The present study examines the national language policy and language in
education policy in Timor-Leste, a post-colonial nation that has adopted
an exogenous language (Portuguese) and an autochthonous language
(Tétun) to be its official languages, and two exogenous languages
(Indonesian and English) as working languages. Based on an analysis of
the findings, it argues that there is convincing evidence that both the
policies are moving towards assimilationist exclusionary monolingual
Portuguese model.
It was originally intended to investigate the use of languages in
three senior high schools in Timor-Leste. However, due to logistical and
administrative reasons, the study did not eventuate as planned. Instead,
the researcher interviewed 13 key informants from parliamentarians,
ministry of education officers, high school directors and teachers, as well
as government and non-governmental organizations officers, both in Díli,
Timor-Leste and subsequently in Hamilton, New Zealand.
The objective of the interviews was to gather data on the
interviewees’ perspectives on the current national language policy and
language policy in education. The study found that the debate of national
language policy and its implementation, as well as implications, in
educational domains is still vibrant and therefore far from over. The data
from the interviewees showed that even some politicians did not agree
with the current national language policy, saying that Timor-Leste should
only use Tétun at the moment and keep Portuguese for the future. It was
also said that there was no time frame apportioned in the implementation
of the national language policy and therefore there was a rush toward
Portuguese monolingual policy with the risk of devaluing Tétun and other
national languages at the same time.
While there was a bulk data from interviewees showed that there is
an imperative for the development of Tétun to improve its status planning,
the language was viewed not politically and financially supported to iii
develop, which some earlier studies had called the state of affair more
symbolic than substantial.
The language in education policy to use Portuguese as a mandated
medium of instruction and Tétun simply to function an auxiliary role posed
real challenges to education sector in Timor-Leste. High school principals
and teachers complained about the use of Portuguese as medium of
instruction and Tétun functions as auxiliary language because in the front
line they found out that more than 80% of teachers were not qualified to
teach that the majority of the teachers obtained their education in
Indonesian, which means that they hardly use Portuguese to teach. There
was a mismatch of idealized language policy and reality of language
planning and therefore some teachers even said that they had to write
their lesson plans in Indonesian, used Google translation to translate them
into Portuguese to be used later to transfer knowledge to their students.
For ease of students’ understanding, they had to and normally use Tétun,
even Indonesian, to explain the content of their teachings.
Lack of essential pedagogic materials also mentioned to be
complicating the issue. Both principals and teachers suggested that
teaching materials had to be provided in accordance with language policy
in education, i.e. to be both in Portuguese and Tétun.
For professional development of teacher, it was learned that
sending teachers away to attend basic Portuguese courses was not
sufficient in equipping the teachers to be effective and efficient teachers
unless they were given specific training based on their subjects and
continued tutoring at their workplaces.
The study also explored the extent to which the data from
interviewees, and accidentally one classroom observation, indicated
degree of plurilingualism in Timor-Leste. The preliminary data showed that
at least three languages were used in an interview sessions, with the most
four languages used, reflecting the existence of plurilingualism in the
country.