ጥናታዊ ጽሁፍ

The Policy Description

Until the socialist regime came to power, it took longer time for ethnic languages to become a policy issue in Ethiopia for the imperial regimes’ unwillingness to entertain ethnic issues as well as for the interest to remain independent nation (Seyoum, 1997). The policy decision to employ local languages in non-formal education and transcription of the languages in the Ethiopic script were worth to mention unfinished race of the then government (Ayalew, 1999). By the mid-1980s, there was a growing concern regarding the negative influence of Amharic MoI as hindering factor to non- Amharic mother tongue students’ school achievement as verified by study comparing science scores of Amharic vs non- Amharic mother students. (Daniel Vujcich, 2013).

Immediately after EPRDF government came to power in 1991, the issue of ethnic languages as MoI resurrected from death and emerged as policy issue. Seyoum (1996) presents two major factors that he believed to ignite the policy change. The first was the political ideology that echoed commitment to ‘Liberty, equality, justice, truth, and respect for human rights as manifestation of democracy’. The second factor was discussed as being guided by ethnic-based politics that echoed local languages except Amharic are suppressed which later devised the issue of ethnic languages as a response to equality. Thus, the government made it a top agenda and policy item along its nation building efforts.

The formal policy was formulated in 1994 after the language policy was implemented since 1991 (Seyoum,1996). This is evidenced by the directive issued for the immediate provision of primary school instruction in five major ethnic languages and use of chosen scripts for own languages during the Conference for Peace and Democracy in Addis Ababa from July 2–6, 1991 (Ayalew, 1999). The policy issue definition as well as agenda setting was done by the government and was even done before the language policy was officially formulated in 1994. The 1994 language policy reads ‘Cognizant of the pedagogical advantage of the child in learning in mother tongue and the rights of nationalities to promote the use of their languages, primary education will be given in nationality languages’. The government uses ethnic languages interchangeably with nationality languages (Daniel and Abebayehu, 2006).

It is evident that policies, including education policies. are not free from political interest or ideological yeast of governments. There is a legitimate debate amongst education experts in that some argue that such decisions are not evidence based and are politically obsessed (Ayalew, 2000).

Seyoum (1996) challenged the policy formulation process against the representations of key stakeholders apart from its support by top-level politicians. He continues to argue that the General Education Policy was drafted by a group of five task forces comprised from 42 members mainly from the Addis Ababa University, and development ministries (such as Health, Agriculture, Science and Technology, etc.). Though MoE held successive review meetings with teachers in Addis Ababa university and other regional cities, no inputs were incorporated in the final document (Seyoum,1996). Once the draft document was ready for review, the Ministry of Education held several meetings with teachers in Addis Ababa and seven other regional cities.The official policy implementation began immediately after being endorsed which Wagaw (1999) described as ‘extreme rush’. The rush was characterized by abrupt translation of books from Amharic into other ethnic languages without adequate preparation of trained teachers. The use of Latin scripts for the Cushitic language groups resulted in pushing out qualified and seasoned teachers and administrators who did not speak the local languages and replacing them with new others “for political reasons and for their compatible ethnic origins,” thereby compromising standards. Wagaw (1999) added that under-qualified individuals, for instance in Afar region, had been assigned as district (woreda) supervisors and as primary teachers. The implementation had suffered from little or no literary stocks, such as dictionaries, glossaries and other printed literature (Dereje ,2001). In addition, the hurried implementation did not consider mixed communities where minority groups were denied of education with their own language. Children from these groups were reported to drop out of schools (Hoben, 1995). Same writer observed that there has also been a conflicting practice between mother tongue instruction and ethnic language instruction against the pedagogical principles that advise children learn better using their mother tongue in places where children were forced to learn in languages they do not speak.

The historic failure of WOGAGODA (Wolayita, Gamo, Goffa, and Dawro) ‘blended’ language is a living witness of the ill-planning and implementation of the language policy( Getachew & Derib, 2006) . In addition, the implementation process faced serious challenge as the decentralization process that was introduced by the government as a new paradigm had various level of maturity across regions and their subsequent structures. With all its limitations the language policy has remained now for over 27 years until the newly formulated 2023 education policy replaced it.

Several studies conducted to evaluate the impact of Ethiopia’s mother tongue education revealed quite large benefits of the language policy along with challenges of implementation. Reduced drop out and repetition rate (Ramachandran, 2012, Heugh et al., 2007 as cited in Vujcich, 2013), promotion of sense of dignity as related to realizing ethnic identity and community culture, increased public awareness and participation in educational matters (MoE, 1999 as cited in Daniel and Abebayehu, 2006) were few of the outcomes. Resistance from users, lack of adequate materials, poor transition from MTE to English medium, inadequate number of MTE teachers were some of the challenges found in the process of evaluation (Vujcich, 2013)

Pedagogical Advantages of Mother Tongues

Research indicates that mother tongue instruction raises student participation, decreases attrition, and enhances the prospect of family and community engagement in the child’s learning (UNICEF, 2016). Studies also reveal that using the mother tongue as the instructional media improves the child’s cognitive learning processes, and for learner-centered learning to be effective it has to be conducted in a language the child speaks. Mother tongue classes increases children’s and parental understanding of curricular content and hence enhances attendance and school performance which translate into reduced drop out (Laitin, Ramachandran and Walter, 2015 as cited in UNICEF, 2016). In contrast, using a medium of instruction not understood by the learner significantly impedes learning (Trudell and Piper, 2014, in UNICEF, 2016)

When it comes to learner centered pedagogy (Vavrus, Thomas and Bartlett, 2011, in UNICEF, 2016) medium of instruction should be in a language that the students can speak as the approach demands dialogue, discussions and critical thinking by both students and teachers. Country specific studies (For instance, 2002-2011 in South Africa and Tanzania, 2012 in Ethiopia and 2013 in South Africa) showed that using a language that is better known to the learner results in enhanced learning, compared to use of a language that is less well known to the learner (UNICEF, 2016).

Issue of Unity within Diversity

Though the 1994 ETP dictates that ‘Amharic shall be taught as a language of countrywide communication’ it is being taught as a subject from either Grade 3 or Grade 5, depending on the region. As a result, children are facing difficulties of communication as they move to other regions for lack of common language. The introduction of mother tongue policy, though pedagogically sound, has affected the nation’s unity within diversity. Ethiopian Education Development Roadmap-2018-30 (MoE, 2018) report suggested the implementation of national language and the creation of a common curriculum that would foster a common national identity. This is to have a common language that all regions use to communicate with one another. The report added that the best experience that Ethiopia can share from the international benchmarking report is that ‘Vietnam uses Vietnamese national language as a compulsory national language throughout the school years although they had 54 mother tongues. A fundamental part of this common background in the curriculum is the training of teachers in colleges throughout the country takes place in a common syllabus.

Ambatchew (2010) takes issue with the glowing reputation of Ethiopia’s language-in education policy, claiming that “it is one of the most advanced language policies on paper, but with questionable practices on the ground” . He observes that, “for all the progressive policy in the country, many of the political elite continue to send their children to English or French medium schools”.

Necessary Preparation

The 1994 Education and training policy states that ‘Making the necessary preparation, nations and nationalities can either learn in their own language or can choose from among those selected on the basis of national and countrywide distribution.’

It is indicated that (UNICEF, 2016) for best use of a local language as medium of instruction the language has to prove certain level of written development and pedagogical appropriateness which may include the stability of writing systems, vocabulary development, text availability, adequacy of the curricular content, teacher capacity and literacy ability in the language of instruction, availability of linguistically, culturally pedagogically appropriate reading instructional methods (Trudell and Schroeder, 2007).

In majority of the regions mother tongue is being used as medium of instruction except SNNPR, Afar, Gambella and Benshangul-Gumuz where Amharic is used as medium of instruction. A region like the SNNPR with a multitude of languages being used as media of instruction faces special challenges in the development of education materials and in the implementation of the education reform. (Seidel, K. and Moritz,J., 2009) . With language policy most African countries have minority group inclusive policies, but the challenge is the mismatch with implementation for the lack of adequate materials, support from parents and teachers. Ambatchew (2010) claims that some families intentionally move from mother tongue areas to cities where classes are taught in Amharic. Addressing some of the reasons behind this mismatch between policy and implementation, Cohen (2007) describes the current argument that, since the various languages being used for primary grades instruction are not all equal in their adequacy for use in education, the current practice is inherently unfair and perpetuates educational inequality. Cohen also describes an additional concern that this policy may be ethnically divisive and create regional nationalisms.

Ethiopian Education Development Roadmap-2018-30 (MoE, 2018) put way forward about the needed attention to be given to primary education system as:

• Start mother tongue as a medium of instruction from grade 1;
• Start English as a subject from grade 1 (where, in fact, the focus should be on oral/spoken/listening aspects– until grade 3); and
• Start Amharic (Federal working language) as a subject from grade 1.
• Introduce bilingual education (mother tongue + one more language based on the preference of the child/ parent) so as to strengthen unity in diversity.

To discuss the mother tongue education policy, I have identified the stages heuristic model of public policymaking from amongst the major policy process theories presented by Professor Paul Sabatier (2014). This is the most common theory that endeavors to explain policy. Political scientist Harold Lasswell was the first scholar to describe a “decision process” for public policy and articulate “policy sciences” (Lasswell,1956). The steps of making public policy can be thought of in the following terms (1) problem identification and definition, (2) agenda setting, (3) policy formulation(4) policy legitimation, (5) policy implementation, and (6) policy evaluation.

Stage 1: Problem Identification and Definition

The first stage of the policy process is to figure out what the problem is and to define it. A key component of figuring out the problem is determining a public problem. The language policy process identified problems as related to monolingual education dominated by Amharic, nationalities denied of exercising the use of their language as medium of instruction, cultural rights, and a symbol of identity. It further defined the problem against assumed prospects of mother tongue education as it enables the student to understand lessons easily, and avoids problems associated with language barriers; enables it to continue to be a living language and saves it from possible extinction; reinforces identity and enables its users to be proud of their culture and identity, become self-confident and proud citizens. Such self-confidence coupled with the acquisition of knowledge and skill through schooling makes producing capable and productive citizens possible (FDRE, MoE, 2002).

It is noted that just because ethnic based political parties and few scholars think any of these aforementioned challenges are public problems does not mean there was widespread agreement among other stakeholders that they are problems. This is evidenced by the resistance encountered by parents, cosmopolitan political parties as discussed earlier. However, the issues gained traction through a variety of ways including through the media, supportive organizations, politicians, and even average citizens though the problem identification and definition followed top-down approach. The approach reflects Group theory of public policy where armed groups who overthrow the Socialist regime came to consensus to establish mother tongue education as a reflection of ensuring rights of nationalities and minority groups. Even after prosperity party came to power the need for Mother Tongue ducation followed top-down approach without the public having adequate and meaning participation.

Stage 2: Agenda Setting

As the mother tongue education gap was acknowledged and defined by the ruling party EPRDF, the problem had captivated the attention of the government and the public to compel action. And the government only has so much bandwidth in which to consider a problem. Public policy scholar Thomas Birkland (2016) points out that there are different levels of the policy agenda that help us understand how and why some issues do not stay in the public spotlight while others work their way through the layers of the agenda and make it further in the policy process.

The language policy agenda has easily become both systemic and governmental agenda as it has got strong political attention and support both from government and some elites. During both EPRDF and PP, key policy actors including parents, teachers, scholars , political parties ( particularly opposition parties) had not been given meaningful role in making Medium of Instruction an agenda item except ethnic political elites who made a top -down impositions.

Stage 3: Policy Formulation

This is the stage of the policymaking process where specific, concrete actions about how to address an issue are brainstormed, discussed, and debated. The language policy has passed this step in a very few meetings and conferences hosted by MoE as discussed in the earlier sections. Yet the process is criticized by education scholars for its representation pitfalls.

The 1994 language policy states that Amharic shall be taught as a language of countrywide communication. Other languages including Oromiffa, Somaligna, Tigrigna, Siamang spoken by majority groups had the potential to be taken equivalent to Amharic.

Empirical studies indicated that the policy intended to make Amharic as a language for countrywide communication did not go as planned for various reasons including political sabotage. The newly introduced 2023 education and training policy totally omitted Amharic as a national language and presented at least three languages which is a direction that is detrimental to national unity within diversity.

Stage 4: Policy Legitimation

The mother tongue policy was legitimated by the FDRE parliament and the decision on the typical mother tongue instruction was left for the discretion regional states. Given the different socio-economic, demographic and cultural factors, the legitimation process was very tough for some regions like SNNPR where WOGAGODA, for instance, remained a historical scar. Though the newly introduced 2023 ETP policy mentioned to be approved by counsel of ministers on April 28, 2023 Eth.cal, it came out abruptly while the academic community, various stakeholders and policy actors are expecting further dialogue on matters of contentions including the language policy.

Stage 5: Policy Implementation

Policy implementation, the fifth stage of the policy process, which is the process of carrying out policies, accomplishing the actual policy is often far more intriguing and indicative of the overall success or failure of a policy. In this case, the mother tongue policy had to be translated into actionable regulations at various government structures where various interest groups had to participate. Implementation is not as simple as decreeing that mother tongue should be medium of instruction. Although mother tongue as a medium of instruction is believed to have a significant contribution to students’ academic achievement, psychosocial functioning and sense of national identity, the current practice in the Ethiopian context has numerous limitations. Limitations on mobility and inter group communications were few mentioned amongst many others.

Stage 6: Policy Evaluation

Assessing whether a policy is successful is critical, as the entire policy process strives to address, and perhaps even solve public problems. policy evaluation typically involves a multitude of actors to gather data; find out about how the policy is being implemented at grassroot level; and analyze how the policy is working across time, place and organs. Then, analysis of the data has to be conducted, findings summarized, and conclusions reached. Despite these, difficulty in social science research to set apart all of the factors that could be influencing a policy and assess the causal factor makes the evaluation stage challenging and biased. Given such complexities and lack of readily available data, language policy evaluation has stayed unachievable at macro level. As discussed above the mother tongue policy had no formal evaluation spearhead by MoE except fragmented studies that can not be said to be exhaustive and nationwide. The new 2023 language policy (as embedded in the Education and training policy) is adjusted without evaluating the 1994 policy impact.

In general, the stages model presents steps that look discrete and sequential, but many times various steps occur simultaneously and even out of order during real-life policymaking. This is true by the fact that the 1994 language policy got implemented before the official policy is formulated and legitimated. The model , by its virtue, provides no predictive value in helping forecast when and if a policy will make it to the next stage of the process. But the language policy when it was put on the agenda table the official actors know that it would be implemented. Per the model policymaking is methodical and rational when, in reality, the government’s action was not irrational when it opted to start implementing the mother tongue policy in 1991 before the policy came into existence in 1994.

The Ethiopian mother tongue policy can also be analyzed against Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) that has been advanced in an effort to address some of the disadvantages of the stages model (Kingdon, 2010). This model is built on three different “streams” ( The problem stream, the policy stream and the politics stream) that can converge in a “policy window,” which is where policymaking can occur. With MSF, policymaking occurs in a less orderly, more ad hoc manner. This model reveals that efforts surrounding problems, policy options, and politics happen simultaneously and may or may not be connected to one another. In light of the MSF, the mother tongue policy came easily to be a policy for the three independent streams converged together at some point in time with unreserved support from the politics stream.

The abrupt implementation of the language policy at all regional states right after the policy formulation in 1994 can be explained by Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET). PET attempts to explain why most of the time policymaking is incremental and moves along gradually, while during other times massive change can and does happen. According to MoE in a response to Dr Seyoum’s position paper (MoE, 1996) reflected that the mother tongue policy implementation.

Mother Tongue Policy Critique

In general policy problems originate from a variety of sources: The public, technical/professional, political, and external sources. As Seyoum pointed (EJE, 1996) towards the fall of The Derg Regime the relevance of the curriculum, quality, equity, and accessibility of the education were questioned and overall dissatisfaction on the education system was reflected widely. Moreover, a broad study was conducted before the new policy was formulated. The study engulfed six subsections including Curriculum and teachers’ affairs, Education and assessment, Education and language, educational organization and finance, Educational logistics and issues of support and Integration of education, training, development, and research (MOE,2014). The study showed that the old educational system had limited reach, scant relevance in helping solve the problem of either the individual or that of the society, and was in general of low quality ( MOE, 2002). Hence the need for brining educational reform became an agenda item. However in particular to the language policy the agenda setting was done by Office of the Prime minster and ethnic based political parties ( Abebayehu and Daniel, 2006).

During the process of the 1994 education and training policy a group of Ethiopian educators drawn from different government had participated as Task force members. Though meetings were held to discuss on the draft policy document , Seyoum (EJE, 1996) concluded that the general public had not been represented well and no adequate public debate was held. Hence he concluded that the policy is a result the top-down reform without participation of commendable quite good number of professionals, teachers, parents, students , representatives from civic and religious groups with diverse views in the formulation process. Abebayehu and Daniel (2006) asserted that the policy was formulated by higher involvement of MoE and a government affiliated Teachers’ Union while other key stakeholders had low involvement. Hence it can be concluded that it was top-down decision which later affected the implementation process. In particular to the language policy, though the policy states ‘primary education will be given in nationality languages, it did not appear incremental in nature in reference to regional disparities. Again while the policy says ‘Amharic shall be taught as a language of countrywide communication’ regions have varied starting grade levels to begin teaching Amharic as subject. Those who started later grade have proved to under develop the language.

Abebe (2011:15) argues that the implementation process has been handicapped for the policy followed elite model of policy formulation without participating the public and key stakeholders to the fullest. As discussed above the implementation has been characterized by public dissatisfaction, demotivation of teachers and students, lack of adequate educational inputs.

Power Analysis of Major Actors in Language Policy using PRINCE System revealed that (Abebayehu and Daniel, 2006) ethnic based political parties, officials of the Ministry of Education, government affiliated teachers’ union and government media had more power than Cosmopolitan parties, private media, representatives of mixed communities to influence and get the policy adopted. Ethnic-based parties and the government-affiliated teacher union had by far better access to financial and political support than the actors against the policy who were run-down of their source of power, and discouraged through various pressures.

The education and training policy allowed nations and nationalities to promote their culture and to use their language as a medium of instruction beginning from O-class. However the extreme emphasis on mother tongue while underperforming in a common national language has created huge communication problem as people move from one region to another and even when students join universities and try to have inter group communications. Per the writers observation, graduate students from Rural Oromia, Tigrai and Somali and Afar who come to Addis Ababa in search of jobs have faced difficulties of reading Amharic vacancy posts. Similar problem is reflected in the Ethiopia Education Development Road Map ( 2018-2030) in that It is good if there is common language that all regions use to communicate with one another. Though the 1994 ushered ‘Amharic shall be taught as a language of countrywide communication’ it is not well implemented in regions that applied MoI other than Amharic. Indonesia is a multilingual country where over 600 languages exist. Through its language planning program, Indonesian is made to be the language of instruction from primary school through university throughout the nation. Nationality languages are optionally allowed in the first three years of primary school in nine regions of the country (Paauw, 2009 as cited in Yirgalem, 2020).

The new 2023 education and training policy missed indicating the need to have a national language in this regard except mentioning a clause about a federal language to be taught from grade 3 on based upon parents’ choice.

There are no clear criteria for determining the languages that must be used in education as it is simply left to the mandate of state and local authorities. In addition, close to three decades after the introduction of the ETP, many languages have not obtained the status of a language of instruction. Consequently, parents in some communities are compelled to either send their children to a school that uses the language they would not choose otherwise or to schools in neighboring towns (Cohen 2000).

The Case in Addis Ababa City

Numerous government, private and community schools started teaching Oromiffa language as medium of instruction and a subject in September 2022 at elementary level while the new policy that gives the mandate for same is formulated in April 2023 which reminds ‘the cart before the horse’ notable saying. Same problem happened with the 1994 ETP. Students with mother tongue other than Oromiffa were forced to attend Oromiffa language as a subject without their parents’ consent. Though the policy says that “ አንድ ተጨማሪ የሀገር ውስጥ ቋንቋ ከፌደራል የስራ ቋንቋዎች መካከል የተማሪውን/የወላጅን ምርጫ ታሳቢ በማድረግ በየደረጃው ባለው የትምህርት መዋቅር ተወስኖ ከ3ኛ እስከ 10ኛ ክፍል የሚሰጥ ይሆናል” there is no practice and evidence whether parents have been involved to ascertain the best interest of their children. During the time Oromiffa was imposed as a subject in many schools, there were successive uprisings and oppositions both from students and teachers. Several of them were put in jail. Why only Oromiffa amongst other Federal languages? Why the cart came before the horse in the implementation process? This phenomenon is pragmatic evidence of the existing education system to become slave to the ethnic based political ideology and be overly manipulated by same for de-unifying the nation.

The 2018 Education development roadmap report indicated a very strong quotation of a respondent which is believed to represent the feeling of the critical majority as

“Appreciating the use of the mother tongue…, the problem that I would like to raise this line is that it has been overly emphasized and as people living in one country we are facing problems. There is a problem to understand each other as one goes out of his place of birth or moves to other regions of the country. It is good if there is common language that all regions use to communicate with one another.

The instructional language policy as a threat to national unity

Future Actions

For the mother tongue policy to be successful in responding to pedagogical advantage of the child in learning in mother tongue and the rights of nationalities to promote the use of their languages in primary education the below actions are recommended:

1. Separation of education and politics: Language has remained a political good to instigate conflicts amongst ethnic groups since it served ethno-lingual border limit between regional states, zones and Woreda. Mother tongue education should not serve as a political tool to remain on power despite its pedagogical advantage. Let the educators lead the education sectors instead of making it be loyal to political parties.

2. Ethnic identity vs National Integration: The policy implementation has exerted significant effort on nationality languages while also down grading national integration as nationality groups lack common language of communication. Hence , given its widespread advantage and development , Amharic language should used as working language of the Federal government as well as be taught at all schools in all regions.

3. Active participation of policy actors: Both official and unofficial policy actors should be actively involved in the policy process beginning from problem identification through policy adjustment. Parents, students, teachers, researchers , political parties should be given a platform to voice their positions and defend for the rights of children of today and tomorrow.

4. Redeeming Amharic: Some politically polarized and intended research present Amharic as had been dominating other languages at the expense of linguistic rights of nationalities. This is a mistaken rhetoric which is associated with alienating the Amhara ethnic groups. While also developing other languages, given its long lasted pedagogical advantage as well as linguistic maturity Amharic should be used as national language. This leads to making Amharic language a subject students learn from basic or primary education.

5. Policy Dialogue: As there are ample evidence-based positions on the instructional language policy, Ministry of Education should organize policy dialogue forums which are free from political impositions so that different stakeholders can be heard and objective policy directions are set with. To this end, the academic community who put aside themselves assuming that language policy is a sole political issue should come to front line for active policy dialogues.

References

1. Alemu, D., and Abebayehu, T. (2011). Comparative Analysis of Instructional Language Issues in Ethiopia and the United States. Creative Education, 2, (4), 402-407. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/51028334/Comparative_Analysis_of_Instructional_Language Issues_in_Ethiopia_and_the_United_States

2. Ayalew, S. (1999). The impact of federalization on education in Ethiopia. Unpublished manuscript, Addis Ababa University.

3. Ayalew, S. (2000). “Education in Ethiopia: An overview.” In Ch. Fellner (ed.), Ethiopia: An Introduction into Culture, Economics, Politics, and Cooperation. Frankfurt: Brandes and Apsel. 95-107

4. Birkland, T. A. (2016). An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts, and Models of Public Policy Making. 4th ed. New York: Routledge
5. Cohen, G. P. E. (2000). Language and ethnic boundaries: Perceptions of identity expressed through attitudes towards the use of language education in southern Ethiopia. Northeast African Studies, 7(3), 189–206. DOI:10.1353/nas.2005.0004, retrieved from researchgate.net/publication/236718234

6. DAE (1995). Association for the Development of African Education, Education Policy Formation, Formulating Education Policy: Lessons and Experiences from Sub-Saharan Africa, Tours, France.

7. Daniel,A., & Abebayehu, T(2006). Instructional language Policy in Ethiopia: Motivated By Politics Or The Educational Needs Of Children? , Vol. 37, No. 3&4, 2006, pp. 151–168 Retrieved from chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https:// files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ756221.pdf

8. Derash, M. (2013). Opportunities and challenges of mother tongue teachers: Lessons learned from two multilingual education projects in Ethiopia. Paper presented at the 8th Pan-African Reading for All Conference. Nairobi, Kenya: 29 July to 2 August 2013.

9. (1994). Education and Training Policy. Addis Ababa: St.George printing press.

10. (2023). Education         and       Training      Policy.  Addis   Ababa: https://moe.gov.et/PoliciesStrategies

11. Getachew, A., & Derib, A (2006). Language Policy in Ethiopia: History and Current Trends. Ethiopian Journal of Education and Science Vol. 2 (1) 2006: pp. 37-62 Retrieved from https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ejesc/article/view/41975

12. Hoben, S. (1995). The language of education in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Institute of Ethiopian Studies.

13. Kingdon, J. (2010). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Updated 2nd ed. New York: Pearson

14. MOE (2002): The Education and Training Policy and Its Implementation. Addis Ababa

15. MOE (2018). Ethiopian          Education      Development    Roadmap          (2018-2030):     An      Integrated Executive Summary. Draft For Discussion: Addis Ababa, Education Strategy Center

16. MOE (1996). Attempts at Educational Reform in Ethiopia: A Top-Down or a Bottom-Up Reform? Seyoum Tefera, Ethiopian Journal of Education, Vol. 16, No.1, 1996, pp. 1-37, Reviewed by The Ministry of Education, The Ethiopian Journal of Education Volume XVI, No.2, Dec.1996

17. Ramachandran, R. (2012). Language Use in Education and Primary Schooling Attainment: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Ethiopia, Retrieved from http://www.ieb.ub.edu/aplicacio/fitxers/WSEE12Ramachandran.pdf

18. Sabatier, P. A., & Weible, C. M. (2014). Theories of Policy Process. (P. A. Sabatier & C. M. Weible, Eds.) (third). Boulder: Westview Press.

19. Seidel, K. & Moritz, J. (2009). Changes in Ethiopia’s Language and Education Policy – Pioneering Reforms? Proceedings of the 16th International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, ed. by Svein Ege, Harald Aspen, Birhanu Teferra and Shiferaw Bekele, Trondheim

20. Seyoum, T. (1996). Attempts at Educational Reform in Ethiopia: A Top-down or a Bottom-up Reform? The Ethiopian Journal of Education. Volume XVI, No.1. Addis Ababa University.

21. Trudell, B. and Schroeder, L. (2007). Reading methodologies for African languages: Avoiding linguistic and pedagogical imperialism. Language, Culture and Curriculum 20.3, 165- Retrieved from https:// www.academia.edu/ 9647283/ Reading methodologies for African languages Avoiding linguistic and pedagogical imperialism

25. UNICEF (2016). The impact of language policy and practice on children’s learning: Evidence from Eastern and Southern Africa, retrieved from https:// www.unicef.org/esa/sites/unicef.org.esa/files/2018-09/UNICEF-2016-Language-and-Learning FullReport.pdf
26. Vujcich,D.(2013). Policy and Practice on Language of Instruction in Ethiopian Schools: Findings from the Young Lives School Survey, © Young Lives 2013 , ISBN: 978-1-909403-21-5
27. Wagaw, T. G. (1999). Conflict of ethnic identity and the language of education policy in contemporary Ethiopia. Northeast African Studies, 6(3), 75–88. Dereje, T. (2001, June). Ethiopia. In J. Aglo & M. Lethoko (Eds.), Curriculum development and education for living together: Conceptual and managerial challenges in Africa (Final report of the UNESCO seminar, pp. 51–52). Nairobi, Kenya: UNESCO.
28. Yirgalem, A. (2020). Language Policy of Education and National Identity in Ethiopia. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342178140