In South Africa, students' academic success in tertiary environments is generally low, despite governmental or institutional interventions. Underpinned by McCroskey, Valencic and Richmond's (2004) General Model of Instructional Communication, we explored lecturer and student perceptions of lecturer clarity during instruction using a mixed-methods case study. A convenience sample of seven lecturers were interviewed and observed in situ. Questionnaires were completed by 252 first year students at a large South African university. Content and statistical data analyses revealed that a mismatch existed between lecturers' perceptions of their own instructional clarity and their students'. The high percentage of students who felt lost during a lecture suggests a high level of instructional dissonance, which might account for a less-than desirable academic throughput. We recommend that institutions quality assure lecturers' oral, written, content and process clarity prior to and during appointment.

In South Africa, Khelobedu-speaking leaners learn Sepedi as their ‘home language’ at school because Khelobedu (sometimes referred to as ‘Selobedu’) is classified as a dialect of Sotho. This article draws on the challenges that Grade 8 Khelobedu-speaking learners experience when writing in Sepedi Home Language. This article will encourage teachers to reflect on their teaching and support the learners to write better. The study aimed to investigate the Selobedu-speaking leaners’ writing experiences in Sepedi Home Language with reference to dialectical variations, exploring the strategies learners use to adapt and making recommendations to support them. A qualitative research study was conducted at two public high schools in Mopani District. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with four Sepedi teachers, learner group interviews with 30 learners from two high schools (15 per school) and 60 learner essays (30 per school). The data were analysed through content analysis and error analysis. Both the teacher interviews and learner focus group interviews revealed that the teachers used Khelobedu in the Sepedi classrooms. Moreover, teacher interviews also suggested that the learners also used Khelobedu words and pronunciation in their writing and spelt Sepedi words the way they pronounced them in Khelobedu. Further, the essays indicated that the learners struggled to write in Sepedi; they made spelling mistakes, had limited Sepedi vocabulary and struggled with conjunctive and disjunctive writing. Finally, the findings revealed that the dialectal variations between Khelobedu and Sepedi interfered with the learners’ writing instead of being additive. The learners used Khelobedu words in their writing and spelt Sepedi words the way they pronounced them in Khelobedu.

No abstract

No abstract