate that
the direction of influence can go from L2 to L1.
Research question 4: What is the relationship between L1 and L2 language, L1 and L2
reading ability and school performance (as measured in the final examination results)?
The final research question explores the contributions made by L1 and L2 language, and
L1 and L2 reading ability, to school performance, as measured in the final examination
results. The examination results reflect the total scores derived from eight different Grade
7 subjects, namely English, N. Sotho, Afrikaans, Maths, Natural Science, Social Science,
Life Orientation and Technology.
A multiple regression analysis was performed, with L1 language, L1 reading, L2
language and L2 reading included in the model for both pre- and post-test stages, using
the enter method. The results are shown in Table 6.
In these analyses, L1 language did not account for a significant amount of the variance.
While L2 language proficiency accounted for 40% of the variance at both pre- and posttest stages, it is interesting to note how L2 reading accounted for more of the variance at
the pre-test (38%) than the post-test. At post-test, there was an increased contribution
(23%) from L1 reading, with L2 reading now accounting for 28% of the variance.
To examine reading distribution patterns over time, the learners’ performance on the
language and reading tests were matched against their academic performance at school. The
total mean scores for each learner, as reflected in the final November examinations, placed
the learners into one of four achievement categories used by the Department of Education,
namely Not Achieved (0–39%), Partly Achieved (40–49%), Achieved (50–69%) and
Outstanding (70–100%). Although there is some dissatisfaction with these groupings, they
are de facto categories used by all schools. The learners’ academic or ‘examination’ profile
across the language and reading variables is shown in Table 7 below. The ‘gap’ column
refers to the gap between performance in language and reading in both languages, while
the ‘gains’ column reflects the gains in language and reading from pre- to post-test.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
52
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
Table 7. Comparison of L1 and L2 language and reading proficiency across the four academic achievement
categories.
Academic category
Language and reading
assessment
Not Achieved (n 5 11)
L1
L1
L2
L2
L1
L1
L2
L2
L1
L1
L2
L2
L1
L1
L2
L2
Partly Achieved (n 5 15)
Achieved (n 5 51)
Outstanding (n 5 17)
language
reading
language
reading
language
reading
language
reading
language
reading
language
reading
language
reading
language
reading
Pre-test
mean
52.3
17.8
17.6
14.1
71.3
23.4
49.5
20.4
70.2
30.3
63.8
28.9
78.4
38.3
77.1
44.3
Pre-test
gap
34.5
3.5
47.9
29.1
39.9
34.9
40.1
32.8
Post-test
mean
39.3
15.3
22.9
18.7
67.7
23.9
52.2
31.7
71.7
39.7
66.2
42.1
77.2
54.9
86.4
67.6
Post-test
gap
24
4.2
43.8
20.5
32
24.1
22.3
18.8
Gains
13
2.5
5.3
4.6
3.6
.05
2.7
11.3
1.5
9.4
2.4
13.2
1.2
16.6
9.3
23.3
It is interesting to note, in the pre-tests, the large gaps between achievement
in L1 language and L1 reading, as also the large gaps, but to a slightly lesser extent, in
L2 language and L2 reading. As reading skills improved, the gap between language
and reading performance slowly started closing. This did not happen equally for
all the learners. The learners in the Not Achieved and Partly Achieved groups actually
lost some L1 language and only made very small gains in L2 language. While the
learners in the Partly Achieved group showed an 11.3% improvement in L2 reading,
they did not show any upward mobility in their L1 language and reading. In contrast,
learners who passed Grade 7 were learners who showed improvements in both L1 and
L2 reading.
Finally, a discriminant analysis was performed with academic performance as the
dependent variable and L1 language, L1 reading, L2 language and L2 reading as the
predictor variables. A total of 94 cases were analysed. Because the groups were unequal
in size, the analysis was computed from group sizes. Univariate ANOVAs showed that
the four academic groups differed significantly on each of the four predictor variables,
with the value of the discriminant function differing significantly for the four academic
groups (w2, 12df, 5 109.39, p 5 0.000). The correlations between predictor variables and
the discriminant function suggest that L2 language (.534), L2 reading (.512) and L1
reading (.291) were the best predictors of academic performance. L1 language did not
emerge as a significant predictor. Overall, the discriminant function successfully
predicted outcomes for 74.5% of cross-validated groups correctly classified. Accurate
predictions were made for 63.6% of the Not Achieved learners, 33.3% of the Partially
Achieved students, 86.3% of the Achieved students and 82.4% of the Outstanding
students. The fact that the Partially Achieved students were less easy to predict is perhaps
not surprising: although they show similar characteristics to the learners who failed (no
upward mobility of L1 language or reading skills), they showed some features of the
achieving learners, namely an increase in L2 reading, albeit a smaller increase.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
53
Discussion
The study reported here is part of a relatively small-scale, 3-year, work-in-progress
project. Given that the study was largely project driven rather than research driven and
that different tests were used in the pre-and post-tests, the examination of the data
collected during the course of the first year was exploratory and the findings must be
treated with some caution. The continuation of the reading project over the next 2 years
may yet throw up further shifting patterns of relationship between L1 and L2 language
and reading skills. Despite these limitations, we feel that the longitudinal data in the study
throw up some interesting patterns underlying the complex dynamics of L1 and L2
language and reading proficiency levels in a disadvantaged educational setting that is
fairly typical of many schools across South Africa and the rest of the continent. The study
also identifies areas for further, more detailed research.
Print environment and reading agenda at school
The pre-test results are indicative of the kind of L1 and L2 language and reading
accomplishments that can be expected in high-poverty schools when learners have limited
exposure to texts, and little attention is given to actively nurturing reading abilities. Good
readers should show a strong alignment of scores between language and reading
performance. The large gap between performance on the language and the reading tests
indicates that language proficiency alone, especially in the L1, does not guarantee ability to
read in a language. The fact that the learners’ L1 reading was initially marginally better
than L2 reading (except for the Outstanding learners whose L2 reading was in advance of
their L1 reading) might have been due to the fact that the N. Sotho pre-test was written a
month after the English pre-test. By then, the reading project was already into its third
month of implementation and learners were starting to read more often.
The post-test results are encouraging in that they show that the barriers to learning that
poverty imposes can be overcome if learners have access to books and if the school puts
reading on the daily agenda. By the end of the year, mean reading levels in both L1 and L2
had improved, even though mean L1 language levels had not increased, and L2 language
levels only marginally so. Elley (1991) suggests that the effects of a reading programme
may take more than a year before they impact on language and school performance.
The changes in reading ability brought about interesting shifts in the relationships
between language and reading proficiency in different groups of learners that are relevant to
L2 reading research. These changes occurred as a result of changes in the print environment
and in the reading agenda at the school. This suggests that any theory of L2 reading
needs to be context sensitive. Current formulations of the Linguistic Interdependence and
the Linguistic Threshold hypotheses assume a reading context (i.e. access to books and the
development of L1 reading skills) that may not generally obtain in the formal learning
contexts of the developing world. There are three notable patterns underlying the changes
in reading at the school during the year, as discussed below.
Teaching factor and negative Matthew effects
In spite of having had N. Sotho as LoLT for 3 years in the foundation phase, the Grade 7
learners at Batho Pele had problems with reading comprehension in both N. Sotho and
English. These findings point to the importance of the teaching factor and the long-term
consequences that negative Matthew effects can have on reading.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
54
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
Before the intervention, nothing much was being done about reading at Batho Pele, and
the learners had very little access to texts in either the L1 or the L2. At pre-test time, 30%
of the cohort of Grade 7 learners were reading below a 20% comprehension level. Several
were over-age for their grade level, suggesting a previous ‘Not achieved’ track record
during their primary schooling. When a few of the very weak Grade 7 readers were
assessed individually, they were found to have poor knowledge of letter–sound
relationships and weak word recognition skills, in both L1 and L2. They even had
difficulty reading Grade 2 and 3 texts in N. Sotho. This possibly points to an inadequate
phonics basis in the foundation phase. Research consistently shows that if sound decoding
skills are not well established during the early primary school years, many learners find it
difficult to catch up later (Adams, 1990; Chall, Jacobs & Baldwin, 1990; Paran, 1996).
The seemingly modest mean gains made by the learners highlight the challenge of trying
to simply catch up on basic reading skills as late as Grade 7, a stage when precious time and
effort is needed to prepare children conceptually and linguistically for the demands of high
school. Furthermore, the class sizes at Batho Pele were large (about 54 per class). The low
mean post-test scores point to the challenges that lie ahead. Regular exposure to a variety of
L1 and L2 texts is needed to push learners’ reading levels to more acceptable levels.
The home language factor did not appear to affect performance. All the learners in the
Not achieved group had N. Sotho as a home language; all the Grade 7 learners who were
from a non-N. Sotho home background (18%) were in the Achieved group. The learners
who failed at this school did so for other reasons, and not because they were not N. Sotho
speaking: one of the reasons for failure relates to severe reading difficulties that were
never attended to in the lower grades. Whether this pattern obtains at other linguistically
heterogeneous schools is obviously an area that merits further research.
Factors that predict reading proficiency
The findings in this study provide some support for the Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis
with regard to L2 reading. However, this hypothesis assumes that readers already possess
L1 reading skills and knowledge that can be transferred if the L2 proficiency threshold is
reached. The large gap between language proficiency and reading ability, especially in the
L1, in this set of data suggests otherwise. In this study, like studies elsewhere, L2
proficiency emerged as a strong determinant of L2 reading initially. However, the
longitudinal findings also reveal the shifting dynamics of this relationship; as the learners’
reading skills improved in both L1 and L2, these reading skills seemed to mutually support
each other, with L2 proficiency having a smaller effect. But why did the weaker readers
(in the Not Achieved and Partly Achieved categories) not make gains in their L1
proficiency or L1 reading over time, yet make some gains in L2 reading during the same
period? Does a lack of L1 reading knowledge gradually short-circuit the use of L1 skills
over time? If there is little L1 reading knowledge to transfer in the first place, do these
learners compensate by developing basic reading skills in the L2 and then use these
dominant L2 reading skills to bootstrap themselves to slightly higher levels – provided
they have some kind of L2 proficiency threshold (as the Partly Achieved students did, but
not the Not Achieved students)? The gap between language proficiency and reading ability
in both languages is an area that needs to be further investigated in bilingual reading
research in order to better understand the constraints of a proficiency threshold in reading.
The findings in this study also lend some support to the Interdependence Hypothesis in
that reading ability seemed to transfer across the languages. However, whereas this
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
55
hypothesis generally assumes that transfer occurs from L1 to L2, in this study transfer
seemed to occur bidirectionally. As noted earlier, as the learners’ reading skills improved
in both L1 and L2, these reading skills seemed to mutually support each other. However,
given that the children had access to more and varied texts in the L2 and seemed to read
more in the L2, and given too that their L2 reading skills developed more strongly by the
end of the year than their L1 reading skills, it seems that their L2 reading was being
brought to bear on their L1 reading (particularly among the Outstanding students), rather
than the other way round.
The study makes a contribution to bilingual reading research in that, surprisingly, the
findings indicated that L1 proficiency did not significantly predict L1 reading
performance. Instead, L2 reading was a far stronger predictor of L1 reading ability.
This may be due to the fact that what little reading these learners do tends to be done in
the L2. Reading skills developed in a dominant language can seem to support the
development of reading skills in a language in which reading is not often done. This is
obviously an area that merits further research. It may also be fruitful to look at the subtle
interactions of language and reading factors among different achievement groups in
bilingual settings, in both urban and rural areas.
The issues around L1 proficiency and literacy in developing countries also need to be
more closely examined – what is taught, how it is taught, how it is assessed, how dialectal
variety is affected or accommodated in relation to standardised versions, whether learners
become diglossic (‘mixed township slang’ for everyday interactions and ‘schooled’,
standard N. Sotho for classroom use) and how these factors impact on reading in the
home language are all issues that await future research. Oller (1979, p. 58) points out that
scores on a dictation test correlate highly with numerous other language tests. Whether
these correlations also obtain in education contexts characterised by linguistic diversity
are issues that need closer scrutiny.
These findings highlight the importance of examining more closely the ways in which
factors such as quality of teaching, time spent on task, class size, availability of and
access to books affect language and reading accomplishment in the L1 and L2. More
carefully controlled quasi-experimental studies, the use of a variety of assessment tools,
qualitative research involving classroom observations and case studies of individual
learners would help us gain greater understanding of language and reading interactions in
bilingual reading research in learning contexts that are so vastly different from those that
generally prevail in more affluent developed countries.
Factors that predict academic performance
Both the regression and the discriminant analyses showed that while L2 proficiency is an
important determinant of academic performance, reading ability is also crucially
important. This applies to both L2 and L1 reading. There was clear evidence of positive
Matthew effects in reading: only when gains were made in both L1 and L2 reading did
learners make it into the Outstanding band of academic performance. These were also the
learners who started to narrow the gap between language proficiency and reading ability
in both languages. In addition, their mean L2 comprehension levels were well above
60%. Although the Achieved learners showed a 13% increase in L2 reading, they were
still reading well below 50% in both languages and the gap between language and reading
proficiency was still quite large. Findings such as these point to fruitful areas for future
research. These findings underline the importance of linking school-based reading
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
56
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
research to academic performance, especially in developing countries where a strong
literate culture is not yet firmly embedded within the school system and reading is
regarded as an ‘add on’, to pass the time when all the important work has been done.
Implications for education
Soon after the newly elected democracy in South Africa in 1994, the basis was laid for a
new outcomes-based approach to education, which forms the foundation of the transformed
curriculum in South Africa. According to the revised curriculum, competence in the home
language should be developed in order to provide ‘a strong curriculum to support the
language of learning and teaching’ (Department of Education, 2002, p. 4). Despite explicit
and official attention given to the development of home language literacy in principle,
national policy does not yet translate well into action in the classroom.
Various factors that are usually associated with literacy accomplishment do not seem
to seem to come together felicitously in many schools in developing countries. There are
still schools without libraries, schools where the delivery and distribution of textbooks is
highly problematic, where little time is spent on reading tasks, where teachers use
inappropriate instructional methods, where reading problems develop in the early grades
and are left unattended through the higher grades and where children have minimal
access to print materials. All these factors require urgent attention. Special planning and
budgeting in particular needs to go into resolving the problem of availability of books in
the home languages.
Even if language policy provides for an additive bilingual programme, literacy
development cannot occur in a print vacuum. Learners need to read in order to become
good readers, and in order to read, they need exposure to a variety of print material. The
magnitude of this problem is reflected at a micro level at Batho Pele. Even though
advocacy for reading in the L1 is a central feature of the reading project, and even though
there is funding to purchase L1 books, the fact is that the learners simply do not have
exposure to as wide a variety of texts in the L1 as in the L2.
The relevance of language policy in literacy development should not obscure the
critical role of reading in the learning context and the need for constant exposure to texts.
Doing one’s schooling in a home language does not necessarily make one a good reader
or a good student. The quality of an education system depends vitally on access to books.
The notion of learning to play football without a ball is preposterous to anyone familiar
with soccer – it would cause outrage among the soccer fraternity. Yet the fact that many
hundreds of thousands of learners are expected to acquire literacy skills without books is
a common occurrence in many schools in developing countries, and one that hardly raises
an eyebrow. This study indicates that putting the reading ball onto the educational
playing field not only enhances skill but also makes the game more meaningful.
Acknowledgements
The ‘Reading is FUNdamental’ project, from which this research derives, is funded by
the D.G. Murray Trust. This material is also based upon work supported by the National
Research Foundation. We would also like to express our sincere gratitude to all the
learners and staff at the school for participating so generously and willingly in the
assessments. Thanks are also due to Dr L. Fletcher from the Department of Statistics,
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
PLAYING FOOTBALL WITHOUT A BALL
57
Unisa, who unstintingly helped with statistical advice. The feedback and suggestions by
three anonymous reviewers are also gratefully acknowledged.
Note
1. Not the real name of the school.
References
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Alderson, J.C. (1984). Reading in a foreign language: A reading problem or a language problem?
In J.C. Alderson & A. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language. (pp. 1–27). London: Longman.
Bernhardt, E.B. & Kamil, M.L. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the
linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 16, 15–34.
Bossers, B. (1991). On thresholds, ceilings and short-circuits: The relations between L1 reading, L2 reading and
L2 knowledge. In J.H. Hulstijn & J.F. Matter (Eds.), AILA Review, 8, 45–60.
Brisbois, J.E. (1995). Connections between first- and second-language reading. Journal of Reading Behavior,
27, 565–584.
Chall, J.S., Jacobs, V.A. & Baldwin, L.E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Department of Education (2002). Revised National Curriculum statement grades R–9. Pretoria: Department of
Education.
Education Library Information and Technology Services (2003). A response to the recommendation of Grade 3
systemic evaluations. Study by ‘Quality assurance’.
Elley, W.B. (1991). Acquiring literacy in a second language: The effect of book-based programmes. Language
Learning, 41, 375–411.
George, D. & Mallory, P. (2003). SPSS for windows. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Grade 6 Systemic Evaluation Report (2005). Pretoria: Department of Education.
Matjila, D.S. & Pretorius, E.J. (2004). Bilingual and biliterate? An exploratory study of Grade 8 reading skills in
Setswana and English. Per Linguam, 20, 1–21.
McCormick, S. (1995). Instructing students who have literacy problems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merril.
Mothibeli, A. (2005). Cross-country achievement results from the SACMEQ II project – 2000 to 2002.
A quantitative analysis of education systems in Southern and Eastern Africa. EduSource Data News
No. 49/October 2005. www.edufound.org.za
Oakhill, J. & Cain, K. (1998). Problems in text comprehension: Current perspectives and recent research.
In P. Reitsma & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Problems and interventions in literacy development. (pp. 177–192).
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Oller, J.W. (1979). Language tests at school. London: Longman.
Paran, A. (1996). Reading in EFL: Facts and fictions. ELT Journal, 50, 25–34.
Serpell, R. (1989). The cultural context of language learning: Problems confronting English teachers in Zambia.
In C. Kennedy (Ed.), Language planning and English language teaching. (pp. 92–109). London: Prentice
Hall.
Thomas, W.P. & Collier, V.P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’
long-term academic achievement. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence,
University of California. http://www.crede.org/research/llaa/1.1es.html.
United Nations Report. Statistics Division – Millennium Indicator Database (2003). http://unstats.un.org/unsd/
mi/mi _series_resultsd.asp?rowID=591 (accessed 18 June, 2004).
Wafawarowa, B. (2000). Book development policies in Africa. Meta-info Bulletin, 9, 15–16.
Webber, B.L. (1980). Syntax beyond the sentence: Anaphora. In R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce & W.F. Brewer (Eds.),
Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Walter, S.L. & Davis, P.M. (2005). The Eritrea national reading survey. Dallas, TX: SIL International.
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007
58
PRETORIUS and MAMPURU
Williams, E. (1996). Reading in two languages at Year five in African primary schools. Applied Linguistics, 17,
182–208.
Williams, E. & Cooke, J. (2002). Pathways and labyrinths: Language and education in development. TESOL
Quarterly, 36, 297–322.
Received 3 April 2006; revised version received 2 August 2006.
Address for correspondence: Elizabeth J. Pretorius, Department of Linguistics,
University of South Africa, PO Box 392, Pretoria 0003, South Africa. E-mail:
[email protected]
r United Kingdom Literacy Association 2007