The government’s decision to turn English into the main instructive language in schools and to be used as the medium of communication in all government institutions should not be perceived as language discrimination.

First of all, Rwanda’s constitution clearly stipulates that there three official languages namely; Kinyarwanda, French and English. This implies that the three languages are allowed to be used officially.

Yet the decision to give English preference makes sense. Worldwide it is the medium of communication when it comes to business as well as social and economic development. Moreover, considering Rwanda’s membership of the East African Community, giving the language of Shakespeare a boost was an obvious choice. And let’s not forget the country’s application to join the Commonwealth, most of whose members are former British colonies (if our application is accepted, it will make Rwanda only the second member of the organization, after Mozambique, who is not a former British colony).

However, most people perceive Rwanda’s decision simply as a move to break away from French influence, especially considering the strained political relations between the two countries, which was epitomized by cutting the diplomatic ties and the Rose Kabuye debacle.

That, however, seems to be a wrong impression. The country’s decision is mostly based on the financial and economic gains. Not only is the country strengthening the commercial ties within the EAC, but the continental economic powerhouses, such as South Africa, are also Anglophone.

Across the world too, English has outdone French as the business language. It is not only being used in most former French colonies, but has also influenced other developed countries.

The country’s target to attract investors can become easier to achieve when investors and investment facilitators have a common business language.

Since the introduction of the language policy, there have been complaints about the sudden change in the education system with some claiming that students and pupils who before were instructed in French, would find it hard to adopt.

Anywhere in the world, changes come with their pros and cons. However in Rwanda’s language policy case the pros outnumber the cons. First of all, if Rwanda is to look beyond national and regional boundaries into the international area, preparations have to begin at the grassroots, through the education system. This will enable Rwanda to produce the required labor skills that can access employment anywhere in the world.

In the current world, globalization is the name of the game with countries opting to turn from closed to open economy. This requires human resource development which would act as a major player in advancing business and economic growth, enhancing competitiveness as well as goods and services. This is aligned to the country’s policy of creating a knowledge-based economy which is able to compete anywhere in the world.

Learning French at school as a course for the purpose of knowing the language and applying it where necessary should be enough. Yet if our schools were to instruct in French and students are unable to master English, it reduces the employability chances. Teaching in English, if done properly, would ensure that Rwandan schools achieve international standards.

What should be looked at closely at is the implementation of the language policy which should not be rushed since the adaptation process might be longer. Teachers need to get enough time to learn and master the language so as to be able to pass on the language skills to the students.

On the other side, the decision by the ministry of education to attract English teachers from abroad should be lauded since it would speed up learning the English language.

Related articles:

•    Ready to embrace Shakespeare