Home | Next

A. STUDENTS

1. Preferred Number of Languages
The students were asked to state the number of languages they would like to learn in the school. It was supposed that their preference could be indicative of the fact that whether or not they consider the learning of more than one language to be a load on them. The percentage distribution of students to the question that the number of languages they would like to study, is given below in Table-1.

Table 1
Percentage Distribution of Students' Opinion
Regarding the Number of Languages they prefer to Learn

From the perusal of the above table the following trends emerge:

A large number of students (69.3 percent) on the whole irrespective of area, medium and sex, want to learn four and more than four languages. 27.9 percent of the students want to learn at least three languages but only 2.8 percent students prefer the study of two languages only. If we combine category two, i.e., preference for the learning of three languages and category three i.e., preference for the study of four and more languages, we find that 97.2 percent students prefer to learn three and more than three languages. The same trend is visible (above 92 percent in all the cases) if the data are classified area medium and sex-wise. All these clearly demonstrate that the students are highly motivated to learn several languages.

Area-wise analysis of data once again reveals the same trend. However, if the percentages of rural and semi-urban students are combined, on the one hand, and those of urban and central schools, on the other, it appears that the latter group prefers to study more number of languages than the former. More students from urban and central schools (71.8 and 71.0 respectively) in comparison to rural and semi-urban schools (65.0 and 59.7 respectively) prefer to study four and more than four languages. While rest of the students from all the areas are inclined to read three and more than three languages, this difference between the two groups-rural and semi-urban and urban and urban and central schools may be attributed to differential social environment. The urban environment as well as schools provide better facilities for learning of several languages than the rural and even the semi-rural environment. The urban environment also provides better opportunity for use of the languages learnt which acts as a source of continuous reinforcement. This point has been stressed by the students also in response to other statements, discussed later in this study.

While the medium-wise analysis shows the same trend, it appears that English medium schools are more inclined (80%) to study four and more than four languages than the Kannada medium students (55.7%). Since the sample for Hindi medium students was very small, they have not been taken into consideration for purposes of discussion. The English medium students from the very beginning have studied through a language other than their mother tongue. This has completely removed their inhibition towards learning of languages which have become a pleasant exercise with them. However, though comparatively less, the Kannada medium students are also well inclined to study several languages in their curriculum.

Sex-wise distribution once again shows almost equal willingness (96.3% in the case of boys and 99.0% in the case of girls) on the part of boys and girls to study three or even more than three languages.

The above discussion will show that the students are well motivated to learn several languages, which are not considered to be a load by them. The reasons for this high degree of motivation are more evident when the data for the section, 'Motivation for learning of languages is analysed', which we are going to do in the following section.

2. Motivation for learning of languages

Motivation for learning several languages arises from advantages which might possibly act as incentives for learning more and more languages. In order to investigate the extent of motivation among students, seven statements related to advantages resulting from learning of languages were asked and the students were expected to report 'yes' or 'no' to each of them. These statements were as follows:

i) It helps in studying different school subjects
ii) It helps in scoring over-all good marks
iii) It helps in higher studies
iv) It helps in getting jobs
v) It helps in talking to people
vi) It helps in traveling to different parts of the country
vii) It helps in enjoying cinema, magazines, etc.

The percentage distribution of students for each of these statements is presented in Table 2.

Table 2
Percentage Distribution of Students' Opinion Regarding Advantage
Of Language Learning in terms of Area, Medium and Sex

From the perusal of the Table-2 following important trends emerge:

A large percentage of students (above 92% in all the cases), of the whole, irrespective of area, sex, and medium, show preference for all the advantages emerging out of learning of languages. Almost the same trend is visible when the statements are classified area, medium and sex-wise. This shows that the student population is fully conscious of the importance of learning several languages and the multifold incentives offered by it. A further significant point emerges when the incentives are broadly classified as instrumental like getting jobs and help in higher studies, and integrative like help I enjoying cinema, magazines and radio programmes and in the talking to people. The responses of students between the instrumental and the integrative incentives are well balanced as they show very high preference for both. Similar is the case with the classification academic or formal educational incentives like help in higher studies, in getting good marks and in studying different school subjects and the non-academic or non-formal educational pattern for language learning is well balanced I the students, almost evenly shared by he instrumental and academic incentives on the one hand, and integrative and non-academic on the other. The student population, on the whole, is neither over swayed by the emotional factors nor is over-determined by the intellectual considerations-a definite sign of maturity in them so far as studies are concerned. The willingness for language learning is, therefore, based both on the primary as well as on the secondary needs.

When the overall percentage for each advantage is glanced through, the highest percentage (97.9%) has been shown for help in enjoying cinema, magazines and radio programmes followed by help in getting jobs and in higher studies (96.9% for each) and the lowest (92.9%) for help in studying different school subjects. The same trend of high and low, though not in all the cases of the highest and the lowest appears when the data are analysed, area, medium and sex-wise. The only exception is the central school, which generally consists of highly urbanized students coming from the higher socio-economic status. However, the result on the whole, leads to a significant inference when a distinction is made between language as a medium of instruction, under which the category help in studying different school subjects come and language as a means for achieving some ends like getting jobs or enjoying cinema. The students have higher preference for the latter and lower for the former. The lower preference for the advantage help in studying different school subjects, accruing from the learning of several languages, is not surprising in view of the fact that mother tongue is the medium of instruction at the secondary stage. Even in English medium schools the students even though their mother tongue is different learn from the very beginning of their schooling through the English medium. Therefore, except for central school students, it may be inferred that the students consider the incentives like enjoying cinema and getting good jobs to be a stronger motivation for learning languages, other than one's own, than getting help in higher studies. The central school students, who are exception to this inference, show comparatively higher preference for instrumental and academic incentives like help in studying different school subjects, etc., (98.8%) then the integrative ones like enjoying cinemas, etc., (94.7%) and help in talking to people (93.4%). Though on the whole their responses are well balanced, when it comes to a preference between the two incentives, they prefer instrumental to integrative ones. May be this is because of the sophistication that they have developed due to their highly urbanized existence and traveling from one part of the country to another as wards of central Government servants.

Although the area-wise responses are not very different, the percentages for rural and semi-urban students in almost all the cases are higher than those of urban students. This may be due to the feeling in the rural and semi-urban students that competence in several languages may better their chances in competition with the urban students to help them in their upward mobility in the society. The urban students who have already achieved this goal, therefore, do not perceive the advantages emerging out of learning several languages in the same perspective as the rural students do. Since they also consider language learning to be advantageous in all respects, their perspective may be to keep pace with the fast moving and highly competitive urbanized cosmopolitan society.

While the data are analyzed taking into consideration the medium of instruction it is seen that the number of students having Hindi as medium of instruction is very less i.e., 8 only. Hence although the percentages for these have been drawn and presented in the Table, they have not been considered although for the purposes of medium-wise comparison. This is because any comparison on the basis of such a small number might be hazardous and may lead to over generalizations. The responses for both Kannada medium as also the English medium students are on the whole similar. A very high percentage of students (above 90% for all) in both the categories find language learning advantageous from all the seven view points mentioned in the statement. This further supports the inference made in the beginning that students irrespective of medium of instruction consider learning of several languages to be of manifold advantages. Analysis of data on the basis of sex once again confirms these inferences.

On the whole, it appears that all the students are well motivated to learn languages and the advantages arising out of it serve as incentives to motivate them to learn. It may be because of these incentives that all the students want to learn at least two languages and 97.2 percent (irrespective of area, sex and medium) preferred to learn even three or more, well motivated to learn when they actually start learning the languages I order to fulfil their goals, they meet certain difficulties. However, motivated as they are, they keep themselves substained in spite of them. The difficulties felt by the students in language learning now going to be discussed.

3. Difficulties experienced in learning languages

In order to investigate the difficulties that the students have to face while learning languages, nine statements related to possible difficulties in language learning were presented. The students were expected to report 'yes' or 'no' to each of them. These statements, selected from three areas-pedagogic, environmental and curricular, were as follows:

1. Pedagogic

a) Language learning is difficult because learning of grammars for different languages, at the same time, create confusion.
b) It is difficult because learning of different scripts for different languages at the same time, create confusion.
c) It is difficult because the lessons are not explained properly in the class.

2. Environmental

a) It is difficult because there is no occasion to use the language for practice.
b) It is difficult because no extra coaching at home is available.

3. Curricular

a) It is difficult because there are many other subjects to learn.
b) It is difficult because there are too many textbooks to study in each language.
c) It is difficult because time allotted in the school for language learning is not sufficient.
d) It is difficult because lessons are not interesting.

The percentage distribution for each of these statements is presented in Table-3.

Nature of Difficulty A, B,  & C and specific difficulties(1,2,3; 4,5,6; 7,8,9)	Over-all	Area				Medium			Sex
		Rural	semi-Urban	Urban	Central	Kannada	Hindi	English	Boys	Girls
A. Pedagogic
1. Confusion in learning different grammars	50.5	45.0	61.1	50.6	46.1	52.3	87.5	47.9	54.4	41.8
2. Confusion in scripts of different languages	16.4	16.3	25.0	15.1	14.5	16.0	50.0	15.9	18.2	11.8
3. Lessons not ex-plained properly	8.8	8.8	12.5	8.6	6.6	11.5	12.5	6.5	5.9	13.8
4. No occasion to use the language for practice	45.2	70.0	69.4	40.0	19.7	58.4	50.0	33.7	41.0	52.2
B. Environmental
5. No extra coaching at home	38.9	55.0	66.7	35.1	13.2	49.6	62.5	29.1	41.8	32.5
6. Many other sub-jects to learn	29.9	28.8	26.4	15.4	15.8	27.5	37.5	14.9	24.7	13.3
C. Curricular
7. Too many text- books to study in each language	14.4	7.5	16.7	13.7	22.4	8.8	12.5	19.1	17.1	9.4
8. Time not suffi- cient	10.0	15.0	19.4	5.7	3.9	12.9	0.0	7.8	12.8	5.4
9. Lessons not interesting	9.5	10.0	12.5	6.0	22.4	7.6	25.0	10.7	8.7	10.3

following trends seem to emerge from the distribution pattern :

The overall responses show that for the largest percentage of students maximum difficulty is confronted in the pedagogic area followed in order by environmental and curricular. The first four items of difficulty are,

i) 'confusion in learning different grammars' (Pedagogic-50.5%),
ii) 'no occasion to use the language for practice' (Environmental-45.2%)
iii) 'no extra-coaching at home' (Environmental-38.9%)
iv) 'many other subjects to learn' (curricular-29.9%). For the other five items of difficulty, belonging to all the three areas, the percentages are comparatively much lower indicating that fewer students consider them to be sources of difficulty in learning several languages. The students have, therefore, very clearly continued the four major obstacles, one out of the four listed from the pedagogic area, both the items from the environmental area and again only one out of the four from the curricular area. The responses of the students are once again well balanced, which has ignored none of the important obstacles emerging from different areas of difficulty. Later when the data are interpreted, area, medium and sex-wise, a clear interaction of these variables is visible indicating that some groups feel more difficulty in pedagogic, some in environmental and some in curricular as well.

It is not hard to find reasons for the specific type of pedagogic difficulty which the students experience while learning different languages. The reason has to be found in the teaching system itself. It seems that the schools still follow the traditional method of language teaching where grammar is isolated from the rest of the language teaching. Secondly, it is possible that the students try to transfer the grammatical system of their mother tongues to the second and third language learning and the teachers fail to identify this problem. Thirdly, as part of the three language formula the students have to study the non-cognate languages and the different grammatical systems might possibly create mutual interference in the acquisition process. Whatever be the reasons the students have very clearly identified one important problem in the pedagogy of language teaching.

Not less than the pedagogic difficulty, the students have highlighted the environmental difficulties. Both the problems listed in this area - no occasion to use the language for practice and no extra coaching at home, have been identified by a large number of students, 45.2 percent and 38.9 percent respectively. To emphasise the importance of environment in language learning is to emphasise the obvious. Opportunity to use the newly learnt language in day to day environmental interactions acts as a continuous reinforcement strengthening and enriching the newly acquired skill. Lack of such opportunity inhibits the skill as a result of disuse. It is, therefore, not surprising that 70 percent of the rural students and 69.4 percent of the semi-urban students have identified it as to be their difficulty number one in learning of several languages. On the other hand, only 40 percent of the urban and 19.7 percent of the Central School students consider it to be so. The difference in the rural and urban environment will be discussed later. The students, on the whole, also do not get any extra coaching at home since the parents and the guardians may not themselves know the language. Needless to say that proper environment for mutual interaction in the newly acquired languages has to be created for the successful implementation of the policy of learning several languages. The students, on the whole, are motivated and it is at the pedagogic and social levels once again that something has to be done.

The curricular difficulty has also not escaped the attention of the students though comparatively fewer students consider it to be a problem. The one curricular difficulty which has been highlighted by them, (29.9%) is the fact that many subjects have to be learnt. A t the secondary stage, as part of general education, the students have to learn all the three languages besides different subjects in science and social sciences. This difficulty is felt more acutely by rural and semi-urban students (28.8%) and (26.4%) respectively than urban and central school students (15.4% and 15.8% respectively). However, since fewer students consider it to be a problem and since all the students are well motivated to learn several languages, it appears that solution at pedagogic and environmental levels may also take care of this difficulty. On the contrary, solution only at curricular level may not in itself remove their difficulties.

Areawise analysis of data brings to the fore the fore the difference in the perception of rural and semi-urban students, on the one hand, and the urban and central school students, on the other. The rural and semi-urban students stress the environmental difficulty most followed in order by pedagogic and curricular. The urban students stress most the pedagogic one followed in order by environmental and curricular. The highly urbanized central school students stress most the pedagogic followed by curricular and environmental. Hence a clear rural-semi-urban-urban Central School interaction in response pattern is visible, which ultimately goes to highlight the important rules played by area from which a student comes and the environment he is exposed to on the learning of new languages. It is not that the rural students are not conscious of the pedagogic and curricular difficulties since respectively 45 percent and 28.8 percent of them focus the other subjects to be learnt'. But the two environmental difficulties - 'no occasion to use the language for practice' (70%) and 'no extra coaching at home' (55%) have been stressed comparatively more. Rural environment is monolingual and less cosmopolitan. Moreover, most of the parents are not in a position for obvious to give any extra coaching at home to their wards. It is, therefore, not surprising that for rural student environment acts as the biggest obstacle to the acquisition of new languages. The students generally agreeing with the rural students on the question of environmental impediments, comparatively stress more the pedagogic and curricular difficulties. They seem to be more conscious of both these than the rural students. 61.1 percent and 25 percent of such students stress respectively the two pedagogic difficulties-'confusion in learning different grammar' and 'confusion in scripts of different languages.' Even the environmental factor- 'no extra coaching at home'- which has a pedagogic essence, has been stressed more by the semi-urban students (66.7%) than by rural students (55%). In this respect the semi-urban students are closer to the urban and central school students in their perception. It appears that the semi-urban and central school students are pulled by both the environmental-rural and urban to which they are exposed in a way. It has already been discussed earlier that the semi-urban students are motivated to learn several languages in order to letter their chances in competition with the urban students to help them in their upward mobility in society.

The urban students emphasize most the pedagogic difficulty ('confusion in learning different grammars'-50.6%) followed in order by environmental ('no occasion to use the language for practice',--40% and 'no extra coaching at home-35%) and curricular ('many other subjects to learn'-15.4%). Since urban environment is more cosmopolitan offering better opportunities, the environmental difficulties are not perceived to be creating as much difficulty as the pedagogic ones. The urban students, who are relatively more free to devote themselves to their studies in comparison to their rural counterparts and also because better facilities are offered by the home and social environment, are, therefore, more conscious of the pedagogic problems facing them in language learning. The Central School students however stress most the pedagogic difficulty ('confusion in learning different grammars' - 46.1%). Followed as order by the curricular (too many text book to study in each language - 22.4% and lessons not interesting 22.4%) and environmental ('no occasion to use the language for practice' - 19.7%). We have already discussed earlier that the Central School students, particularly the school selected for study, have highly urbanized existence, their parents are more educated and come mostly from middle class families. Moreover, as wards of Central Government servants many of them move from one part of the country to the other. It is therefore, not at all surprising that very few of them consider environment to be offering any difficulty in language learning. These students appear to be highly conscious and concerned about their studies since they stress most of the pedagogic difficulty followed by the curricular. Qualitatively also the students are expected to be better since such schools are highly restrictive and choosy in the selection of students. No wonder, therefore, that they are not only enlightened about their educational problems but can also critically assess the curriculum. The items, 'there are many other subjects to learn' (15.8%) and, 'time not sufficient for study purposes (3.9%), are not perceived to be creating as much difficulty as the items, 'too many text books to study in each language' (22.4%) and 'lessons not interesting' (22.4%).

Medium-wise interpretation of data once again focuses the difference in the responses of Kannada medium students, on the one hand, and the English medium students, on the other. Though the responses of Hindi medium students have also been presented in the table under discussion, these have not been taken into consideration for comparative purposes since the number of students was very small. The Kannada medium students stress most the environmental difficulty ('no occasion to use the language for practice'-58.4% and 'no extra coaching at home'-49.6%) followed in order by pedagogic ('confusion in learning different grammars'-52.3%) and curricular ('many other subjects to learn'-27.6% and 'time not sufficient'-12.9%). The English medium students emphasize most the pedagogic ('confusion in learning different grammar' 47.9%) followed in order by the environmental ('no occasion to use the language for practice' -33.7% and 'no extra coaching at home'-29.1%) and the curricular areas ('too many textbooks in each language'-19.1% and 'many other subjects learn'-14.9%). The reason for this difference is not difficult to find if we take into account the present craze among the parents, particularly those coming from upper, socio-economic status, for English medium education of their children. Such schools charge very high fees and cater to the needs of a smaller section of society. Therefore, they are able to provide better educational and environmental facilities to their students, whose home background doubly reinforce these facilities. On the other hand, parents coming from lower socio-economic status generally send their children to Indian language medium schools, where the facilities are less because of over-crowding of the students and nominal fees charged. Besides these differences, the Kannada medium sample also includes the rural sample, whereas the English medium population comprises only of the urban and semi-urban students. In villages there is no provision for English medium Education. Therefore, it appears that the environmental social and familial backgrounds of Kannada medium students are different from the English medium students, this creating differences in the perception of difficulties in the way of learning of several languages. The former perceives environment does not prove to be much of a difficulty, which they perceive more at the pedagogic level.

Sex-wise, distribution of the same set of students show a clear difference between the response patterns of boys and girls. The girls stress most the environmental difficulty ('no occasion to use the language for practice' - 52.2% and 'no extra coaching at home' - 32.5%) followed by pedagogic ('confusion in learning different grammars' - 41.8%) and curricular, ('many other subjects to learn' - 13.3%). The boys, on the other hand, stress most the pedagogic ('confusion in learning different grammars' - 54.4%) followed in order by the environmental ('no occasion to use the language for practice' - 41% and 'no extra coaching at home' - 41.8%) and the curricular ('many other subjects to learn' - 24.7%). It is not surprising that the girls find lack of opportunity to practice the language taught to them to be the most important barrier in learning several languages. In our society there are social constraints on a girl in moving around and interacting freely with others. However, same is not the case with the boys and therefore, the difference in the perception of the two sexes. One more pedagogic difficulty stressed by some girls is that the language lessons are not explained properly in the classroom (13.8%) which only 5.9 percent boys consider to be a difficulty. It is possible that the girls are more demanding in terms of reliance on teachers for explanation in the classroom because like boys they may not always be able to seek help from others outside the classroom boundary. This again may be due to the cultural disadvantage that they have against the boys. The girls, unlike boys, do not stress the curricular difficulties since very few students, the highest being 13.3 percent for, 'many subjects to learn' as against 24.7 percent of the boys have emphasized the four items included under this category. It appears that the girls are hand working and sincere in their studies since in spite of the several domestic demands on their time, they have sufficient time for study and can, therefore, cope with the number of subjects in the curriculum or with the number of textbooks to be read in each language.

On the basis of this discussion it becomes clear that since the students are highly motivated to learn several languages, difficulties perceived by them are more environmental and pedagogic and not curricular. It appears that curriculum as such does not pose much of a difficulty in learning of several languages. What makes this learning difficult is the lack of environmental facilities and a few other difficulties which can be tackled at the pedagogic level.

4. Difficulties faced in learning language skills

The students were asked to state the difficulties faced by them in learning each of the four skills, namely understanding, speaking, reading and writing of the languages they learned in the school. The students of class is IX and X have to learn three languages-first, second and one third-in the school. However, in the Central School only two languages i.e., first and the second are taught in classes IX and X.

Table 4 below presents the percentage distribution of the difficulties faced by the students in acquiring each of the four skills of the three languages.

 

TABLE 4(Percentage distribution of students' opinion regarding
difficulties in language learning skills

From the percentage distribution in Table 4 the following trends seem to emerge.

The overall response show that majority of the students seem to find the third language to be the most difficult in acquiring its four skills - understanding, speaking, reading and writing - followed in descending order by the second and the first languages. Three fold reasons - curricular, pedagogic and environmental - can be offered for this feeling of difficulty. Firstly, in terms of time allotted in the curriculum to language teaching third language gets the minimum time. The objectives behind he teaching of the three languages also differ. The curriculum for the ten-year school published by the NCERT clearly states that, 'a child at the completion of ten years of school should be competent in the first language, be able to understand and express himself in the second language and be able to comprehend the third language in its ordinary printed form' (p.24). Hence, even in the system itself the attention given to the third language teaching is not as much as it is given to the first and the second languages. Secondly, the teaching of the third languages as done in the classroom is not much different from that of the first language which in many cases is the mother tongue of the child. Modern language teaching methods make a difference between mother tongue and other tongue teaching. Thirdly, in the case of the third language the reinforcement in terms of practice outside the classroom is minimal and even in the homes the exposure to this language is very limited. The curriculum for the ten-year school fully appreciates this handicap and thus states that, "…the exposure of the pupils to these languages is very much restricted, and there is hardly any chance for the child to enrich its command of these languages except through reading. Therefore, the teacher of these languages should be satisfied if the pupils learn to operate within the limits of controlled vocabulary and graded structures" (p.24). It is for these reasons that the third language is perceived as the most difficult by the students both area and medium as well as sex-wise.

The second language is rated to be more difficult than the first language but less than third language. English was the second language for all the students included in the study. The attention and time given to the teaching of English in the schools is certainly more than what is devoted to the third language teaching. In English medium schools it gets as much importance, perhaps more, as it is given to the teaching of the first language. In English medium schools it gets as much importance, perhaps more, as it is given to the teaching of the first language. It is therefore not surprising that for the English medium students the gap in the difficulties faced in all the skills between the first and the second language is comparatively less than the one between the second and the third languages. English continues to be a prestigious language in society particularly for achieving the higher economic goals of life. If the acquisition of the four skills in the first language is considered to be less difficult than the second language it is because of the long exposure and the environmental and familiar reinforcements which the former gets and the latter does not. It is, therefore, not surprising that, on the whole, the students find least difficulty in the learning of the first language. In many cases, first language also happens to be the mother tongue.

Out of the four languages skills, the students, on the whole, consider the acquisition of understanding and speaking skills in any language to be more difficult than those of reading and writing. Speaking is considered to be a bit more difficult than understanding and similarly writing skills than the reading skills. In order of difficulty these may be arranged as speaking, understanding, writing and reading. In the second and third languages, particularly in the latter, this trend is more marked. The reasons for this difference have to be found in the pedagogy of language teaching where the reading and the writing parts are more emphasized. The students are seldom taught or tested for the speaking and understanding skills of the language learning. Moreover, the teaching system also encourages more the reproduction of facts learnt than students' own reconstruction and creation, which would have encouraged free flow of ideas and expressions when confronted with the new situation. Textbooks are also prescribed and besides these rarely do the students read the supplementary reading materials or materials of their own choice. All these completely take away the initiative from the students to express their own ideas freely in direct communication. The English medium schools, to some extent, emphasize speaking and understanding skills and therefore, difficulties faced by the students in these two skills of the three languages are much less than the Kannada medium students. The fact that the speaking and understanding skills are considered to be more difficult than reading and writing can also be attributed to environmental factors. This emphasizes the role of social environment because the skill of speaking as well as understanding can be better attained by social interaction, familiar reinforcement and the general social exposure in terms of opportunities to talk I the newly acquired languages.

The above interpretations are fully supported when the data are analysed area, medium and sex-wise. The rural and semi-urban students, on the whole, have to face many difficulties in learning the language skills in the second and third languages than the urban and the central school students. This trend is particularly marked so far as speaking and understanding skills are concerned, where the rural and semi-urban students find more difficulty than the urban and central school students. The reading and the writing skills do not pose as much difficulty to the rural and semi-urban students as the speaking and the understanding skills create for hem. Between the rural and semi-urban students, the former feel more difficulty than the latter and the semi-urban students, the former feel more difficulty than the latter in the understanding and speaking skills of the second and the third languages. However, the semi-urban students, in comparison to the rural students, have more difficulty in reading and writing skills of second and third languages, particularly the third. All these can be explained at the environmental and pedagogic levels. We have already discussed how the environmental facilities for language learning differ from the one extreme of rural to the other extreme of Central schools with the semi-urban and urban students coming in between. Similarly, more difficulty, that is faced by the students in the acquisition of speaking and understanding skills than the reading and writing skills is entirely due to the more emphasis given to the latter than the former in the pedagogy of language teaching. In the rural and semi-urban schools this gets more accentuated since the environmental reinforcement are also comparatively much less. The fact that the semi-urban students have more difficulty in reading and writing skills of the second and third languages is unexpected. The less difficulty felt by these students, in comparison to the rural students, can be attributed to the difference in the two environments and also to the pedagogic facilities. It appears that the rural schools emphasizes most of the reading and writing skills in the form of repeated rehearsing and copying of the prescribed textbooks, which become mechanical cramming and reproduction of the textbooks. As a result the students do not perceive the acquisition of reading and writing to be much difficult skills. That is why in the second and the third languages, so far as these two skills are concerned, there is not much difference in the perception of rural and urban students. It is also possible that the rural students perceive reading and writing skills confined only to the reading and written reproduction of textbooks and related materials. Therefore, they do not perceive these to be very difficult skills. The semi-urban and urban students see these skills in a wider perspective than textbooks alone. More semi-urban students perceive themselves to be not equal to the task. More urban students because of better facilities find themselves to be equal to the task. This explains the near similarity in the responses of the rural and urban students, in spite of difference in the perspective.

So for as the first language is concerned it is quite surprising that 21.9 percent of the urban students feel difficulty in the speaking skill of the first language. This is the highest percentage in this subsection since in the other area group almost negligible percentage of students count it to be a difficulty. In the understanding skill of the first language 4.3 percent urban students feel difficulty, whereas corresponding percentages for the other groups are negligible. The only explanation which seems possible is the fact that in the urban schools, there may be a large number of whose first language is different from their mother tongue. This only highlights the problem faced by the students when the first language which is also the medium of instruction is different from their mother tongue. The central school students find comparatively more difficulty in all the skills of the first language than the second, which is English. This is typical of the English medium schools, which emphasizes more on the second language than the first one.

The medium-wise analysis of the data shows that, on the whole, the English medium students, in comparison to Kannada medium ones, feel less difficulty in acquiring the language skills. This is particularly true for the second language learning, where for all the skills there is a pronounced difference between the groups. Besides the better environmental and pedagogic facilities in English medium schools making the perceptual difference in the two groups, there is one more reason for it. The English medium students have an additional advantage in second language learning. They learn all the subjects through the medium of English and the books are also in English. So they have the advantage of continuous exposure. With Kannada medium students English is taught only as one of the languages while the rest of the subjects and the books in them are in Kannada. So far as the third language is concerned the Kannada medium students, in comparison to the English medium ones, feel more difficulty in understanding and speaking skills than the reading and writing skills, where the English medium students find more difficulty. This only shows that comparatively more emphasis is given in English medium schools to the speaking and understanding skills than on the reading and the writing skills. The emphasis on these skills make them more verbal, at least it shakes off the inhibition to communicate and react. This gets transferred to the other language situations also.

Sex-wise analysis of the data shows that except for the skills of speaking in the first and second languages, lesser number of girls, in comparison to the boys, have difficulty in learning the skills of languages. The girls in spite of all the environmental and cultural handicaps, seem to cope-up better than boys with the difficulties facing the language learning. This may possibly due to the aptitudinal and cultural factors, which make girls opt for liberal education like humanities, fine arts and social sciences. The boys on the other hand, offer more the science and the technical as well as the vocational streams of education. The girls, on the whole, feel more at home in learning of languages. Moreover, the girls from the very beginning of the socialization process are conscious of being the repository of the non-material cultural modes and systems. Boys, on the other hand, acquire more the material values of life encouraging them to take more risks and the rough weather of outdoor life. This to some extent, explains the choice of girls more liberal, and of boys for science ad technical education. The differences in the speaking skills, however, may be due to the fact that opportunities for environmental facilities of exposure and social interaction, which give impetus to speaking skills, are far more available for the boys than for the girls. Still the wide gap in the speaking skills in the first language of boys and girls (Boys-8% and Girls-24.1%) is unexpected. The only explanation which seems to be possible is the projection by the girls of their cultural inhibition in talking freely in a group situation to the perception of difficulties in speaking skills of the first language. This may also be one of the reasons as to why the girls feel maximum difficulty in the speaking skill of the three languages than in any other skill, where very few girls perceive to have any difficulty.

The above discussion very clearly highlights the important rolls played by environment and opportunities for language use in the newly acquired languages. Secondly, language teaching in schools emphasize more the reading and writing skills than the understanding and speaking skills, the latter being the most neglected skills of language in the pedagogy o language teaching. Now we turn to analysis how the students compare these three languages with other subjects in the curriculum in terms of difficulty.

5. Language learning as compared to other subjects of the curriculum

The students were asked to compare and report whether the learning of the first, second and third language appeared to be more, same or less difficult than the subjects, social science, mathematics and science.

Table 5 in the next page, presents the percentage distribution of the responses of the students.

 

 

Table is under construction

 

 

 

 

 

The following trends emerge from the perusal of the above table.

The overall percentages show that a large number of students feel that the first and the second languages are easier to learn than the three subjects - social studies, mathematics and science. However, the third language is regarded as more difficult than any of these subjects. The reasons for this type of difference between first and the second language, on the one hand, and the third, on other have to be found in the curricular, pedagogic and environmental factors. We have already seen that the third language is, on the whole, allotted about 7 percent of the total instructional hours, while each first and the second language is allotted 12½ percent (of Chapter 2). Therefore, much less time is devoted to the teaching of the third language. However, the time is not the only factor. The pedagogic and environmental factors are also important. All these subjects are taught either through the medium of the first language or the second language but never through the third, which further reinforces the acquisition of the first and the second language. One pedagogic factor has to be examined more at the psychological level which is the low importance that the students attach to the third language in comparison to either the first or the second language or the school subjects, social science, science and mathematics. Most of the students plans to pursue in future the science stream and, therefore, from the very beginning, they give more attention to the science subjects and to the two languages, first and second, which are instrumental in achieving higher academic goals of life. Those joining humanities streams also attach the same importance to the first and second languages. In any case the third language is always the loser.

We have already discussed the importance of the roll of environmental factors, like no occasion outside the classroom to use the language for practice and no extra coaching at home, in acquiring new languages. Third language being an absolutely new language which has hardly any roots in the local environment gets much less environmental reinforcement than the first and second language, the former getting more because of being either the mother-tongue or the language of the region and the latter because of the prestige which society still attaches to English.

If we analyze the percentage of students who consider the three languages to be more different than three subjects, one interesting trend again emerges. First language is considered to be more difficult than social studies by only 18.6 percent of the students. But in comparison to mathematics and science, respectively 30 percent and 34 percent of the students consider first language to be more difficult. Similar trend, though in less degree, (social studies : 30.2% mathematics : 33.5% and science : 39.7%) is found when the subjects are compared with the second language. The same trend is found for the third language also (social studies : 48.1% mathematics : 49.3% and science : 54.1%). It appears that there is a progressive rise in percentage from social studies to mathematics and to science in considering these subjects to be easier in comparison to the three languages. It means that more students consider science and mathematics, in comparison to social studies, to be easier than the three languages. Even that the risk of over generalization we can hazard to say that a sizeable percentage of students consider the science stream to be easier than the humanity stream. However small in degree, this trend is definitely there. The traditional method of education, whatever be reason, did not very much encourage science education. However, since independence this glaring shortcoming of our educational system has been removed by emphasizing the study of science in our country. The Committee appointed by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir for the development of education in the State has very well stated the situation in these words. "The traditional educational system has emphasized the three Rs, i.e., Reading, Writing and Arithmetic in the new educational system we much speak not of the three Rs, but of the three "Racys", technocracy, literacy and numeracy. By technocracy we mean teaching of science, of technology and of work experience of productive processes based on them" (13-14). The recommendations of the Education Commissionon which our national pattern of education is based have removed the dichotomy of the two cultures, science and arts, in the first ten years of education Emphasis on science education, therefore, has made our students more science minded and no wonder quite a sizable percentage of them consider subjects like science and mathematics, in comparison to social studies, to be easier than the languages.

A higher percentage of students consider the three languages either easier or difficult than the three subjects. On the other hand, comparatively much small percentage, excepting one or two cases, perceives the three languages and the three subjects to be equal in difficulty. This small group may also be including some highly all round talented students who have equal confidence in all the subjects of the curriculum. However in any school or in the total population itself such students are very few indeed. It may therefore also include those students who have not given much thought to this problem or are disinterested in their studies or are inhibitive and indecisive and are, therefore, noncommittal in their opinion. However such students are very few and it appears that a large number of our students have very definite view, either way, about the difficulty they have to face in the study of languages vis-à-vis other subjects of the curriculum. We would once again at this juncture like to emphasize the position of the third language, which inspite of the fact the students are motivated, appear to be difficult because of the reasons explained earlier. For the success of the three-language formula it is extremely necessary to take steps to remove the difficulties facing the third language learning.

Analysis of the data area, medium of instruction and sex-wise throw some light on the problem under consideration. Area-wise analysis shows that there is a progressive decline from the rural to the central school in considering the first language to be easier than the other subjects. However, if we take only the category of considering the first language to be easier than the three subjects, it is found that lesser percentage of rural students, in comparison to other area groups, consider the first language to be easier. This goes against the interpretation of progressive decline. However, there is a marked tendency in the rural students to perceive the languages equal in difficulty to the three subjects. Do they really consider it to be so or are they indecisive and noncommittal? The semi-urban students are very emphatic that first language is easier than the three subjects. From the rural to semi-urban area such a wide gap in the assessment of first language where in most of the cases it is also the mother-tongue is hardly expected. It appears, therefore, that many of the rural students, who perceived the first language to be easier, in order to play safe, have marked their response as equal. Following this, if we combine the two categories easier and equal to, we find that there is a progressive decline in considering the first language to be easier in comparison to other subjects, from the rural to the central schools (Social Studies-Rural: 93.8%, semi-urban:93.1%, Urban: 78.4% and Central School : 71%; Mathematics-Rural :87.5%, Semi-urban : 65.3%, Urban : 66.7%, and Central School : 71.1%, Science-Rural : 81.2%, Semi-urban : 66.7%, Urban : 61.2% and Central School : 71.2%). Apart from the opportunities of environmental reinforcement for the first language being far more in the rural and in the semi-urban areas, two more factors seem to be responsible for this decline. Firstly the possibility of mother-tongue being the first language is more in the rural and semi-urban areas than in large urban societies. Secondly, it is possible that in urban schools first language teaching does not get as much importance as the teaching of the science subjects or even English. May be the students in urban areas also devote more time and attention to other subjects than to the first language. We get support for this conclusion when the responses for the second language are examined, which show just the reverse. There is progressive rise from the rural to the central school in considering second language to be easier than the three subjects. It is obvious that urban societies still attach far more importance to English than to their own language since the former is considered to be the source of prestige, good employment and wealth. The Indian languages, whether first or third, have yet to gain the same high status in the perception of urban elite or even those who are not elite, who pass on their attitudes to their wards. English thus continues to live, and effectively too.

The general trends that now students are getting more conscious of science education gets support by the area wise analysis as well. We have discussed above about the progressive decline from the rural to the central in considering first language to be easier. The reverse in the case with the second language. It appears that less urban and central school students consider first language to be easier than social studies, science and mathematics. In other words, there is quite a good percentage of students, who consider these subjects to be easier than the first language. If we look at the table under discussion and particularly the data of progressive decline mentioned a paragraph above, it will be found that the percentage for each area is gradually reducing from social studies to mathematics and to science. It means that increasing percentage of students, from each area but particularly from urban and central, consider science and mathematics to be easier than the first language. In the third language also, a very large percentage of students, from each area, consider science and mathematics to be easier than the second language, which is English. A large percentage of only the urban and central school students consider English to be easier, the reason for which have already been discussed. Moreover, quite a fair percentage of urban students have studied through the English medium since the beginning and English, therefore, is almost like a first language for them. To conclude, the trend of our students getting more conscious of science education is also supported by area-wise analysis.

Medium-wise analysis of data shows that a very large percentage of English medium students consider English to be easier than any of three subjects. The corresponding percentage for Kannada medium is very low. This is expected and needs no explanation. So for as the first and the third languages are concerned, less of Kannada medium students in comparison to English medium students, consider them to be more difficult than any of the three subjects (first language and social studies - Kannada : 12.6%, English : 24.2%, third language and social studies - Kannada : 46.9%, and English : 50.6%; first language and mathematics-Kannada : 19.1%, English : 39.8%; third language-Kannada : 44.7% English : 54.9%; first language and science - Kannada : 25.2%; English : 42.4%, third language and science - Kannada : 51.5%, English : 55.8%). While the difference between the two groups is only marginal in the case of third language, the same is more or less double for the first language. This wide difference in the first language between the two groups is quite understandable. Firstly, for the Kannada medium group, which includes the entire rural sample, the chances of environmental and familial reinforcement are more than the English medium group. Secondly, for most of the Kannada students the mother-tongue and the medium of instruction are the same, which further reinforce the first language learning. Thirdly, the Kannada medium students learn all the subjects through the medium of Kannada, which once again strengthens the language. Therefore, there is totality of environmental, familial and curricular reinforcement for the Kannada medium students, an advantage in which English medium students have received much less share. But for English medium students there may be one reason more. They and perhaps their schools too emphasize more the study of English which is also the medium, and therefore, the other languages are reduced to a secondary position.

It is further seen that, except for mathematics, where also the difference is very small, the Kannada medium students find that in comparison to other subjects the second language is much more difficult than the third language. This shows that except for the English medium students, the third language, which may be any one of the Indian languages, appear to be easier to the students than that of the second language. In the case of the present study the third language for majority of the students Hindi, which for a large number of students get a lot of environmental reinforcement through the films and peer group interaction. The second language, on the other hand, is English which hardly gets that reinforcement since very few students regularly see English movies and talk to their friends in English.

Sex-wise analysis reveals a very distinct tendency in girls to consider the languages as equal in difficulty to other subjects. The corresponding percentages for boys are much less. Once again it is very difficult to say if this is due to some inhibiting factor which make them noncommittal and indecisive or really do they think to be so. If the two categories, languages easier than the same as other subjects are combined, there is definite tendency in girls for more than boys to consider languages, to be either easier than or same as the other subjects. The trend under discussion gets more marked in the case of the third language where as much as 63.1% of the boys consider science to be easier than the third language, but only 38.1% of the girls think to be so. It has already been discussed earlier that girls may be because of the cultural factors or the aptitudinal factors have more liking for languages and fine arts than science and technology. At least the high achievers among the girls take up humanities stream for higher studies. In case of boys it is just the reverse.

Looking back through the entire discussion, some of the important trends that emerge are that the first language is considered to be the easiest in comparison to other subjects followed in order by the second and the third languages. Secondly, the second language, which is English, very much continues to be a prestigious language, which a large number of students, on the whole find to be as easier as the first language is perceived to be in relation to other subjects. The urban and the English medium students even consider English to be easier than the first language. Thirdly, the third language is perceived to be the most difficult in spite of the fact that the students are highly motivated to learn languages. Lastly, the consciousness for science education has definitely developed among our students, which is a welcome feature.