<em>Kaduwa</em> or <em>Manne</em>? Issues and Tensions Related to Bilingual Education Policy in Sri Lanka

Abstract

Policies related to language have had far reaching consequences for social inequality in Sri Lanka as they have had in many other postcolonial nations. Consequently, language policy, specifically language in education policy has been frequently mobilized in efforts to address social inequality, with varying degrees of success. This paper focuses on a decade of implementation of such a policy that was conceptualized to address inequality-the bilingual education (BE) policy of 2002 initiated primarily in order to effect changes in language learning and thereby deal with issues of inequality based on differences in levels of language proficiency. Utilizing a methodology that includes document analysis, focus group interviews and semi structured interviews with important stakeholders in the bilingual education project this study attempts to report on the status of an initiative after more than ten years of its implementation, with regard to attitudes, issues and challenges. It was revealed that unresolved tensions to do with the demand and clamour for English due to its market value and the forces of globalization on one hand and the struggle to maintain a national and local identity on the other are reflected both in the circulars and in the structural and attitudinal factors related to implementation. The study revealed the emergence of a new 'elite' group among students, those who, because they study in the 'English medium' see themselves as superior and distance themselves from the mother tongue medium students, and the ineffectiveness of ministry circulars and campaigns to position English as a tool rather than a weapon

Kaduwa, humor and language policing: Memes and folk linguistics in Sri Lanka

“…Kaduwa literally means 'sword' in Sinhala, a weapon for the elite to cut down the lower classes who do not know English. English still has the potential to divide, discriminate and denigrate even after more than 7 decades of independence from Britain (Medawattegedera, 2015). Kandiah (1984, p.139) eloquently explains how the metaphor crystallizes the socio -political psychological attitudes of the ... man who has no chance of beating the English dominated system...…”

Language Planning and Policy: Negotiating with Global Actors in Local Contexts

“…In Sri Lanka there has been a tendency for language planning and policy mechanisms in higher education to be overshadowed by an emphasis on the planning and execution of more traditional academic disciplines and programs of study. While committees are appointed by universities and faculties for the design and review of mainstream curricula, few or no committees are appointed for the specific purpose of language planning and policy, even though language policy has been a thorny issue in Sri Lanka's post-independence era for many areas (Coperahewa, 2009;Irshad, 2018;Medawattegedera, 2015;Perera, 2015;Raheem, 2006;Raheem & Ratwatte, 2004;Vamadevan, 1996). If such committees are appointed, there is no guarantee that they will be led by linguists, who, being trained in theoretical and applied disciplines of language and language use, are arguably the best equipped to make informed recommendations and decisions about language policies in plurilingual contexts.…”

“…Ensuring maximum participation in language planning is especially crucial in the case of policies related to ELT, given the complex nature of the attitudes and ideologies related to English in Sri Lanka. More than 60 years after the expulsion of English as a medium of education, the presence of English in the curriculum can still cause conflict, as Medawattegedera's (2015) account of the results of a recent language policy intervention in Sri Lanka's secondary school system makes clear. It is best therefore, to question, scrutinize, and carefully evaluate LPP not only in one specific Faculty of Arts, but in the university system as a whole, in order to avoid situations of dissatisfaction and even conflict.…”