By
M.B.Musa, PhD
Department of Sociology,
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.
mbmusa@abu.edu.ng
The recent move by the Kano State House of Assembly to enforce the use of mother tongue as the language of instruction in public schools has sparked considerable debate. While the policy appears progressive on the surface—drawing inspiration from global examples such as China and India, where the use of indigenous languages has contributed to educational and technological advancement—its feasibility and long-term implications in the Nigerian context are far more complex.
1. The Federal Context of Language and Integration
Unlike China or India, Nigeria operates as a federal republic with a highly interconnected national system, where English serves as the official language of governance, education, law, and commerce. In this structure, enforcing mother tongue instruction at the subnational level (e.g., in Kano State) may create dissonance between local education and national integration. Students educated solely in Hausa or any other indigenous language within Kano may face severe limitations when engaging in higher education, civil service, or business activities that operate in English.
This could inadvertently deepen regional isolation, limit inter-state mobility, and weaken Kano students’ competitiveness in national and global spaces. The centre of interaction is the Nigerian federation, not an isolated state system. Therefore, policies must align with broader linguistic and educational frameworks to ensure inclusion, mobility, and equal opportunity.
2. Misplaced Comparison with China and India
It is misleading to compare Kano State with China or India, which have established national language frameworks supported by decades of investment in linguistic research, translation technologies, and curriculum development. In China, Mandarin serves as the unifying language across all provinces, supported by national policies and media. Similarly, in India, while several regional languages exist, English and Hindi remain dominant for inter-state and international communication.
Kano, by contrast, is one component of a multilingual federation where over 500 languages exist. The absence of a coordinated national policy supporting the use of mother tongues across Nigeria means that adopting Hausa as a teaching language could create disparities between states, particularly in access to tertiary education, federal employment, and global opportunities.
3. Educational Disadvantage and Global Competitiveness
In today’s globalized world, English remains the lingua franca of science, technology, business, and international relations. Denying children early exposure to English in the name of linguistic nationalism could limit their ability to participate in global knowledge systems. Educational research consistently shows that while initial learning in a mother tongue may enhance early comprehension, continued reliance on it without transition to an international language hinders cognitive and professional development (Bamgbose, 2011; UNESCO, 2016).
Students from Kano taught exclusively in Hausa may struggle when competing with peers from southern Nigeria or from private schools who are fluent in English, thereby widening inequality between the public and private education sectors.
4. Risk of Political and Ethnic Polarization
Language is not only a medium of communication but also a marker of identity and power. Promoting a single mother tongue in a multiethnic state like Kano could be perceived as politically motivated, potentially marginalizing non-Hausa communities. Such a policy might breed resentment and reduce cohesion, especially in urban centres like Kano City, where populations are ethnically diverse.
5. A Balanced Alternative: Bilingual Education
Rather than enforcing exclusive use of mother tongue, the state could adopt a bilingual approach, where Hausa (or any indigenous language) is used in early grades to aid comprehension, while English remains the medium of instruction from upper primary onwards. This model preserves cultural identity while ensuring linguistic competence for national and global participation.
Conclusion
While the idea of promoting indigenous languages aligns with cultural preservation and identity politics, enforcing mother tongue instruction in isolation from national and global realities poses serious dangers. The federal nature of Nigeria, the centrality of English in governance and education, and the demands of global competitiveness make it imperative that policies in Kano State remain inclusive, strategic, and balanced. Mother tongue education may nurture local pride, but without mastery of English, it risks producing a generation linguistically rich yet globally handicapped.