French Language Pedagogies in Tanzania: A Critical Analysis of Methods and Approaches and Their Implications for Language Education.

French Language Pedagogies in Tanzania: A Critical Analysis of Methods and Approaches and Their Implications for Language Education.

Japhael Mgoma Jambo¹, Monday Israel Bwambayeko²

¹Advanced school of Translators and interpreters (ASTI), Pan African university (PAU), Cameroon

²University of Dar es Salaam – Dar Es Salaam College of Education (DUCE), Tanzania

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803171S

Received: 21 June 2024; Revised: 27 June 2024; Accepted: 01 July 2024; Published: 07 August 2024

ABSTRACT

This paper delves into the methodologies employed for teaching French in Tanzania. It begins by examining the existing research conducted by various scholars on French in Tanzania and its integration within the education system. Subsequently, the paper explores the coexistence of foreign languages within the educational system and the utilisation of languages within this framework. Finally, the author presents the critical analysis of approaches, methods, and techniques employed for teaching French, along with their implications for learners in Tanzanian institutions that offer French language education.

Keywords: French language, approach, method, Tanzania, Language learning.

INTRODUCTION

Tanzania is a multilingual nation. This includes Swahili, English, French, German, Chinese, and over a hundred indigenous Bantu languages. Among these, the Swahili stands out as the lingua franca, facilitating communication for over 90% of the population (Acharya, 2019). English, on the other hand, serves as the language of documentation along with Swahili and instruction in higher education institutions, particularly secondary schools, colleges, and universities. Swahili’s influence extends beyond Tanzania’s borders, reaching neighbouring countries like Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, carried by the thrilling East African community (Makundi, 1997).

French, though a foreign language in Tanzania, holds a significant presence in the country’s educational landscape. Although the number of institutions offering French instruction is relatively limited compared to English and Swahili. French language is influenced by Tanzania’s strong ties with Francophone nations. French language learning opportunities are provided by institutions such as Alliance Française, with branches in Dar es Salaam, Arusha, and Mwanza. Therefore, French language education in Tanzania has its historical context in the country.

The landscape of education in Tanzania is undergoing continuous development, and language learning plays a crucial role in this evolution. French, in particular, holds a unique position within Tanzanian education. This growing significance necessitates a critical examination of the methodologies employed in French language teaching and learning within Tanzania. This study skim over the various approaches currently used to teach and learn French in Tanzanian classrooms. Hence, the study explores the historical context of French language instruction in the country along with analysis of specific methodologies employed and their strengths and potential limitations within the Tanzanian educational environment and overall language acquisition. This study contributes to a broader understanding of educational practices within the country as well as provide valuable insights for educators, policymakers, and curriculum developers on the improvement of French language education in Tanzania.

Study Objectives

This study aims to critically analyse the methods and approaches used to teach French as a foreign language (FFL) in Tanzania. Below are some specific objectives this study

1. To Identify the dominant and complementary French language pedagogies along with analysis the strengths and weaknesses of these pedagogies.
2. To examine the implications of current pedagogies for student learning outcomes.
3. To Identify potential areas for improvement in French language teaching in Tanzania.

Study Questions

1. To what extent, and in what forms, is French language instruction offered and accessible across different levels of the Tanzanian education system?
2. What are the predominant methodologies currently used for teaching FFL in Tanzania?
3. Considering the current dominant pedagogies, what complementary approaches could be integrated to improve student engagement and learning outcomes in French language programs?

METHODOLOGY

To gain a comprehensive understanding of existing research on French language pedagogies and their alignment with critical pedagogy principles, the study employed a systematic literature review approach. This involved searching relevant academic databases for scholarly articles, books, and other publications that explore these topics. Search strategy was developed by using keywords and subject headings related to French language teaching, critical pedagogy, and the Tanzanian educational context. After identifying a collection of relevant sources, critical evaluation was conducted for quality, relevance, and theoretical grounding. Through this process of analysis and synthesis, it was possible to identify key themes, debates, and knowledge gaps in the existing literature, which informed the development of our research questions and the overall direction of this study.

LITERATURE REVIEW

French Historical Context and Educational Integration in Tanzania

The history of French in Tanzania is a subject of ongoing discussion among scholars, and understanding its evolution requires consulting various sources. According to Mtavangu (2003 :25), French holds equal status to English and Chinese as a foreign language in Tanzania. Thus, it serves as a crucial tool in international relations and diplomacy. French’s was initially introduced to the University of East Africa as a response to Organisation of African Union (OAU) now (AU) mandate to promote Pan-Africanism. In 1963, recognising that most newly independent African nations had either French or English as official languages and assuming that all Africans spoke one of these two languages, African leaders advocated for compulsory bilingualism (French-English) across the continent to foster linguistic unity. This envisioned bilingualism aimed to equip individuals with sufficient proficiency in the other language for everyday communication, both orally and in writing. Learners were expected to comprehend basic radio broadcasts and newspaper articles in their non-native language. Moreover, these strategic considerations also motivated Tanzania’s adoption of French into its education system. The country sought to promote good neighbourly relations with its French-speaking neighbours, including Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo), Rwanda, and Burundi. Therefore, according to Mulinda (2013:64), the objectives of introducing French in Tanzania were but not limited to:

1. To enable Tanzanians to communicate fluently in spoken and written French.
2. To develop reading and comprehension skills for enjoyment and information.
3. To utilise French language knowledge in pursuing further education.
4. To effectively communicate in French with Francophones both within and outside the country.

French in the Tanzanian Education System

French initially found its place in Tanzanian education in 1966. It was introduced in both private primary and secondary schools. While Swahili and English had been established since Tanganyika’s independence in 1961 due to British colonial influence. French faced several challenges in the education system, including the competition from existing languages; Swahili and English which has already held prominent positions in the curriculum. Also, Swahili’s dominance; Swahili remains the language of instruction in primary schools, while English is used in secondary schools, colleges, and universities.  Finally, the limited usage of French language in daily basis communication.

Generally, with reference to Mulinda’s (2013) study, firstly, French instruction is offered in a relatively small number of schools compared to English and Swahili. Secondly, French language learning opportunities are concentrated in urban areas contrary to rural regions. Thirdly, the number of qualified French language teachers is inadequate to meet the demand, particularly in public schools. Fourthly, the absence of a standardised French language curriculum across Tanzania leads to inconsistencies in teaching standards and assessment methods. Last but not least, Schools often lack sufficient resources, such as textbooks, teaching materials, and audio-visual aids, to support effective French language instruction. Overall, these challenges have hindered the widespread adoption and effective teaching of French in Tanzania.

Challenges and Issues in French Language Education in Tanzania

Researches has shown that, French in Tanzania suffers from inadequate government attention and limited instructional time (Mulinda, 2013; Mtavangu, 2003). That is to say, French language education faces significant challenges in Tanzania, primarily due to insufficient government attention and limited instructional time allocated to the subject. This results in a mere one hour of French instruction per week in secondary schools (Mulinda, ibid). This hinders student’s ability to develop adequate proficiency in French language. Furthermore, French language education experiences the scarcity of qualified teachers and inadequate teacher training. The shortage of qualified French language teachers further compounds the challenges faced by French education in Tanzania. This includes the lack of a strong French language foundation among teachers and inadequate teacher training programmes lead to the production of instructors who themselves struggle with French proficiency, hindering their ability to effectively impart the language to their students (Mulinda, 2013).

In addition, Mulinda’s (2013, 2015) studies highlights the absence of continuous professional development and imposed teaching methods. French language teachers face additional challenges due to the absence of continuous professional development opportunities and the imposition of teaching methods that require a high level of French language fluency. This lack of support and flexibility hinders teachers’ ability to adapt their teaching approaches and enhance their own proficiency. Furthermore, non-compliance with curriculum requirements and declining student interest; despite the official mandate for French language instruction during the first two years of secondary school in designated public schools, many schools opt to make French an optional subject. This widespread non-compliance with curriculum requirements has resulted in a decline in student enrolment in French classes, leading to a scarcity of French language majors at the university level.

Discouraging Factors and Negative Perceptions of French Language in Tanzania

Several factors contribute to the declining interest in French language learning among secondary school students. Mulinda’s (2013) study on the abandonment of French subject in secondary schools has highlighted discouraging factors such as, the perceived lack of government commitment to French language education discourages students from pursuing the subject. Two, negative perceptions of French as a language of little value or practical use in Tanzania further deter students from taking the subject seriously. Three, the belief that French does not offer significant career or employment advantages further diminishes its perceived value among students and parents. Lastly, the negative attitudes towards French extend beyond students, with parents and teachers from other disciplines often discouraging students from pursuing French. This discouragement stems from the perceived lack of practical benefits associated with French language proficiency.

French Language Education Current Status and Instructional Methods

French language instruction in Tanzania in spite of everything, holds a unique position.  While not mandatory, French continues to be taught in various institutions like primary, secondary and high schools as well as in colleges and universities across the country. This offers students an opportunity to expand their linguistic horizons. Additionally, this reflects the historical ties between Tanzania and French-speaking countries, as well as the growing importance of French on the global stage. Initially, there was only one combination that was offering French language education which was French alongside Swahili and either English (KLF) in High schools. As for the moment, the government’s introduction of new subject combinations in Advanced Secondary Schools further emphasises. For instance there are more than ten combination with French: History, Geography, and French (HGF); Kiswahili, English Language, and French (KLF); Kiswahili, Arabic, and French (KArF); English Language, French, and Arabic (LFAr); English Language, French, and Chinese (LFCh); French, Arabic, and Chinese (FArCh); History, English Language, and French (HLF); French, Music, and Sports (FMS); Kiswahili, French, and Theatre Arts (KFT); Kiswahili, French, and Music (KFM); Kiswahili, French, and Fine Art (KFFi), (TAMISEMI, 2024). This demonstrates a recognition of the potential benefits of French language education.  These combinations allow students to develop French proficiency along with other arts, language and socials science studies which is a valuable asset in today’s interconnected world.

The Concept of an Approach and Teaching Method

According to Anthony, (1963), an approach encompasses a set of interrelated assumptions about the nature of language and language learning. In the context of French language teaching in Tanzania, an approach therefore refers to the underlying beliefs and principles held by French specialists regarding the nature of the French language and its effective instruction in educational settings. A language teaching method, according to scholars in applied linguistics, refers to a specific set of principles and practices used to instruct learners in acquiring a new language (Richards, 2017; Littlewood, 2014). It outlines how teachers approach language instruction, including, How the method prioritises learner needs, styles, and interests; Which language skills (reading, writing, speaking, listening) are emphasised; The types of classroom activities used to promote language acquisition and the teacher’s responsibilities in facilitating learning (e.g., providing instruction, correcting errors). Similarly, Richards (2017: 15) Defines a language teaching method as a set of interrelated classroom procedures used by teachers to achieve specific language learning outcomes. He emphasises the importance of choosing a method that aligns with the desired learning goals and the learners’ characteristics. Furthermore Littlewood (2014: 62) views language teaching methods as broad frameworks that guide teachers’ classroom practices. He acknowledges that many teachers don’t rigidly adhere to a single method but may combine elements from different approaches to create an effective learning environment.

Theoretical Framework

This study used theoretical perspectives of Critical pedagogy theory pioneered by Paulo Freire (1970) who is widely recognized as the founder of critical pedagogy theory. This theory was also championed by (Apple, 1993; Giroux, 2011; McClaren, 2011). Hence, the theoretical framework of Critical pedagogy provides a valuable lens for analysing French language pedagogies in Tanzania. This framework emphasizes education that goes beyond mere language acquisition. It posits that classrooms should be spaces for critical thinking, social justice, and questioning of power dynamics. In the context of this study, critical pedagogy is used to explore how French language teaching in Tanzania, (i) empowers learners to critically engage with French language and culture and (ii) addresses the needs and realities of Tanzanian learners such as local context, culture, and learning styles of Tanzanian students. By critically analysing French language pedagogies through this framework, this study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of how language education can be used to empower Tanzanian learners and foster a more linguistic diversity in global society.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

SQ2: Predominant methodologies currently used for teaching FFL in Tanzania

Grammar-Translation Method

The GTM is rooted in Ferdinand de Saussure’s structuralist linguistics. This approach, derived from traditional language teaching methods. It emphasises the memorisation of linguistic rules, including verb paradigms, grammatical structures, and vocabulary lists (Larsen-Freeman, 2013). Its primary objective is to enable learners to identify linguistic patterns and differences between languages. GTM is characterised by a teacher-centred approach with minimal learner engagement and interaction. This positions the teacher as the central authority figure who delivers instruction and assesses progress. Learners are often evaluated based on their ability to translate texts accurately, demonstrating a mastery of grammar and vocabulary. The GTM heavily relies on translation between the target language (French) and the learner’s native tongue (Kiswahili) for our case (Ellis, 2003). The teacher likely prioritises passive activities like memorisation over opportunities for active communication and interaction. Thus, it can be said that this approach somewhat undermines the development of communication and interactional skills to learners.

In Tanzanian education, GTM remains a prevalent method in Tanzanian secondary schools, particularly in preparation for national examinations. The emphasis on grammar and translation is reflected in the types of questions commonly found on these exams, which often require learners to translate sentences, write in the plural form or singulars, conjugate verbs, transform sentences into different kinds of tenses, finding grammatical errors and so forth. While grammar plays a role in language acquisition, an overemphasis on memorisation and translation exercises, as discussed by Ellis (2003), can hinder the development of spoken fluency leading to learners struggling to apply their knowledge spontaneously in conversation.

Despite its prevalence, the GTM has been criticised for hindering effective communication and language proficiency. The emphasis on memorising grammar rules and translating between languages may come at the expense of spoken fluency as Swain (1985) asserts that while GTM might involve some pronunciation drills still the primary focus is on written language and analytical exercises, leading to a lack of opportunities for spoken communication. Thus, learners struggle to put their knowledge to use in spontaneous conversations which is evident among Tanzanian French graduate.  Furthermore, the focus on reading and writing skills can overshadow the importance of listening and speaking which is crucial aspects in real-world communication.  Finally, the teacher-cantered and passive learning environment of GTM may limit student engagement, motivation, and opportunities to actively use the language.

As the reflection to Tanzanian context, despite the widespread use of the GTM in Tanzania for teaching FFL (FLE), its suitability for learners remains a topic of debate.  While GTM offers a foundation in grammar rules and structural linguistic proficiency. It is still evident that it is relatively ineffective method for foreign language learners. It does not adequately promote communicative French which is a critical skill for real-world communication. Furthermore, it is clear that, it is reasonably impossible to achieve the true proficiency solely through reading and writing by neglecting the importance of spoken interaction. These uncertainties highlight the need for a more nuanced approach to language learning in Tanzania, potentially incorporating GTM for specific aspects like grammar development while prioritising methodologies that encourage active communication and spoken fluency.

The Direct Method

The Direct Method, also referred to as the Natural Method, emerged as a response to the limitations of the GTM. It underscores the use of the target language (French) as the sole medium of instruction. It emphasises immersion and direct communication in the target language, mirroring how children acquire their first language (Matamoros-González, et al., 2017). This approach strictly prohibits the use of learners’ native languages or any other languages during teaching activities. Translation is entirely eliminated, requiring that French be taught exclusively through French.

The Direct Method is characterised by several distinct features such as instead of relying on translation or explanations in the learners’ native language, teachers demonstrate concepts and vocabulary using the target language (Richard & Rodgers, 2001). Furthermore, the primary objective is to develop learners’ communicative competence, enabling them to effectively communicate in the target language. Moreover, reading and writing skills are introduced from the beginning of the instruction, alongside oral communication skills. last but not least, language learning extends beyond linguistic skills to encompass an understanding of the target culture and its expressions.

As contemplations to Tanzanian context, the implementation of the Direct Method in Tanzania raises several questions, for instance, learner adaptability; can Tanzanian FLE learners effectively adapt to the immersive nature of the Direct Method? Also, teacher preparedness, are there sufficient numbers of teachers adequately trained and equipped to implement the Direct Method effectively? Moreover, can the Direct Method be successfully applied to Tanzanian learners who primarily speak Bantu languages, which are structurally and typologically different from French? As the matter of fact, many French languages instructors in Tanzanian schools are Tanzanians especially in public schools, because government in its policy prefer to employ its servants within the country. This suggest that the tutors are not French language native speaker, which means they also learnt French language as a foreign language (FLE). For that instance, it can be argued that it is relatively difficult for these teachers to fully apply Direct Method in classrooms, since they are not the natives of French language.

The Communicative Approach

The Communicative Approach emerged from the functionalist ideas of André Martinet in 1963. It prioritises the ability to use language functionally in various situations (Richards & Rodgers, 2014) so as to enable learners to communicate effectively in various situations. The Communicative Approach (CLT) has become a dominant force in language teaching, emphasising the development of communication skills through interaction and tasks that mirror real-world scenarios (Littlewood, 1996). This approach stands in contrast to methodologies that prioritise rote memorisation and grammatical accuracy over practical communication. Moreover, as for implementation of this approach, primarily, teachers should consider the following components (i) who (learners; their abilities, backgrounds, age, etc.), (ii) what (the lesson content: what to teach?) (iii) why (the learner’s objective: the goal to be achieved by the learner) (iv) how (the means, methods, and strategies of instruction: resources, strategies, and methods)

The core principle of this approach is that, CLT goes beyond grammatical correctness (Richards & Rodgers, 2014), hence it lays emphasis on communication in which learners are considered competent if they can effectively express themselves in the target language. Also, it promotes engaging classroom atmosphere, encouraging learner autonomy and motivation through activities such as role-playing and other interactive games. It can therefore be said it is a learner-centred approach as it encourages active participation from students (Littlewood, 1996). This means learners develop the skills to express themselves clearly, understand others, and navigate conversations effectively. In addition, it also integrates activities that develop listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills (Littlewood, 1996). Hence, all aspects of language are utilised, including both written and oral skills, with a strong emphasis on comprehension.

As for the observation on implementation of this approach in Tanzania, there is a gap initially in terms of availability of authentic French materials (John, et al, 2023:116). There is insufficient of readily available authentic French materials even the available ones don’t align with the French language curriculum in Tanzania. For instance, there was no books written for specifically Tanzanian instruction, therefore the available ones were imported from other countries such France (Bascherelle grammar books), Ivory Coast (on Y va series: 1-3) among others. On the other hand, there is an issue on instructors. It is distinct that majority of Tanzanian teachers are not well trained and equipped to effectively implement the Communicative Approach during the instruction. Similarly, it is true that French teachers themselves have not been trained in the Communicative Approach during their own language learning because Communicative Approach in Tanzania have started to be implemented lately. Additionally, John et al, (2023) point out that, there is insufficient in-service trainings such as seminars and workshops aimed at equipping teacher with Communicative Approach.

The Enunciative Approach

The Enunciative Approach draws upon the principles of enunciative linguistics, as developed by prominent French linguists, Émile Benveniste (1970) and Antoine Culioli (in De Vogüé, 1992) in their theory of enunciation. This theory puts forward three elements (i) the utterance (énoncé), (ii) the enunciator (énonciateur), and (iii) the enunciation (énonciation). These three components are essential for producing meaningful utterances. The Enunciative Approach emphasises language learning through contextualised utterances. Learners acquire language by engaging in real-life situations through producing utterances (énoncés) that respond to specific needs and contexts. It is crucial to differentiate between “énoncé” (utterance) and phrase (sentence). A sentence adheres to grammatical rules, while an utterance is a spontaneous production that fulfils a communicative need in a given situation, regardless of strict grammatical constraints. This approach prioritises the transmission of messages over rigid adherence to grammar rules. The Enunciative Approach employs real-life situations to teach language, encouraging learners to produce utterances such as “Viens ici” (Come here), “Passez-moi ce stylo” (Pass me that pen), “sois sage” (be wise), “fais attention” (be careful), “arretez” and so on. While the Enunciative Approach isn’t as widely documented in language teaching methodologies, clear and distinct pronunciation (enunciation) plays a crucial role in effective communication.

By combining Benveniste’s foundational ideas with Culioli’s focus on operations it can be said that, enunciation is complex approach since it involves both the speaker and the language system itself. Key Considerations for effective implementation of this approach is utilising authentic language by employing real-life utterances encountered in everyday situations, avoiding abstract or contrived examples. It also involves incorporation of deictic expressions by effectively utilising deictic expressions, such as maintenant (now) to refer to the present moment, nous (we) for the speaker and listener, and ici (here) to indicate the current location, accompanied by gestures if necessary. This therefore encourage the minimisation the use of non-deictic expressions, such as personne (someone), le docteur (the doctor), Japhael, il (he), le jour d’ouverture (opening day), instead à 10 heures le 2eme février (10 o’clock on February 2nd), and en classe, à la maison (in class, at home), as these expressions may not align with the spontaneous nature of utterances.

As the case for the French language teaching in Tanzania, it is clear that most of examples (sentences, pictures, realia and other teaching aids) are drawn upon books and other ready-prepared instructional materials. In this case, learners understand French abstractly (out of their environment or imagination). Obviously, this limits them in using it in actual settings.  For instance, students are likely to master vocabularies on kitchen appliances of French people but fails to mention the appliances in their proper kitchens. It goes without mentioning that, learners end up understanding more unpractical vocabularies and utterances to the extent that when they encounter a real-world situation, they likely fail to interact. This suggests the unavailability of native-level enunciators; insufficient number of teachers who can produce utterances like native French speakers do. Also, teachers cannot fluently produce utterances that reflect natural language use in Tanzanian contexts.

RQ3: Complementary approaches that could be integrated to improve student engagement and learning outcomes in French language programs

Technology-Assisted Language Learning (TALL)

TALL utilises technology tools like apps, online platforms, and interactive games to enhance language learning (Warschauer & Meskill, 2000). It offers a more engaging and personalized experience, promoting independent learning and self-paced practice (ibid.). It accesses a wider range of learning materials ranging from interactive exercises to authentic audio and video content. In this method learners focuses on areas needing improvement, like pronunciation or vocabulary acquisition, through targeted apps or exercises (Stockwell & Harrington, 2013). Furthermore, many TALL tools offer instant feedback on grammar, pronunciation, or comprehension, allowing learners to self-correct and improve (Chapelle, 2015). Moreover, Language exchange platforms and online communities within TALL tools facilitate interaction with native speakers, fostering practical language use. The mobile nature of many TALL tools allows learners to access language learning opportunities on their own schedule and convenience (Thorne et al., 2009). By incorporating TALL effectively, educators can create a more dynamic and engaging learning environment, complementing traditional teaching methods and empowering students to take ownership of their language learning journey.

In the Tanzanian ever-evolving landscape of language education, there are newer methodologies that often take a more holistic view of language learning, emphasising not just grammatical structures but also communication skills, cultural understanding, and real-world application.  Furthermore, these approaches are not only potential for French language pedagogy in Tanzania but also practically more effective in language teaching. The following are some of those approaches, their strengths and weaknesses of each method within the Tanzanian context and how they can be employed to create a comprehensive and effective curriculum for French language learners.

The Task-Based Learning Approach

The Task-Based Learning Approach also known as Action-Oriented Learning approach shares a close connection with the Communicative Approach. It is a relatively new language teaching methodology that builds upon the Communicative Approach but takes it a step further (Piccardo & North, 2019). It is rooted from constructivist paradigm, which require learner agency and active participation in the learning process (Lightbown & Spada, 2013). Generally, it advocates for the notion that language learning is not merely about acquiring grammatical rules and vocabulary but about actively using the language in real-world situations. it is an indispensable element in language acquisition since it involves action as a central to all forms of learning by using tasks that engage learners’ linguistic, social, and cognitive abilities. It aims to make language learning an enjoyable and engaging experience. It minimises the constraints often associated with traditional foreign language instruction hence, facilitating natural language development and enhances learners’ motivation to participate in the learning process.

Key features of are, firstly, learners engage in meaningful tasks that require them to use language skills such as organising a birthday party, planning a weekend trip, or role-playing everyday conversations. In addition, it incorporates games and activities that incorporate language learning without explicit instruction. Also, it includes songs, chants, and other playful activities that enhance language acquisition more enjoyable and engaging. Furthermore, it includes the questions and tasks that are relevant to learner’s lives and experiences. This fosters a sense of connection between language learning and the daily realities.

In Tanzanian context this approach might be relatively difficult to be implemented due to several reasons. First of all, this approach needs time which is the case for Tanzanian schools which has a limited time allocated for French instructions (see Mulinda, 2013; John et al, 2023:116). Majority of the real-world Authentic Tasks that can be used in this approach require the presence of some native speakers for interactions which is also a challenge to Tanzanian context. Language and culture are two sides of the same coin that depends on one other. Therefore, taking culture into consideration, AOA’s activities should be culturally appropriate and respectful of learner’s diverse backgrounds and experiences this is also an issue since Tanzanian culture and that of French are quite diversified.

Immersion Method

This method is a kind of language learning trough real-world experience. It throws students into a deep end of the target language (TL) by surrounding them with it throughout the learning process (Lightbown & Spada, 2013). Imagine children learning their native language; immersion programs replicate this by using the TL for all instruction, not just language lessons. This creates a language bath where students are constantly exposed to the language and forced to develop comprehension and communication skills. Furthermore, immersion programs can vary in intensity and duration. Some programs may be full-time, where all subjects are taught in the TL, while others may dedicate to a portion of the school day to immersion-based learning. Regardless of the format, the core principle remains the same: students acquire language through real-world use, similar to how children learn their first language (Genesee, et al., 2013).

This method fosters strong listening and speaking abilities as students are constantly using the TL to interact and learn. It also Improves Cultural Understanding since students are exposed to the language in its natural context. It leads to more motivated and Motivation and Engaged learning since it is more stimulating and engaging way to learn a language compared to traditional grammar-based methods. On contrary, Students may initially struggle to understand and communicate in the TL, potentially leading to frustration which is also the case to Tanzanian learners. In addition, it requires teachers who are proficient in both the TL and the students’ native language (L1) to effectively scaffold learning. Finally, Immersion programs may not be readily available in all locations such as Tanzania due to several reasons such as travel expenses and limited budgets.

The Audio-Oral Method

The AOM emerged in the mid-20th century, drawing inspiration from the behaviourist theories of American psychologist B.F. Skinner, which emphasised habit formation through reinforcement and repetition (Skinner, 1957). Charles Carpenter Fries, a prominent linguist, further developed these ideas in the context of language learning, advocating for intensive aural practice and mimicry as the foundation for language acquisition (Fries, 1967). AOM emphasises the communicative use of the TL to establish the habit of using the language naturally. The goal is to enable learners to communicate like native speakers (pronunciation, intonation, accent …). Key Characteristics of the Audio-Oral Method is the focus on developing oral proficiency first, followed by writing skills. it is also characterised with Repetition and Drill whereby learner repeat structures until being able to reproduce them spontaneously and correctly. The AOM is well-known for its emphasis on direct teacher instruction and correction to solidify learning.  Furthermore, the method heavily utilises oral-based materials like music, audio recordings, dialogues, songs, and oral drills.

Total Physical Response (TPR) Method

TPR Method, was developed by James Asher (1965), a psychology professor at San Jose State University, the TPR Method is based on the connection between language coordination and physical movement. Learners listen to instructions and respond with actions. Distinguishing TPR from the AOA, is that in Action-Oriented Learning, learners use language while performing actions. While in TPR, learners primarily respond to instructions with physical actions. Core Features of the TPR Method is the Initial Focus on Oral Skills by Emphasise oral proficiency at the beginning of language learning (Asher, 1965). It uses the Physical Responses for Meaning Construction in which learners create meaning by responding physically to instructions, which helps them grasp concepts without needing immediate translation (Asher, 1982). Moreover, TPR is an Interactive and Engaging Approach since it promotes active participation and reduces learner anxiety (Asher, 1999).

In Tanzanian pedagogical platform, TPR is mostly used by being integrated with other prominent approaches such as GTM and CLT. For example, TPR Activities may include body parts songs, whereby sing songs about body parts while touching the corresponding parts. It also involves Instructional Commands, whereby learners follow instructions by performing what is said without saying or drilling. For instance, students will raise up after hearing “stand up,” and settle down after “sit down,” or roll over after “turn around”. Therefore, instead of repeating what is said students act upon what is said.

The Audio-Visual Method (AVM) 

The AVM associate language with images, using visual aids to enhance vocabulary retention and language acquisition. It utilises various media, including films, videos, and animations, to facilitate language instruction. key principles of the AVM are on the basis on image-sound coherence, by building coherence by simultaneously using image and sounds. It encompasses the Visual and Auditory Inputs whereby learners learn through both visual and auditory channels. Moreover, this approach incorporates cultural exposure by immersing learners in the TL’s culture through visual aids such as Films and Videos. This exposes learners to natural language use and cultural contexts. This method is particularly significance since it allows student to explore more on non-verbal communication cues, such as body language, facial expressions, exclamation, emotional expressions and other related paralinguistic elements (Milligan, 1986).

The Silent Method

This method was developed by Caleb Gagnetto (1970’s) “The Silent Way”. In this method, the teacher minimises talking, letting students produce language and develop their own understanding. Oiler (1983) described this method as an induce the students to take the initiative. The Silent Way views each language as having a unique essence, characterised by core structures and practical vocabulary. It emphasises language as a system, similar to algebra. Unlike first language acquisition, learning a second language requires intellectual effort and exploration on the part of the learner. Silence serves as a tool to encourage students to take charge of their learning and experiment with the new language. The belief is that quiet reflection can stimulate significant mental activity.

The goals of this method are to equip learners with the ability to use the language for creative self-expression and to develop an internal gauge for accuracy. Errors are seen as a natural part of the learning process. The teacher adopts a minimalist role, providing utterances only once and refraining from modelling, directing, or controlling the class. The Silent Way typically uses a structured syllabus built around grammatical concepts and related vocabulary. Learning materials might include colour charts with sound associations, coloured rods, picture books, stories, and drama activities. Collaboration and a supportive learning environment are encouraged. The teacher provides resources as needed and steps back to allow students to think critically and build their own understanding. This method also incorporates opportunities for post-class feedback sessions where students can share their thoughts and feelings about the learning process. All four language skills (reading, writing, listening, and speaking) are integrated from the beginning.

Suggestopedia.

This method is all about Learning Through Relaxation and it was developed by Georgi Lozanov (1970’s), Suggestopedia is a language learning method inspired by yoga, extrasensory perception (ESP), and Soviet psychology. It emphasises creating a deeply relaxed state for learners so as to promote accelerated learning. The method utilises decorative music and specific rhythms to induce relaxation, aiming to alter brainwave patterns. The teacher fosters a stress-free environment, and allows for the use of native language (L1) translations to build a sense of security. The teacher takes on the role of a trusted guide, providing a large amount of input (up to 450 words daily) while students remain comfortably relaxed. Furthermore, suggestopedia positions the learner as a student in a safe, nurturing environment, similar to a child learning their first language. The focus is on passively absorbing materials, even during sleep. However, there’s also a strong emphasis on active interaction. Students adopt new identities within the TL and culture, fostering deeper engagement. Moreover, it generally prioritises conversational fluency, with units typically featuring 1,200-word dialogues of high literary quality. Learning activities incorporate recordings, role-playing, and drama to create an immersive experience. Lozanov emphasises the power of whole meaningful texts” (1978: 268) engaging stories with emotional content that learners can readily connect with. Suggestopedia’s core principle of harnessing the brain’s potential for accelerated learning laid the groundwork for later concepts like super learning (Johansen, 1999).

RECOMMENDATIONS

This critical analysis has explored the strengths and weaknesses of various methods and approaches. We have seen those traditional methods, while offering a foundation in grammar and vocabulary, can struggle to foster true communicative competence and may not fully engage learners. Conversely, communicative approaches like TPR and Task-Based Learning can promote active participation and real-world language use. However, they may require additional scaffolding and support for learners at the beginning stages. Each method has its strengths and can be effective in different contexts. Teachers should select the approach that aligns with the learning objectives and the specific needs of their students. For instance, GTM is Suitable for developing grammatical and linguistic knowledge. In contrary, Communicative, Enunciative, and AOA, Effective for fostering communicative competence. Furthermore, the ideal approach for French language education in Tanzania likely lies in a thoughtful blend of methodologies. By strategically incorporating elements of both traditional and communicative approaches, educators can cater to diverse learning styles and goals. This might involve starting with a focus on basic grammar and pronunciation using structured methods, then gradually transitioning to more communicative activities that encourage students to use the language in a meaningful way. Additionally, fostering a culturally rich learning environment that incorporates aspects of Tanzanian and French cultures can further enhance student motivation and engagement. Currently, French language instruction in Tanzania faces challenges, as many university level French learners lack adequate oral proficiency. This may be attributed to the teaching methodologies employed in primary, secondary, and higher education. Addressing to theses deficits is recommended to Strengthen French Language Teaching Methodology by Reinforcing and improve teaching methods to enhance language acquisition. In addition, Developing French Language Expertise by Increasing the number of qualified French language teachers. Considering the vitality of motivation to learners, pedagogies should encourage and motivate learners to appreciate the importance and opportunities of learning French.

CONCLUSION

Successful language learning requires a combination of factors such as learner motivation, learners should find personal reasons to learn the language. Engaging learning environment, create a supportive and interactive learning environment which is not the case in Tanzania. Effective teaching methods, utilise appropriate teaching methods that align with learners’ needs. Moreover, Teacher Expertise and Dedication, by employing qualified and dedicated teachers who can inspire and guide learners. By addressing the current challenges and embracing a holistic approach to language instruction, Tanzania can foster a generation of proficient French speakers who can contribute to the country’s linguistic and cultural diversity. Moreover, the success of French language education in Tanzania hinges on a dynamic and adaptable approach that considers the specific needs and contexts of Tanzanian learners. Continued research and collaboration among educators, policymakers, and researchers will be crucial in refining pedagogies and ensuring effective French language learning for all Tanzanian students.

REFERENCES

1. Acharya, A. (2019). The status of Swahili in East Africa. East African Community Secretariat.
2. Anthony, E. M. (1963). Approach, Method, and Technique. ELT Journal, 17(2), 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/XVII.2.63
3. Apple, M. W. (1993). Education and Power (2nd ed.). Routledge.
4. Asher, J. J. (1965). Learning Our Second Language: A Process Product Model. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 113-126.
5. Asher, J. J. (1982). Learning Styles, Psychological Processes and Second Language Learning. Modern Language Journal, 66(7), 497-507.
6. Asher, J. J. (1999). How to Learn a Second Language Through TPR: The Complete TPR Method. Sky Oaks Productions.
7. Benveniste, É. (1970). Problems in General Linguistics. Translated by M. E. Meek. University of Miami Press.
8. Chapelle, C. (2015). The Flipped Classroom for Second Language Learning: A review of research. Calico Journal, 32(2), 1-27.
9. De Vogüé, M. (1992). On Antoine Culioli’s Theory of Enunciative Operations. Historiographia Linguistica, 19(1-2), 81-102.
10. Ellis, R. (2003). Focusing On Form: On Tasks and The Language Learning Curriculum. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 99-122.
11. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Seabury Press.
12. Fries, C. C. (1967). Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. TESOL Quarterly, 1(4), 63. https://doi.org/10.2307/3585815
13. Gagnetto, C. (1972). Teaching Foreign Languages in Schools: The Silent Way. New York: Educational Solutions.
14. Genesee, F., Paradis, J., & Paradis, M. (2013). Immersion And Bilingual Education: An Introduction. Multilingual Matters.
15. Giroux, H. A. (2011). On Critical Pedagogy. Continuum.
16. Johansen, S. (1999). Major Foreign Language Teaching Methods: A Descriptive Overview. The Korean Language in America, 3, 3–14. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42922227
17. John, P. & Vuzo, M. & Mkumbo, K. (2023). Contextual and Pedagogical Challenges Facing English Language Teachers in Using Communicative Language Teaching Approach in Tanzanian Primary Schools. 2020. From https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
18. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2013). Techniques And Principles in Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. (pp. 32-33)
19. Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages Are Learned (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
20. Littlewood, D. (2014). Language Learning Strategies. Routledge.
21. Littlewood, W. (1996). Communicative Language Teaching: An Introduction. Oxford University Press.
22. Lozanov, G. (1978). Suggestology and Outlines of Suggestopedy. New York: Gordon and Breach
23. Makundi, B. I. (1997). The Swahili language in Eastern and Central Africa. Journal of Eastern African Research, 3(1), 148-159.
24. Matamoros-González, J. A., Rojas, M. A., Romero, J. P., Vera-Quiñonez, S., & Soto, S. T. (2017). English Language Teaching Approaches: A Comparison of The Grammar-Translation, Audiolingual, Communicative, And Natural Approaches. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(11), 965. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0711.04
25. McClaren, P. (2011). Critical Pedagogy: A Reader (3rd ed.). Paradigm Publishers..
26. Milligan, B. (1986). The AV Method: Past and Present. System, 14(2), 117-122. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED181520.pdf
27. Mtavangu, N. (2003). Students’ Attitudes Towards Learning French and Socio-Economic Benefits Accrued from Learning It. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Dar es Salaam.
28. Mulinda, A. (2013). Abandon Du Cours De Français au Secondaire En Tanzanie: Représentations d’élèves Et d’enseignants. In: L’enseignement supérieur et la recherche dans le contexte des Grands Lacs et de l’Afrique de l’Est: les enjeux linguistiques pour l’intégration régionale (pp. 279-296). Sylvains les Moulins-France: GERFLINT.
29. Mulinda, A. (2015). Le français au sein multilinguisme en Tanzanie: défis et perspectives. Université de Dar es Salam. From https://gerflint.fr/Base/Afrique_GrandsLacs4/mulinda.pdf
30. Oller, J.W. & Richard-Amato, P.A. (Eds) (1983). Methods that Work. Rowley MA: Newbury House.
31. Piccardo, M. C., & North, S. M. (2019). Action-Oriented Approaches to Language Learning: Theory and Practice. Multilingual Matters.
32. Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches And Methods in Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
33. Richards, J. C. (2017). Approaches And Methods in Language Teaching. Routledge.
34. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches And Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
35. Rivers, W. M. (1981). Communicating Natural Language in The Language Classroom. Cambridge University Press.
36. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal Behaviour. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
37. Stockwell, G., & Harrington, J. (2013). Second Language Acquisition and Technology. Routledge.
38. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Theoretical Perspectives. The Modern Language Journal, 69(10), 9-27.
39. TAMISEMI. (2024, March 20). Public Notice Regarding the Introduction of Subjects Combinations for Advanced Secondary Educations Year 2024. Retrieved May 15, 2024, from https://www.tamisemi.go.tz/announcement/
40. Thorne, S., et al. (2009). Investigating Mobile Language Learning: Use, Effectiveness, And Design. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 3(1), 8-28.
41. Van Els, C. J. M. (2005). Sociocultural Factors in Second Language Acquisition: A research agenda. Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 168-188.
42. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. Warschauer, M., & Meskill, C. (2000). Technology And Second Language Teaching and Learning. In J. Rosenthal (Ed.), Handbook of Undergraduate Second Language Education: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069