64
Annex A
8. Improves internal education efficiency
A frequent argument against providing L1 instruction is the mistaken assumption that it “costs
too much.” However, analysis has shown that providing instruction to children in a language
they understand is likely to be much more cost effective, due to the reduction in repetition,
dropouts, and poor learning outcomes. A study of an L1-based education
program in Mali, for
example, found that the program cost about 27% less for a six-year primary cycle than for the
traditional French-only model (World Bank, 2005). Another study in Guatemala estimated that
the cost savings of bilingual education was $5 million per year because of a reduction in
dropouts and repetition rates—an amount equal to the cost of primary education for 100,000
pupils (Patrinos & Velez, 2009).
10
Even though a country may incur initial start-up costs associated with the production of materials
in new languages, these are recovered in the long run due to improvements in efficiency.
Although each country will have to conduct its own budgeting exercise to identify the costs—
and savings—associated with providing instruction in familiar languages, analysis from
Guatemala and Senegal estimates that the cost of producing local-language materials would be
1% of the education budget where orthographies and language development units already exist
(Vawda & Patrinos, 1999). Other analysis indicated that immediate costs associated with the
development of L1-based instruction would be covered by a 4- to 5-percent increase in a
country’s education budget, while long-term costs would be reduced
due to improved internal
efficiency (i.e., fewer students repeating and dropping out) (Heugh, 2011b).
Analysis by François Grin (2005), a specialist in language and the economy, showed that
although some aspects of education provision in L1 may be “slightly more expensive” than
provision of education in L2, the actual cost of “teaching and training would by and large cost
the same, irrespective of the language in which it takes place” (Grin, 2005, p. 20, as quoted in
Heugh, 2011b, p. 277). He concluded that because using children’s L1 conferred significant
advantages with respect to educational outcomes (higher achievement, less repetition, and lower
dropouts, and increase in the number of years of schooling), this in turn would lead to a “higher
stock
of human capital,” which is a “predictor of labour productivity, and hence of earnings”
(Grin, 2005, pp. 20–21, as quoted in Heugh, 2011b, p. 278). Through analyzing the costs of
various language-in-education models over a five-year period, he concluded there would be a
savings of actual financial outlay to the system, plus greater longer-term benefits (Grin, 2005,
p. 22, as cited in Heugh, 2011b, p. 279).
Given that the largest share of education sector budgets is generally teacher salaries and school
infrastructure—costs that are not related to the language of instruction—providing schooling in
languages that children understand well is not likely to significantly alter the overall
education
budget. Moreover, in a country such as Malawi, materials already exist that can be used for some
languages, while other materials can be translated. Indeed, cost-effectiveness may improve as
10
Another analysis of Guatemala’s schools showed that the cost per grade 6 graduate
of Spanish-medium schools
was $3,077, while the cost for bilingual schools that provided instruction in familiar languages was $2,578. If
applied nationwide, the estimated cost savings would have been more than $11 million (Walter, 2009, as cited in
Pinnock, 2009a).
65
Annex A
more children receive a quality education and are able to contribute to a country’s economy via
improved opportunities for further employment and greater contributions in the form of taxes.
Moreover, literature from the health field has found that education reduces fertility rates,
improves maternal health, and reduces infant mortality (UNESCO, 2011). In Malawi, 27% of
women with no education knew that HIV transmission risks can be reduced by the mother taking
drugs during pregnancy; for women with secondary education, the figure rose to 59%. This
institutionalization of knowledge through education in turn reduces the burden
on the state in
terms of health care costs and reduced labor productivity.
