Functional foreign language literacy for higher education and research: The case of French in Nigerian universities

Abstract

African nations have always considered the knowledge of each other’s official language, principally English and French, as a means for their scientists to exchange their research work and findings with their counterparts across the linguistic barriers on the continent and in the world, and thereby hasten the pace of national development. Nigerian universities thus began in the early 1970s to teach French as a foreign language to students majoring in other disciplines. This paper conceptualizes this teaching in terms of the objective of giving the students a functional literacy in the foreign language, and examines it in terms of this objective and of how much it has been attained. It goes on to propose French for specific purposes as the strategy for attaining functional literacy in foreign languages by Nigerian scientists and experts in the various fields for the purpose of exchanging research information and enhancing their research.

Keywords

Exchange foreign languages French for specific purposes functional literacy Nigeria Nigerian universities research students of other disciplines

Introduction

Battestini (1971) reports that at the attainment of political independence by many of the African countries in the early 1960s, the need was strongly felt and expressed that university students in Africa – those future intellectuals, professionals and experts, and the very hope of their respective nations and of the continent at large – should acquire literacy in foreign languages to enable them to benefit from research and knowledge across the linguistic barriers on the continent and in the world at large. It was believed that this would make for the faster pace of development which the continent then stood, and still stands, in dire need of. Battestini’s words are worth quoting here at length if only to reveal the dramatic nature of the need as it was felt and expressed at the time:

Right from independence, scientific research in Africa was advancing at a galloping speed in all directions: pharmacology, psychiatry, medicine, economics and planning, social psychology … in-depth and general studies were being turned out in a frenzy …

By 1962 already, and ever increasingly afterwards, the need was felt to bring together researchers to examine their views and the progress of their research, to work in concert, and this brought about the era of conferences and colloquia … but then, the language barrier arose …

At the congress on Primitive History in Dakar, the anglophone participants would leave the hall when the francophone took the floor and vice versa. Recently a congress on geology resolved that students ought to be bilingual − after all geological strata do not recognize linguistic boundaries! [This and subsequent quotations from Battestini have been translated from French by the authors of this article.]

With specific regard to the situation in Nigeria, Battestini (1971) reports as follows:

More and more postgraduate students tell me daily; “I need to read and understand French to prepare my thesis” or “I must carry out research in a francophone country for my thesis”. The sum of all this simply is “You must perform a miracle”. And sadly enough, I cannot be of help.

Our colleagues who participate in numerous international conferences come to me with the same request. Our science, social science and agriculture students find to their surprise and even anguish that the reading list handed them by their lecturers contain titles in their field of specialty written in French.

Battestini (1971) further reports that to save the students from this predicament, the Department of Modern Languages of the University of Ibadan, where he was teaching at the time, did set up a French course titled ‘French as an ancillary subject’ or simply ‘Ancillary French’, the teaching of which began in the 1969/1970 academic year. He points out that the foreign language literacy to be given to this group of students has to be peculiar:

… it has been realized that a knowledge of the Fables of La Fontaine, of Shakespeare, of Rabelais, of Ezra Pound, of Beckett or of Ionesco, hardly helps one to understand or write a document in economics or foreign policy; that being able to translate Zola does not enable one to take notes in a conference on maize; that one could as well be able to read and yet remain dumb.

The anglophone intellectual or scientist felt very much an illiterate before his francophone counterpart or vice versa, and that, in spite of years of learning one another’s language …

This is to say that those students who major in disciplines other than the foreign languages they wish to be literate in, do not need the kind of knowledge of these languages given to those who major in them, and which at that time emphasized a sound knowledge of the major works and writers of literature. Such knowledge could not help them understand or write study and research materials in their respective fields of specialty.

When therefore the Department of Modern European Languages at the University of Ibadan set up the first courses in French for students majoring in other disciplines (French for non French major students), it was to teach them the type of French used in their respective disciplines, so as to enhance their studies and research in these disciplines. It was believed that this would make them progress faster in their studies and research by giving them access to the studies and research work of experts in their respective disciplines available in French on the African continent and in the world, a situation which would place the respective African nations, and ultimately the continent, on the fast lane of development. In other words, the study of French by anglophone students majoring in other disciplines was to give these students functional literacy in the language.

The Ibadan Ancillary French Programme which began in the 1969/1970 academic year was soon replicated in other Nigerian Universities. Treffgarne (1975: 98) tells us for instance that ‘French as an ancillary subject was available for students of Science, Mass Communication, Environmental Design and History at the University of Lagos in 1972/73’. Over the years, the number of disciplines whose students must study a foreign language, and particularly French, has kept increasing in Nigerian universities. As at today, the National Universities Commission (NUC) has ended up prescribing French as one of the General Studies subjects in the undergraduate curriculum of Nigerian universities (NUC, 2007: 12). This means that all undergraduates, whatever their disciplines, have to study French for a period of time during their programme. There can be only one reason for this − the increasing awareness of the need for foreign language literacy for our future intellectuals, experts and professionals.

From his practical experience at the very beginning of the teaching of French to university students majoring in other disciplines at Ibadan, Battestini had identified some impediments to the attainment of the objective of the programme, which is functional literacy in the language. More than 40 years since the pursuit of this objective in French first began at Ibadan in the 1969/1970 academic session, and in the light of the vast expansion of the programme and the increasing awareness of the need for this literacy, it is pertinent to examine how this teaching has fared thus far, with respect particularly to its effectiveness and the degree of attainment of its objectives, and to proffer remedies for identified weak points. However, for a cogent appraisal of this teaching, it is important first of all to ascertain that this teaching actually involves a literacy programme, and that this is in effect functional literacy.

A programme in functional foreign language literacy

We do agree with Otaburuagu (2002) that ‘there is a reciprocal relationship between language instruction and literacy. Admissibly, all concerns of language instruction are concerns about literacy since the language skills of reading and writing are the pivot on which the literacy process revolves’. Indeed in its everyday acceptation, literacy is the ability to read and write. While every normal user of a language practices the language skills of hearing and understanding and of speaking, it is only those described as ‘literate’ and who acquired this ‘literacy’ through language instruction that can read and write in the language. However, literacy professionals have conceptualized literacy beyond the mere ability to read and write, which has been categorized as basic or minimal literacy. The practical involvements and achievements of the ‘literate’ in diverse situations of human life and activity, have necessarily and logically influenced the technical definitions of literacy. Some such definition which we find appropriate for the literacy envisaged for university students of other disciplines who study a foreign language in order to enhance their studies and research in their areas of specialty, is given rather succinctly by Onukaogu (2002) as ‘the empowerment to read … and critically and creatively respond to’ the text. Seen in this perspective, literacy in French can enable the anglophone student or scholar to make meaningful use of material written in French for his or her studies or research.

The distinction by Otaburuagu (2002) between minimal literacy and functional literacy is also useful. For Otaburuagu, ‘functional literacy … makes it possible for an individual to appropriate meaning from texts and create other authentic texts himself by using the language medium, and in addition carry out his social and political duties in the community’. Occupational and professional duties, being aspects of social duties, are usually among the most important and the most regular that a functionally literate person carries out in his daily life and activities. The literacy which our university students seek to acquire in French and in foreign languages generally, would certainly fail to enable them to benefit from study and research documents in French in their own disciplines, if it did not enable the individual to appropriate meaning from such texts, and to create such texts himself if the need arises. When Battestini talked about knowledge of a foreign language which ‘hardly helps one to understand or write a document in economics or foreign policy’ or ‘to take notes in a conference on maize’, and that ‘the anglophone intellectual … felt very much an illiterate before his francophone counterpart and vice versa … in spite of years of learning one another’s language’, he was indeed talking about a non functional foreign language literacy.

Achieving functional literacy in French by majors in other disciplines

As Mbanefo (2006) rightly observed, ‘implementing the reading French course for non-language students in Nigerian universities raises questions about content and methodology’. But before we can properly consider these questions, there are two points to make about giving functional literacy in French to the category of students in question here.

The first is that given the present poor state of the teaching of French in Nigerian secondary schools, which is dictated by the status of French as a foreign language in Nigeria, the generality of Nigerian students will, for a long time to come, continue to arrive at the university with little or no knowledge of French. Whatever degree of literacy they attain in French will result from their study of the language at the university. This means that teaching of French to non French major university students will begin from the basics and must go a considerable way up to an appreciably advanced stage if these students must make functional use of the language. This is a project that must be taken much more seriously, and its content and methodology better planned, than is the case at present.

The other point concerns the fact that teaching French to university students majoring in other disciplines is essentially and ultimately teaching French for special purposes (FSP). Battestini (1971) had said as much when he observed that it is vain to hope to teach the specialist French of their disciplines to these students in the total of 75 h which the class contact hours amount to for the duration of the programme, when it would normally take three, four or five years. Mbanefo (2006) has also observed that ‘in terms of content’, French for students majoring in other disciplines ‘will be based on specialized texts with bearing in the students’ content – related courses’, which reveal ‘the themes and specialized vocabulary used in the foreign language to depict what they already know in their various fields of study’.

Bearing the above two points in mind, it is easy to see the direction in which the course content, teaching methodology, and by implication the training of teachers of this type of French, should go. With respect to appropriate course content, it is clear that this teaching will begin with the basic mechanics of the language, since the learners are mostly absolute beginners, and that it has to progress rapidly to those aspects of the language that will enable the students to tackle the demands of their discipline or profession. It might be instructive here to see the content structure proposed by CREDIF, one of the institutions teaching FSP in France, as cited by Battestini (1971):

Français Fondamental 1^er degré (Basic French Stage 1)

Français Fondamental 2 ^e degré (Basic French Stage 2)

Vocabulaire général d’orientation scientifique (general scientific vocabulary).

Specialist French of Broad Areas – Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, etc.

Specialist French of Specific Disciplines – Medicine, Geology, Civil Engineering, Mechanical Engineering etc.

Even at the level of general or basic French, the mechanics of language usage to be taught to majors in other disciplines are not the same needed by majors in French (see Mbanefo, 2006). And at the level of specialist French, as the CREDIF course content structure cited above already shows, the mechanics and features of language usage for majors of other disciplines studying French must vary. This is because features of language usage in the natural sciences and engineering are different from those in law, for instance, or in the humanities or in politics and diplomacy. Battestini (1971) had demonstrated this by pointing out some items of language usage which his syllabus of French for science students had focused on at Ibadan:

Science is objective and descriptive, hence the emphasis on the distribution of words in the sentence, on the function of words, on grammatical elements, and on conjugation. So the student must:

be able to observe the French sentence from the outside – objectively;

be able to name the constituent parts of the sentence using the Chomsky tree diagram, and a specific code;

be able to establish the types of relationship between words in the sentence (conjugation, gender, number, etc.);

learn essentially what is most important in the language of science, e.g. primacy of the indirect speech, of the indicative present (86%), of logical relationship, of nominalization, of impersonal forms, of the reflexive form … the importance of statistics, charts, codes, etc.

Just as the language needs and the features of language usage of specific fields of study determine the course content, they also determine the methodological approach to the teaching of these features. Looking again at the experience of Battestini (1971), we see him prioritising certain language skills over others in his teaching of French to science students:

Oral expression and comprehension were left out: nor did we retain dictation, expressive reading, theme or version.

We only concentrated on making the students to acquire written expression skills, and of this we only practiced what pertained to written comprehension.

The student must be able to read rapidly through an article and make notes in due form in English, hence the (need for the) technique of summary writing.

His reading of the French text has to be:

silent;

fast and with few annotations;

attentive to the context for important points.

The study of vocabulary is deliberately slight, since the knowledge of the English of his specialty can assist the student here.

It is reasonable to believe that Battestini must have kept reviewing his course content and his pedagogical approach on the basis of the practical experience he kept gaining on the job, and given that so many factors in these matters have since changed, whatever Battestini came up with regarding the content and the methodology of the teaching of French to students majoring in other disciplines cannot be said to be ‘the last word’ on these issues. It is interesting however to note that Mbanefo (2006) has agreed with Battestini (1971) on certain issues such as the emphasis on reading, specifically silent reading, and written comprehension skills.

Unlike the reading aloud that involves the four-way cycle we have described above, silent reading simply entails only decoding. This is the type of reading that is appropriate considering that the main purpose of reading is to get meaning from a written message. It is considered appropriate in view of the fact that the non-language students are required to make restricted use of a foreign language. Rather they need to access information in French in order to enhance their performance as specialists in their different areas of choice as lawyers, engineers, doctors, architects, environmentalists, etc. (Mbanefo, 2006)

Mbanefo’s other submissions have also agreed with certain other aspects of Battestini’s course content and teaching methodology. For instance, in Mbanefo’s view as in Battestini’s, ‘non-language students only need to scan through texts to have a glimpse of the themes and specialized vocabulary used in the foreign language to depict what they already know in their various fields of study’ (Mbanefo, 2006).

All that has been said so far on matters of course content and teaching methodology underscores the type of factors that need to be taken into consideration in working these issues out professionally, if the teaching of French to Nigerian university students majoring in other disciplines is to produce functional literacy in these learners. But professionally prepared course content and teaching methodology also imply that the teachers must be professionally trained in the teaching of French to this category of learners if they are to be able to prepare this type of course content and apply appropriate methodology, where prepared materials are not available. Where they are, the teachers must be able to understand and use them. And indeed a number of such materials have been prepared by several institutions in France, CREDIF for instance. Unfortunately, most teachers in Nigerian universities who are engaged in the teaching of French to non-French major students have not undergone any specialist training in French for specific disciplines/professions, nor in the methodology for teaching this. Only an insignificant few have sought to specialize in these matters. With the ever increasing number of students who are coming into the ‘French for other disciplines’ programme since French became a General Studies subject, and given the great need for the programme to actually give functional literacy to the learners, the authorities of the French Departments of Nigerian universities should encourage a greater number of their teachers to develop an interest in this field and receive some specialist training in FSP. In order to make such training available to the greatest number of teachers possible within the shortest possible time, French Departments of Nigerian Universities could liaise with the relevant authorities in Nigeria and France to arrange for experts in FSP in France to visit Nigeria periodically to conduct short training programmes. These training sessions could be held in one location for maximum utilization of human and material resources, preferably at the Nigeria Inter-University French Studies Centre, Lagos, and for a minimum period of three months each time, perhaps during every long vacation. Given the need to use professionally prepared manuals for these French courses in our universities, and the fact that most materials prepared by Nigerian teachers are sub-standard, because of inadequate or complete lack of appropriate training of the authors, the purchase of existing foreign professionally prepared manuals in French for diverse specialties is highly desirable. Nigerian teachers could even begin their ‘autoformation’ (self tuition) with these manuals before they use them with their students, even as they undertake the long vacation training recommended above.

Another major problem that has continued to hinder the achievement of functional literacy in the teaching of French has been insufficient class hours, as earlier hinted in this discussion. The present general policy on the maximum credit load that a student may carry in a semester in Nigerian universities as prescribed or recommended by the NUC, which stands at 22 credit hours, does not allow for any substantial increase beyond the current general practice of a maximum of 2 credit hours of French for non majors. This is despite the fact that programme in French for other disciplines only lasts for two semesters (usually only the first year of University studies) for most students. And yet since the days of Battestini this has been found to be grossly insufficient for work that could provide functional literacy. The way out seems to be the extension of the period of study to cover the whole duration of the Bachelor Degree programme. The benefit of this extended period of study is that students can attain a standard that will enable them to read text-books, research reports and other such materials in their specialist disciplines with fairly good understanding, which is what the whole programme seeks to achieve. This has been proved by the experience of these writers’ students from the Department of History and International Affairs, whom we convinced to continue the study of French with them for 2 h a week for a period of another two years beyond the university approved course taken during the first year. However, if French courses are put on the syllabus for the duration of the Bachelor degree programme for the category of students in question here, continuation of the study of French beyond the second or third year (depending on the duration of the whole degree programme) should be optional. The reason for this is that after two or three years on the programme, provided it has been well taught, the student should be able to weigh his/her aptitude together with his/her attainments so far, and on the basis of this, project what his/her attainment could be after more advanced work, and thus decide on continuing or discontinuing the study of the language. That way, those who continue would be doing so in the full consciousness of their need for competence in the language, based on concrete previous experience and most probably also based on their future career plans. Such students would be adequately motivated and ready to put in the effort needed to achieve positive functional results. The programme would then easily give functional literacy because it would be need-driven, as Mbanefo (2003) has shown.

One other impediment to the attainment of functional literacy in French is the heterogeneous classes which bring together under one syllabus and one teacher students majoring in such diverse domains as the humanities, the natural and applied sciences, the social sciences, environmental studies, agriculture, the management sciences, etc. The solution proposed for this seems to receive general acknowledgment. Mbanefo (2006) for instance submits that:

It is a well known fact that teaching/learning is optimal in fairly homogenous study groups (i.e. study groups with similar preoccupations). In order to apply the principle of homogeneity … it is necessary to group students according to their disciplines. Considering the large number of students that will be involved across the entire population of learners outside the French departments … it is advisable to group together Architecture, Geography, Geology, Town Planning, Landscaping. Another group may comprise those in Economics, Political Science, International Relations, Law and the like, while yet another group will be made up of students in ICT and Mass communication.

Put more concisely, class groups in French for majors in other disciplines could be arranged on faculty basis. However, where a faculty produces a very large class, this could be split into different groups of manageable size, possibly on the basis of individual disciplines or of affinity between disciplines. This is of course very close to what Battestini had suggested, except that Battestini reserves this effort at homogeneity for the higher levels of study when students will actually be working with texts in their respective areas or disciplines of specialization.

With respect to the issue of reducing class size, the best solution in our opinion lies in recruiting a good number of teachers into the Departments of French of Nigerian universities, to bring about a smaller number of students for a teacher in a class. And as we have earlier said with respect to another issue, these teachers should receive a good training in the teaching of French for specific disciplines or professions. It is our conviction that these measures would facilitate functional literacy in French for Nigerian university students majoring in other disciplines.

Conclusion

This discussion was all about the Nigerian experience in the teaching of French to university students who major in other disciplines, with a view to making them acquire a foreign language literacy that enhances their studies and research, and indeed their professional performance, in their respective fields of specialization, by enabling them to access information and knowledge in such fields which are disseminated in French. The discussion began by observing that this objective had informed the very beginning of the teaching of French to this category of students in Nigerian universities in the early 1970s, and has not changed ever since. Observing further that the teaching of French to this group of learners has not been able to attain this objective over the years, our discussion has identified the reasons for this failure, and has proposed certain measures for attaining it.

We invite scholars and practitioners concerned with similar foreign language literacy programmes, in Nigeria and elsewhere, to consider the issues raised here, particularly with respect to the difficulties impeding the realization of the specified objective, and to the measures proposed here to bring about its realization. Our hope is that reactions to this discussion may contribute to the improvement of the organization and teaching of French, and indeed of other foreign languages, to students of other disciplines.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the Vice Chancellor of the University of Uyo for offering Dr Uhuegbu a sabbatical appointment, and to the Vice Chancellor of Abia State University for releasing him to take up the appointment. The collaborative work by the authors which resulted in this article was carried out during Dr Uhuegbu’s tenure at Uyo. The authors are equally grateful to the many colleagues with whom they first examined the various issues presented in this article.

Author biographies

Alozie R Uhuegbu is an Associate Professor of French at Abia State University, Uturu, Nigeria, where he teaches courses and carries out research in Specialized Translation, and Terminology and LSP phraseology. He collaborated with Mike Edung on the work on this paper during his sabbatical tenure at the University of Uyo.

Mike TU Edung is a Senior Lecturer in French at the University of Uyo, Nigeria, where he teaches courses and carries out research in the areas of French Lexicology, Terminology and LSP phraseology, Comparative Stylistics of French and English, and Translation. He has been researching into and developing the syllabus in FSP over the last 10 years, and is currently developing a theoretical/methodological base for its teaching.

References

Battestini

(1971) Le français langue scientifique en Afrique. Le Français au Nigéria 6(3): 22–27.

Mbanefo

(2003) Applied French studies in Nigerian universities: Towards a curriculum proposal. International Journal of Educational Studies 2(1): 70–82.

Mbanefo, E. (2006). Reading: An effective French course for non-languages Nigerian university undergraduates. Paper presented at the 9th annual conference of the university French teachers’ association of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria, 5–9 November.

National Universities Commission (2007) Benchmark minimum academic standards for undergraduate programmes in Nigerian universities – Arts, Abuja: National Universities Commission.

Onukaogu

(2002) Reading for the attainment of sustainable national development. Literacy and Reading in Nigeria 9(1): 287–298.

Otoburuagu

(2002) English language literacy instructions in Nigeria as a multilingual society. Literacy and Reading in Nigeria 9(1): 194–206.

Treffgarne

(1975) The role of English and French as languages of communication between Anglophone and Francophone West African States, London: Africa Educational Trust.