Evaluation of the Senior Phase English First Addition Language Backlogs Pilot Project

Introduction  

The Senior Phase English First Additional Language Backlogs Pilot (SP EFAL) arose from evidence that Grade 8 learners’ performance in English is well below the required level, together with the lack of attention given to learning backlogs in Grades 8 and 9 in the past. Four distinct pilots were implemented by different partners in four provinces, each in 10 low-quintile schools focusing on either teachers or learners as follows: Nelson Mandela University (NMU) in the Eastern Cape and the University Consortium (UWC, UCT) in the Western Cape, worked with teachers during school hours. MIET-Africa in KwaZulu-Natal worked with learners during school hours, and READ Educational Trust in Gauteng worked with learners after school.  English fluency, vocabulary and comprehension were assessed at the start of the Project, which took place between 2021 and 2023. 

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation conducted by Social Surveys-Social Impact Insights was based on the different pilot designs. The implementing partners collected qualitative material and monitoring data. In addition, a case study in two of the 10 schools in each pilot was conducted using focus group discussions with School Management Teams (SMTs), teachers and learners, classroom observations, learner workbook reviews, and a school functionality survey.

The evaluation aimed to answer the following questions:

1. What conditions must exist for EFAL backlogs in the SP to be addressed adequately?
2. Were the pilot activities and pathways implemented as intended?
3. What were the causal linkages and pathways that contributed to observed outcomes?
4. Did the pilots result in the intended outcomes and impacts? 

Evaluation Findings

The evaluation confirmed that the SP is significantly neglected, with interventions in other phases being more extensive and substantial than the investment in the SP. This has a particularly negative impact in low-quintile schools. There is a severe lack of knowledge and understanding of how best to address these backlogs. 

Language factors:    

• Interventions must consider the complex and interconnected roles that English plays as the Language of Learning and Teaching (LoLT], a content subject (EFAL and Home Language (HL)), and as a language of communication in society;
• SP teachers lack sufficient training in basic pedagogical literacy;
• The relationship between general literacy skills and English Language Proficiency in the SP needs to be explored.

Contextual factors:

• Severe school infrastructure disrepair including overcrowding, water supply disruptions, poor toilet facilities, and security concerns related to drugs and gun violence, all impact negatively on teaching and learning in general;
• Inadequate staffing, high teacher turnover, regular learner absenteeism, lack of textbooks and reading resources;
• Disheartened and demotivated teachers due to poor school administration, discipline problems, resource constraints and large class sizes;
• A congested curriculum alongside poor teaching skills in literacy undermine the opportunity of addressing backlogs;
• Lack of reading culture in schools with underutilisation of libraries and learner resistance to reading.

Implementation factors:

• Momentum has been sparked around the urgent need for schools and districts to address the adverse conditions facing SP learners;
• Three of the four pilots demonstrated potential to address backlogs;
• Intervention designs and theoretical underpinnings need to be clarified, with the efficacy of training models and methodology being tested;
• The locus and modality of support must be determined: EFAL or across the curriculum?
• During or after school? And the question of who should deliver such interventions;
• Extensive investment in teacher professional development within the system, the research community and civil society is needed;
• Additional input is required in the form of partnerships, training materials and Learning and Teaching Support Materials (LTSM) and reading resources. 

Conclusion

This evaluation has confirmed that more EFAL-related work needs to be done in the SP. The evaluation has helped to define these needs. To this end, Zenex will carry out a deeper scoping of English backlogs, bringing in new pilots to contribute to a much-needed evidence base.  It has also shown that a policy brief to the DBE addressing the EFAL curriculum gaps would be beneficial, alongside a review of resources that support backlogs for curriculum strengthening. Engaging with universities in the future on literacy development in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) in the SP would complement the work already done in the Foundation Phase.  The findings from this evaluation will be shared with the implementing partners, districts and schools; and Zenex will produce a Learning Brief on lessons learnt from this Project. Zenex is cognisant of the DBE’s move to slowly roll out Mother Tongue-based Bilingual Education (MTbBE) in 2025 and will explore the impact of this approach on learners’ English proficiency in the SP.