The politics of decolonising the curriculum through adopting mother tongue instruction in a South African historically disadvantaged university setting

This paper focuses on the dynamics of decolonising the curriculum by adopting mother tongue language as a medium for instruction in South African universities. There has been growing criticism on the slow pace of decoloniality within university spaces amid mounting challenges of lack of development in society. The paper speaks to the experiences of historically disadvantaged universities regarding adopting mother tongue instruction, especially considering the complexities and contradictions posed by institutional culture and epistemological traditions. The paper presents insights into how a decolonial perspective can assist in ridding African universities of epistemological and pedagogical practices that hinder decolonial efforts and broader societal development. The paper focuses on the synergies between mother tongue instruction and curriculum transformation in light of the contradictions associated with the use of the mother tongue that could enhance students’ epistemic access and success. It thus presents opportunities and controversies surrounding the introduction of the language policy, especially among historically disadvantaged universities. A Kaupapa Māori approach philosophical lens of reimagination evoked during the 1980s revolution becomes a central theoretical framework. It helps understand how indigenous philosophies can be essential in decolonising African knowledge and epistemological traditions. In this regard, the paper concludes that applying the Kaupapa Māori approach—and in particular, the principle of reimagination on the curriculum transformation in African universities (especially the formerly disadvantaged ones)—can propel a decolonial drive. The paper resulted from experiential knowledge and observations, informal interviews targeting students and scholars and empirical evidence from previous studies.


Introduction
The question of the use of the mother tongue as a medium of instruction in schools and universities is an issue that many developing countries have continued to grapple with. Several developing countries are thus reportedly working towards various measures to ensure that mother tongue languages are promoted as mediums of instruction and critical artefacts within indigenous cultures (Mercuri, 2012;Ramoupi, 2014). Language-and in particular its use as an instrument of learning-is in this paper projected from an anthropological vantage point from which it is seen as an essential part of people's culture (Du Preez et al., 2018). This view can be linked to Kim (2020) in which case one can emphasise that using one of the dominant mother tongue languages within a university setting reflects its usage within the society where it is embedded in communication and practice. From such a perspective, arguments in the paper present the state of language within a decolonising African university context where several contradictions are highlighted.
Language policies have supported efforts to deal with the issue of mother tongue as a medium of instruction in developing countries, including Ethiopia, Mali and South Africa (among others) (Ramoupi, 2014). It has been reported that Ethiopia represents one of the best examples of multilingualism having been incorporated into the education 1 3 system. In contrast, the endeavours to promote indigenous languages in South Africa have produced mixed reactions, especially when it comes to their positioning as the medium of instruction in universities. The use of a mother tongue in schools and tertiary institutions (including universities) has included adopting institution-specific mechanisms driven by practice and policy. The issue of using a mother tongue as a medium of instruction in South Africa, particularly in universities, can be linked to the decolonial efforts adopted by the post-apartheid government (DHET, 2015). From this viewpoint, mother-tongue instruction ought to be understood as a corrective measure for addressing the apartheid legacy while at the same time being a better medium for students to understand the curriculum. In addition, it has been argued that learning via a second language as the official language of instruction is another hindrance to students' conceptualisation of curricula (Nyika, 2015). Mercuri (2012) adds that the omission of a student's first language from the medium of instruction compromises the student's identity. In the process, the link to the student's family and cultural community is broken. Restoration thus becomes a challenge, especially in the absence of a conscious deliberate effort that combines resisting practices responsible for the marginalisation of a particular indigenous language and ensuring that such language and cultural practices are brought into the centre of a student's formal learning. Emphasis on the importance of linking culture and indigenous philosophies with educational processes particularly in universities has also been emphasised by several scholars (Du Preez et al., 2018;Norton & Toohey, 2011). It is in line with such arguments that the challenges linked to mother-tongue use or omission as a medium of instruction in South African universities be explored from the Māori philosophical and lived experience lens. In essence, such a line of thinking enhances the papers' argument towards understanding the relational nature of indigenous knowledge and educational pedagogies in a way that recognises the relevance of international knowledge while ensuring indigenous knowledge remains at the centre of knowledge production.
The paper's main thrust is therefore that the close relationship between language, culture and education, as practical means of reproducing social relations, cannot be underestimated (Kim, 2020). Aligned to the propositions of the Māori approach and underscored by Rua et al. (2023), this argument is further extended to indicate that within the context of education, a close relationship between language, culture and education amid the reproduction of social relations implies that an effective educational process must transcend addressing knowledge through formal learning usually underpinned on courses or skills to embrace attitudes and consciousness rooted in people's lived experiences. Embracing attitudes and consciousness tends to legitimise any language used be it a mother tongue or not (Chan, 2002). Mercuri (2012) has argued that at the centre of using the mother tongue as a medium of instruction is the individual's ability to amass linguistic capital, which enhances one's application of such capital to other settings. Language as a medium of instruction in an education setting becomes especially important, mainly because of the legitimacy and associated processes where capital is acquired and reused in different settings. This is particularly true when the language of instruction can enhance cognitive justice. The paper thus explores the transformation struggles experienced within South Africa's historically disadvantaged universities (HDUs) in light of the persistent colonial legacy albeit within a context where the mother tongue is being used to implement transformation and enhance educational pedagogies and epistemic success.

Methodology
The paper draws from an ongoing empirical study that includes experiential knowledge, informal interviews with students and academics and empirical evidence from previous studies. A total of eight students (four males and four females) were interviewed, all drawn from the social sciences department of the humanities faculty at a decolonising HDU university in South Africa. The HDU was purposively chosen owing mainly to observed frictions and frequent protests over the language policy and other areas of transformation. The eight students who formed part of this study were purposively sampled, considering their willingness to share information during a previous (related) study. Observations focused on the relations between students and institutional leadership on the one hand and relations among students themselves on the other. The institution in which the study was carried out was kept confidential following a request by some participants who are in leadership positions and could have been easily identified. All eight interviews of student participants and other informal interviews were conducted between September and October 2019. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.

Influences of the apartheid legacy on African culture and language use in South Africa
The use of any language in South Africa cannot be adequately understood without revisiting the historical experiences of African culture and languages under the apartheid state. An essential feature of the apartheid state related to state-led processes of the 1960s that featured the forced relocation of Africans into what later became known as the homelands. In the post-apartheid state, the remaining homelands are mainly located in vast swathes of poorly developed communal areas. During the apartheid era, these were organised into some form of nation-states governed by a particular ethnic group with a predominant language commonly spoken. Subsequently, by the late 1970s and early 1980s, some homelands began to entrench autonomous positions at social and political levels, with the former being founded upon initiatives aimed at embracing dominant languages. The embracing of the dominant languages did not in any way symbolise a shift away from the Eurocentric practices that deliberately sought to suppress indigenous languages and cultures. Madadzhe (2019) has in this regard argued that the so-called promotion of African languages in the homelands undermined the languages as they got reduced to homeland languages. In essence, in contrast to the already dominant (historically European) English and Afrikaans, recognition of the Indigenous languages did not occur within an environment of deliberate support. This lack of support for the development of Indigenous languages can be equated to similar conditions that prevailed when the Māori culture and language were subjected to dominance that left the people in a precarious position (Rua et al., 2023). This was done albeit such languages were embraced in addition to the already dominant English.
In addition to the sign language, the other diverse indigenous languages widely used in South Africa (and in the respective former "homelands") include the following: -Xhosa (Transkei and Ciskei) -Setswana (Bophuthatswana) -Tshivenda (Venda) -IsiZulu (KwaZulu) -isiNdebele (KwaNdebele) -SiSwati (KaNgwane) -Xitsonga and Shangaan (Gazankulu) -Southern Sotho (QwaQwa) -Northern Sotho/Pedi (Lebowa) (Adopted from Prah, 2006) In post-apartheid South Africa, although there is some commonality in the languages spoken, there is still significant diversity. At present, when it comes to how a particular region and ultimately the university chooses its primary indigenous language, issues of power coupled with other social and economic underpinnings are inevitable (Brenzinger, 2017). For instance, it is difficult to imagine that a reliable formula can be found that accurately represents the language preferences of the majority of people.
It follows that under the apartheid state, English and Afrikaans, the two languages of the white minority, gained more prominence over the Indigenous African languages mainly used in the marginalised homelands (Prah, 2006). Prah (2006) further explains that this process resulted in relative invisibility for the predominantly African population. The process which took the form of geographical and physical exclusion also saw policies that ensured sidelining of Indigenous cultures and languages. Despite the tolerance for Indigenous languages in the Bantustan areas, education institutions were poorly resourced to mount any meaningful development of Indigenous cultures and languages (Brenzinger, 2017). This is despite Africans being subjected to some form of quasi-independence in these homelands, which formed a part of territorial homelands. There was deliberate neglect of the education system at all levels by the apartheid establishment that was bent on ensuring that whatever form of education Africans received translated to mere literacy with little or no prospects of advancement for meaningful development of the individuals and groups concerned. By ensuring that each homeland was treated as a separate "nation", the possibility of a united African majority was further dealt a blow (Brenzinger, 2017).
Despite forming over three-quarters of the population with their languages being widely spoken, the languages could not receive the same prominence as the language(s) of the colonial master. Such a situation set a strong foundation for the "yoking" of African cultures, languages and economic and educational institutions to a certain extent. More often than not, the leadership of the homelands and education institutions tended to serve the interests of the apartheid establishment and barely went beyond being mere handlers of the establishment. Such was the legacy which prevailed under the apartheid state, that it became a "yoke" so much entrenched and buttressed onto the necks of the homelands, its institutions and culture of inhabitants. Importantly, language driving any post-apartheid efforts aimed at "unyoking" should have been as intense as the processes that created the discriminatory tendences. The magnitude of the resultant inequalities and forms of exclusion was so gross that one can easily conclude that the majority of Africans were reduced to "yoked subalterns", an identity that has persisted in the post-apartheid state, albeit mostly in covert forms. There is a paucity of post-colonial policies and institutional leadership on the use of Indigenous languages as a medium of instruction.
Many African countries, including South Africa, have opted for a language model that favours the recognition and promotion of multiple mother tongue languages in spoken terms and as mediums of instruction. In this regard, universities have been identified as institutions capable of promoting Indigenous languages in their localities. The question on what language should be used as a medium of instruction (given the history of the country, in particular where Indigenous cultures and languages, have experienced marginalisation) is of importance in the drive aimed at adopting an Indigenous language in the South African context. In expressing his disapproval of using Western languages as a medium of instruction in African universities, Mazrui (2003) argues that virtually all universities south of the Sahara are based on a combination of 1 3 Western models. He further posits that in almost all these universities, a Western language is used as a medium of instruction. In addition, many of these universities heavily rely on books and articles published by westerners or in the West, with such materials being dominant in the libraries of African universities.
With universities in Africa, especially the HDUs grappling with what can be called a paralysis of institutional culture and identity, the shadow of the colonial legacy, particularly at the linguistic level, remains nearly impossible to dislodge. As Fishman (2020) argues, the dynamics surrounding who speaks what language to whom and when tend to be narrow in stable multilingual settings. Drawing from a European perspective, Rydenvald (2018) has argued that despite the issue of the language of choice being used to denote a prevalent language, it remains important to avoid being entangled in ideological generalisations that might appear to offer face value solutions at macro levels while ignoring practical realities. This view is important as it helps expose the failure of universities in South Africa. This is true, particularly of the HDUs that have relied on the perceived colonial patterns of determining the commonality of a language in an area-and thus shunning multilingual realities within the surrounding communities.
Referring to the case of the University of the Free State in South Africa, Amon (2019) argues that despite some notable indications of curriculum transformation having been attained, questions remain on its depth and whether it is moving towards the direction of genuine epistemic openness. In further assessing the situation concerning knowledge systems and epistemologies in South African universities, there is concern that changes that might have occurred remain inadequate. This is primarily because they remain rooted in Eurocentric, colonial Western world views, a situation that has become untenable under the increasing pressure of transformation. Concerns with the slow pace and direction of transformation, particularly towards decolonising the curriculum using the mother tongue, are common among decolonial scholars. In the case of South Africa, despite homelands emerging as autonomous regions, at least at social and political levels with dominant Indigenous languages being recognised, the traditional dominance of English and Afrikaans in the education system has remained deeply entrenched. This state of affairs was also reflected within the societal linguistic underpinnings, which compromised transformative efforts in society and the education context. As argued by Arendse (2019), despite the high-sounding postapartheid policy pronouncements-especially within the education system-the racial inequalities remain a glaring feature. The same can be said of the situation prevalent in HDU settings. These have attracted criticism for their failure to achieve meaningful transformation; this has been blamed for the continued poor performance of students on the one hand, and the persistence of underdevelopment across black South African communities on the other.
Similar to other parts of Africa, there is a common belief that South African post-colonial policy decisions have at least partially been influenced by poor institutional leadership (Mohuba & Govender, 2016). This involved individuals and groups seeking to fulfil and entrench their interests at the expense of HDUs. The colonial legacy of dominance and lack of a clear pathway for supporting Indigenous languages has thus underpinned the challenges related to broader transformation, especially efforts to use the mother tongue for curriculum transformation. This has, in turn, inevitably compromised efforts towards genuine epistemic openness and created ambiguities thus frustrating the efforts of implementing the mother tongue as a language of instruction in contemporary university settings in South Africa.
Indecisive support by universities in South Africa particularly the historically disadvantaged universities for mother-tongue instruction confirms Madadzhe's (2019) argument, that challenges surrounding the use of African languages in South African universities cannot be taken for granted. Rather, they ought to be taken as a matter of life and death-especially considering that in other African countries, Anglophone-Francophone discord has culminated in open confrontation (such as in Cameroon where there have been clashes in two regions). Tensions are also common in South Africa and other African countries where communities believe that transformation is painfully slow. Furthermore, as argued by Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2013), the poorly managed transformation and unclear results on the embracing of Indigenous languages and the mother tongue have served to reinforce the colonial legacy and some dreaded elements of coloniality knowledge, power and people's identities. Zembylas (2018) extended the argument by highlighting the significance of embracing cognitive justice as part of the mechanisms to recognise the epistemic diversity of knowledge.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni has argued that cognitive justice is mainly associated with exercising the rights to think, theorise and interpret the world, while also having the capacity to develop own methodologies from an empowered position-underpinned by one's own identity without being hampered by Eurocentrism (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2018). From this point, the dynamics surrounding decolonising the curriculum, particularly through the use of the mother tongue and the associated challenges ought to be taken seriously, particularly looking at the entrenchment of coloniality into post-colonial universities and surrounding societies, where power contestations and competing interests threaten decolonial efforts.
A comparison of Ndlovu-Gatsheni's cognitive justice and its emphasis on the need to combine theory and practice to develop own methodologies (albeit from an empowered point of view) can also be drawn with what Bishop (2012) has referred to as aculturally responsive pedagogy of relations. Within this setting of a culturally responsive pedagogy of relations, the prevalent reciprocity within Māori families is extended into educational spaces where it forms an important foundation that subsequently influence relations among students and between students and academics. In this context, students participate in self-determined terms that define the pedagogic process. The South African context can therefore benefit if struggles towards embracing the mother tongue embrace such a philosophy in theory and practice.

The question of language as a medium of decoloniality
Without downplaying the need for enforcing a decolonial approach (as a strategy towards freeing trapped university knowledge from the dehumanising shackles of marginalisation and disadvantage), redress efforts can be in the form of a linguistic struggle. This was the case with the Māori. Nyika (2015) highlighted that for the majority at African universities, the significance of enhancing redress efforts or policies regarding using mother tongue language (both as a medium of instruction and as a strategy to enhance academic success) becomes an important lens. Emphasis is placed on an approach whereby decolonial struggle founded upon language ought to avoid reproducing subtle forms of intellectual and economic marginalisation of the already disadvantaged students-one that restricts their capability to effectively utilise whatever knowledge and skills would have been acquired in spaces where the mother tongue is already being used. Undoubtedly, Indigenous cases (at least in humanities and social sciences) enhance the cognitive capabilities of students as they better relate and are familiar with localised issues. The question remains on whether the instructor can usefully draw from mother tongue, and remain relevant to the curriculum. As was exclaimed by one student in a social science programme, improper usage of the mother tongue can be self-defeating: I am proud of my language being used in communicating lecture material but in some instances, we have some lecturers who spend so much time telling stories in mother tongue without relating that to the core issues of the Module. We leave the class with more confusion as most of the time we find no link of the presentation to our Module. I must however say it's not the same as some of the lecturers do make that connection and we benefit as students. (Interview with a student registered in a social science programme in the institution of focus. The quote presented above supports the view that the use of mother tongue must not be considered as an end in itself but rather a means to an end. The complexity of mother tongue as a medium of instruction, particularly in HDUs, has been noted even in learning Indigenous languages. Students have not just fared poorly in general, but they have tended to abhor the subjects. This must be addressed in particular in an era where efforts are being made not just to promote the use of the mother tongue as a medium of instruction but to use universities as conduits for the promotion of mother tongue languages and cultures in their localities. Drawing from the views of Jones et al. (2022) one can argue that the cognitive challenges faced by students learning mother tongue (in particular in a historically disadvantaged context) lead to numerous opinions. These relate not just to the nature of the challenges but equally, should the lecturers or the students be more responsible for driving learning through the mother tongue Success in the use of the mother tongue as a medium of instruction at universities could be addressed through the conscious engagements on power relations and positions of resistance forming part of the core philosophies of identity and indigeneity -as highlighted by the Kaupapa Māori Theory (and extended into their practices).
This issue of a decolonial drive also speaks to the universities in Africa still suffering from an "academic hangover" where Western teaching and assessments that suffer from contextual irrelevance persist across universities. One may ask if the colonial legacy is so entrenched among academics (or even students) that it has come to represent the dawn and the unfolding of Eurocentric modernity (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2016). The lasting impact of colonialism has perhaps made it difficult for Africans to free themselves from some of the negative influences of the ugly past that sought to question the very essence of the African ways of knowing. The fact that some of these failures are usually associated with HDU academic programme challenges points to African knowledge systems being trapped under overt or covert forms of imperialism. The imperialist forms continue to reproduce in the diverse inequalities in the post-apartheid environment.
The concept of language being understood within the nature of the behaviour of individuals and groups resonates with the views expounded in the Saussurean model located in the discipline of sociology and, to an extent, anthropology (Reda, 2016). This view is essential for its influence on modern approaches to meaning, including cognitive approaches to grammar where meaning is given prominence. As further argued by Reda (2016), of importance, however, are the cognitive semantics that view meanings as best attained through motivation and negotiation instead of an arbitrary process. In this regard, instead of language being seen as an autonomous knowledge structure, it needs to be emphasised that it is impossible to separate linguistic knowledge and behaviour from other cognitive abilities.
Following the preceding argument, it can suffice to indicate that language use, as explored in this paper, externalises thoughts and determines knowledge structures that represent the language users' understanding of their physical and socio-cultural settings. From this view, the paper seeks to caution that in embracing a decolonial framework towards addressing the issue of using the mother tongue as a language of instruction, there is a need to appreciate that it might not be as popular as envisaged among students. In some instances, university students in historically disadvantaged contexts will likely favour the so-called foreign language seen as an appendage of the colonial system or a career of the imperial canon. In this way, university students from such universities may be adjudged as better placed to have their cognitive capabilities enhanced by using mother tongue as a medium of instruction. This conclusion could be far from reality, especially considering their schooling environment, where English has become the dominant medium of instruction.
Zembylas (2018) has highlighted how calls for decolonising South African higher education have been persistent and predate current movements such as #FeesMustFall. Despite the different meanings attached to decolonisation among different people and contexts, there is a consensus that the pace towards transformation could be faster. Despite this, the paper uses the interpretation of Zembylas (2018), who has indicated that decolonisation can generally be construed as an umbrella term for diverse efforts meant to resist the unique but entangled processes of colonialism and racialism. The aim of the process is thus to entrench transformation and redress the historical and ongoing effects of colonialism and racialism to establish and sustain ways of knowing, being and relating that the colonial processes sought to eliminate. It is essential to note that the process of decolonisation, particularly in Africa, has never been smooth or straightforward, as it has always courted controversy. Key to the paradoxes is why higher education institutions continue reproducing an epistemological hierarchy that reflects Western knowledge being privileged over non-western bodies and traditions of knowledge and knowledge construction (Higgs, 2016). Mbembe (2015) has added that it is essential to allude to the Ngungian usage of the term decolonising, by which he cautions that it is not an event that happens once and for all at a given time and place. On the contrary, decolonising should be viewed as an ongoing process in which we must see ourselves emerging from a state of blindness or dizziness. The process is further said to represent the beginning of an entirely new struggle, that is, a struggle over what is to be taught. According to Hapeta et al. (2019), a decolonial reflexive view through a "Kaupapa Māori" philosophical lens of reimagination involves "Kaupapa Māori" coming to represent an Indigenous movement in New Zealand that is pragmatically and philosophically linked to Māori values and worldviews. These have been central in the development of their knowledge and the emancipation of the people themselves.
The application of the Māori concepts is wide and includes epistemological, ontological, axiological and methodological underpinnings through which cultural production, power relations and ideological struggles are explored (Eketone, 2008;Hapeta et al., 2019;Henry & Pene, 2001). The Kaupapa Māori approach to knowledge production is largely grounded upon Indigenous principles that locate cultural knowledge, relational ethics and the lived experiences of Kaupapa Māori people (Rua et al., 2023). In opposition to Eurocentric traditions which tend to exert dominance and silence other knowledge systems, another important element in the decolonial approach of the Māori is the simultaneous embracing of the principle of "both" and "or" in its relational conversations with other Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge systems while still retaining its unique Māori identity (Rua et al., 2023). Emphasis on lived realities is intricately linked to transformation-oriented partnership and praxis and as is the case with other Indigenous traditions with a distinct set of Indigenous traditions deeply entrenched into their genealogies and cosmologies. Eketone (2008) has argued that while the term Kaupapa Māori usually refers to different aspects in different contexts, two major viewpoints have been used. Kaupapa Māori has commonly been used to refer to a group or organisation whose operations draw from Māori cultural values that include language schools (Kura Kaupapa Māori). This paper draws from the second viewpoint that is commonly used in academic circles in which Kaupapa Māori refers to a philosophical approach to a field of practice or theory that is drawn from challenging well-established Western ideas about knowledge, particularly Indigenous knowledge. A combination of language and custom is thus part of the implementation process while outcomes are measured in accordance with Māori and requisite competencies and professionalism in the workforce. The ideas of Rameka (2021) on the influences of colonial subjugation of the Māori education system and cultural values during colonialism and the resistance that emerged have assisted in exploring the implementation of mother tongue as the medium of instruction in South Africa's HDUs. This is the case, especially considering the persistent challenges of epistemic success that has continuously affected student performance despite efforts of implementing the mother tongue as a medium of instruction in South Africa's HDUs. As noted by Jones et al. (2022), criticism of general practice combined with an element of resistance to existing state strictures forms part of the fundamental hallmarks of the Māori pedagogy for teaching and learning something that might be missing or exercised weakly within South Africa's HDU pedagogic practices. Furthermore, the conscious engagements on power relations and positions of resistance form part of the core philosophies of identity and indigeneity of the Kaupapa Māori Theory in practice.
A critical case can be used to understand some of the successful approaches towards decolonising the curriculum by drawing from Indigenous philosophies. In particular, at practical levels, the Māori of New Zealand's philosophical lens of reimagination that propelled the revolution of the 1980s came to the fore. 1 Despite what is commonly projected around the Māori revolution, it was not primarily hinged on dramatic language revitalisation. Rather, one of the defining features of the revolution was the shift of the mindset of a large segment of the Māori who abandoned the practice of waiting for things to be done for them and embraced a philosophy of doing things for themselves (Jones et al., 2022). Taking the initiative towards resolving their challenges also represented a shift from reactive politics to an emphasis on being more proactive. Steps towards being proactive were further buttressed by a move from negativity towards embracing positive inspiration (Campbell, 2000). What is essential about the particular approach taken by the Māori is the deliberate move away from simplifying the decolonisation process. Thus, the Māori have emphasised the importance of avoiding placing the coloniser at the centre of attention. Instead, the Māori approach is founded upon emphasising conscientisation promoting consciousness, a move that puts the Māori at the centre.
Such an approach acknowledges the historical experiences in which the colonial legacy saw the stifling of Māori reimagination taking place during the colonial period. Such a situation speaks to the need to rejuvenate the imagination to promote a spirit of consciousness that could assist in transforming their condition and subsequently getting out from under the influence of the reproductive forces of the dominant groups in society. Smith (2003) highlights that such a moment has been defined in Māori history as it has assisted in dealing with the "politics of distraction" which gets the colonisers preoccupied and always on the back foot, reacting. Creating distractions that need to be confronted by the colonised ends up with the colonisers perpetrating what Smith (2003) has viewed as "self-abuse". As argued by Pihama (2015), critical in the success of the Māori case is the unified radical action they undertook to free themselves from the shackles of colonialism when their language was reportedly in its last death throes. In addition, the Māori language initiatives set in motion a series of schooling and education interventions that the Indigenous people championed. The Māori strategies (pitched within the context of alternative ideas) grew as resistance schemes outside the mainstream system precincts. This underlined their success as they could "free" themselves from what Smith (2003) calls the gatekeeping reproductive components of the leading closely guarded system.
At the centre of understanding and addressing the challenges facing the Māori is the need to appreciate the root of the problem: that is, power and coloniality influences. This view is particularly crucial, especially when linked to an appreciation of the relational and intersectional nature of identities and the changes they are associated with, while at the same time transforming practices. Of importance with this approach towards transformation is the emphasis on the need to ensure that power and coloniality are closely interrogated as having marked influence on those who are experiencing a state of precarity (as has been the case with the Māori) (Jones et al., 2022;Rua et al., 2023). In addition, any efforts to practically address the nuances of power and coloniality as part of meeting the aspirations of the marginalised must ensure that the positioning of broader society is with those experiencing precarity. This approach becomes a significant move within the decolonial framework as it emphasises Māori self-determination as the ultimate goal while equally envisaging the extension of care across New Zealand. This further affirms the richness of the foundation of the Kaupapa Māori scholarship in communal and relational understanding of human beings and how they relate to both the human and non-human with some form of intervention that enhances their transformative actions and the quest for self-determination. This Māori linked approach of building self-determination through evoking communal and relational initiatives in a holistic manner towards building transformative educational pedagogies constitutes what Nyoni (2020) has positioned as an essential foundation for enhancing decolonial practices among persons in precarious low resource universities. It is therefore within this context that this paper presents a case in which HDUs in South Africa can draw from the Māori and use the mother tongue as an instrument for enhancing pedagogic transformation in their institutions, thus subsequently promoting their student epistemic success. Chan (2002) has provided a similar case in which students and parents have surprisingly shifted from mother tongue preference in favour of a second non-Indigenous language. The case involved resistance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government's move to adopt the Chinese mother tongue as a medium of instruction in public sector secondary schools. The resistance from the side of the students was so emotional that there were widespread reports of students breaking down into tears upon realising that they were to learn in Chinese (Chan, 2002). They felt somewhat denigrated by being denied the opportunity to study in English. In line with the views of Wang (2020), parents equally felt that their children's future had significantly been compromised through being denied English. The parents thus responded by switching their children to schools where they could study in English. It is essential to highlight that the Chinese government was surprised as there was evidence pointing to mother tongue education having been proven to have pedagogical advantages over teaching in a second language. With its endorsement receiving backing from many educators, this shows that learning through the mother tongue must not be construed as an end in resolving the issue of student epistemic success, as other factors may have more prominence within the learning process. This view is supported by Madadzhe (2019), who has argued that while learning in one's mother tongue is an important foundation for increasing chances of epistemic success, particularly for black students, other factors such as quality of teaching, knowledge of the curriculum and stability of the institution concerned. It is from such proceeding arguments that the Māori holistic approach towards transformation in which theory and practice are infused become essential for any efforts to produce meaningful epistemic success. Referring to the Zimbabwean case and other contexts in Africa, Thondhlana (2002) has chastised the continued preference for colonial languages as a medium of instruction and for communication on development matters in general. Colonial languages are still considered prestigious owing to a subversive tendency of bilingualism that has historically propelled them to prominence. With scholars such as Berryman et al. (2022) highlighting the importance of language as a window to culture, under a context of the continued dominance of non-mother tongue languages and inadequate support for the Indigenous languages in general, the socio-cultural attributes of Indigenous languages have suffered denigration in favour of the colonial language held with more prestige.

Relating other contexts of linguistical contestations with the Māori experiences
Promoting colonial languages as a medium of instruction has significantly contributed to many Africans acquiring education through the colonial language at the expense of their mother tongue; hence, such languages as English remain dominant in such contexts (Madadzhe, 2019). Thondhlana (2002) goes on to bemoan the laxity in efforts to promote the mother tongue, especially in the South African context and elsewhere in Africa, where both human and financial resources have been committed to developing the mother tongue. The slow pace towards sustainable use of the mother tongue shows that the challenges encountered have more to them than meets the eye. Christie and McKinney (2017) have used the development and operation of "Model C" schools, particularly the language used in the schools they view as associated with coloniality. In suggesting delinking from the power relations of coloniality in education, they further suggest a radical approach that resembles that of the Māori, where fundamental changes, as opposed to minor adjustments to schooling arrangements, are preferred. They advocate for such an approach owing to their conviction (driven by the research findings they carried out in schools) which has resulted in the conclusion that the schooling system in South Africa-where English is overwhelmingly dominant, whether for the privileged or the poor-tends to operate within a logic of coloniality.
In a quest to shed light on finding solutions to the dominance of Western knowledge, Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) has cautioned that it is not necessary to do away with Western knowledge. In his commentary, he reveals that human experience and ontology are plurals, implying that only an approach that embraces the plurality of knowledge can deal with diverse human challenges. As reflected in the language choices of the Hmong students, they have chosen in some instances to maintain a middle path between two competing cultures by combining elements of both. Bosher (1997) reported that students from first-generation immigrants to the USA who formed part of the Hmong made conscious decisions regarding what aspects of American or Hmong culture to retain or discard. The essential aspect of this case is that the increased independence of Hmong students from their families who embraced the autonomy-oriented philosophy of the college life which did not result in the rejection of Hmong culture. However, it resulted in their close identification with-and pride in-their heritage and a more significant association with other Hmong students in college. This cultural hybridisation process can also be traced to university students in South African universities where different cultural groups balance the obligations to university culture (where English is usually the dominant language of instruction) with their own.

Importance of the Kaupapa Māori lens in a South African context
Following the insights presented by Jones et al. (2022) on the philosophical and practical principles that form part of the success that defined Māori's decolonial approach, it can be argued that Kaupapa Māori's holistic conception of understanding one's position and challenges they may be facing can help understand the application of the mother tongue in South African universities. In this regard, Kaupapa Māori's grounding on epistemological, ontological, axiological and methodological underpinnings becomes an important lens into a South African university context, particularly in instances where Indigenous languages have been explored as part of efforts to (i) enhance student epistemic success and (ii) restore the Indigenous languages as key components of local cultures. While the Māori context is characterised by a broader perspective that one can equate to holism, in South African universities, particularly the HDUs, the reliance on Indigenous language is seemingly reliant on policy proclamations that are poorly supported at the execution level.
In essence, while the policies could be viewed as highly progressive, there is a tendency to have these policies delinked from the very Indigenous communities and practices they purport to represent. This has been a major contributor to the poor performance of students at HDUs, even in the mother tongue subjects themselves, while efforts to use the mother tongue in teaching other subjects have equally found the students wanting, especially when it comes to code-switching. Code-switching represents one of the most important processes in which one makes a connection between their mother tongue and the new language to enhance understanding of the latter by applying the knowledge gained through understanding the former. However, in a situation where the very mother tongue language lacks grounding in a student's values and world views, the imagination that usually assists in unlocking some composite aspects of the subject presented in a foreign language tends to be muzzled.
It therefore becomes inconceivable, particularly within the educational setting of a South African HDU, that a student will miraculously gain an understanding of the subject even if the mother tongue is used because its use is not an end but a mere basic principle towards understanding a complex set of epistemic obligations within the student's understanding. A lack of synergy between what students experience in communities in terms of values and world views and how they apply the mother tongue in university learning has thus put them in a precarious position and at risk of experiencing poor academic performance. Such poor performance is underscored by the epistemic compromise brought by a poor link between what transpires in practice when drawing from the mother tongue to deal with some life experiences on the one hand and what transpires within university spaces when Indigenous policies are implemented on the other. It is in this context that the Māori approach becomes central as its grounding on a balanced holistic approach between theories and practices could be adopted to build a stronger epistemic base when it comes to the way students in South Africa's HDUs utilise the mother tongue in their learning and dealing with life challenges and obligations in general.

Student's cognitive capabilities and perceptions towards academics-a decolonial nightmare
To demonstrate some of the key challenges, especially with respect to attaining requisite levels of cognitive justice and the holistic positioning of people's aspirations, philosophies and pedagogies within the ambit of a Kaupapa Māori lens, the issue of HDUs and their struggles to attract academics with requisite competencies comes to the fore. This situation is usually compounded by the institutions also attracting a larger pool of students, some of whom would have failed to make it to the top universities hence they would be faced with academic challenges that run even deeper on language particularly epistemological competency on the mother tongue. Although this does not imply such students would not be qualifying for university entry, it is usually a result of the stiff entry competition for spaces in the universities of first choice that these institutions find themselves having to admit students with lower competencies. Such a lack of attractiveness to top achievers combined with a lack of resources and a paucity of institutional leadership/academic competency has resulted in tensions between parties. This has negatively affected the capacities for a reciprocal atmosphere where parties could work together to establish an institutional culture that can enhance pedagogies founded upon a principle of self-determination and the establishment of identities suitable for epistemological transformation and success. An opportunity is thus lost for these institutions to build a firm foundation for tackling the colonial legacy and establishing a culture of strong pedagogical cooperation underpinned by Indigenous values and practices where the mother tongue languages play a central role.
The structural limitation characteristic in HDUs also means that critical rules of engagement between students and academics-especially with regard to the implementation of language policies-either lack clarity or are ignored by most rogue elements in academic circles that lack the right ethos to deal with student matters effectively. Students thus tend to develop a culture of reaction as they are constantly forced to adopt a repudiatory approach. What is essential to note is that no matter how proficient students or academics can be in the mother tongue, the challenges mentioned above are enough to negatively affect the academic programme. Academics seemed to believe that students at the institution tend to fare better when taught in English as they struggle with code-switching in instances when the mother tongue is used. This becomes a challenge, especially during assessments.
A female student had this to say on frequent protests against management decisions: "It seems our leadership understands the language of violence, and I worry that this might show a lack of engagement strategy" (interview with a female second-year language major student at an HDU). In a conversation of the researcher with a student participant majoring in languages in an HDU humanities faculty on the use of the mother tongue as a medium of instruction at the institution, the student expressed how they have continuously faced challenges with knowledge acquisition-despite using the mother tongue in the classroom. I am proud of using my mother tongue, especially as a languages student but most of us are not getting good 1 3 marks and we don't understand why. The lecturers cannot justify the low marks. I think some of these people don't want us to achieve, what else can we say? (Interview with a male third-year languages major student at an HDU, August 2019, Alice, Eastern Cape) What is essential concerning the above quote is that it is not in any way unique to the student concerned but rather represents a disturbing trend among students who complain of faring poorly. This applies not only in subjects where they just use the mother tongue as a medium of instruction but also in the very mother tongue subjects of their speciality. More questions than answers tend to come to the fore when one tries to deal with what strategies could be employed to ensure effective use of the mother tongue. The questions gain prominence when underlining the importance of transcending language use as a mere medium of learning but as an instrument that students can excel in and love for the good of the broader development of Indigenous cultures and languages.

Conclusion
Drawing from a decolonial approach, the paper presented an overview of the multiple meanings of decolonisation and how this has resulted in controversy and contradictions regarding the concept's meaning in theory and practice. The paper also introduced different contexts in which a decolonial lens could be applied to understand the experiences of the decolonial project in various contexts. Decoloniality should be considered within a context of cognitive justice where Eurocentric linked hindrances ought to be eliminated to ensure that individuals are empowered to reason and develop methodologies relevant to their epistemic and development needs. The paper also explored the significance of language, especially the mother tongue as a key feature towards enhancing people's understanding of their past and current pedagogical and epistemological challenges. Of central importance is the role of Indigenous languages as key foundations towards building people's self-determination and associated independently established identities and ultimately self-determined methodologies towards achieving transformation. Through a lens gazing onto the experiences and struggles of the Māori, we can conclude that South Africa's transformative efforts-particularly the implementation of language policies and their use in redressing colonial legacies within the university mother-tongue pedagogical practices-tend to lack the consciousness and deliberate holistic interventions that combined theoretical underpinnings with practical action to propel the Māori struggles. In the absence of such an approach, South Africa (just like other African countries seeking to deal with the colonial legacies) is bound to experience instability from the people who are growing impatient with the slow pace of transformation.
The use of mother-tongue language as a medium of instruction is no doubt a key element in enhancing the epistemic success of students, in particular when it comes to African educational institutions. The significance of the mother tongue in South Africa stretches from its use in non-formal settings such as the family to formal education institutions in such a way that a close relationship exists between these different spaces. The paper also presents arguments on the contexts under which the mother tongue has been experienced in South Africa's HDU setting. The paper presented arguments pointing to the paucity of university leadership, coupled with poorly performing students attracted to the HDUs. This provides a recipe for the lack of cooperation and reciprocity required for cognitive justice that one can equate to the Kaupapa Māori philosophy. This implies that such institutions struggle to create a conducive atmosphere with the potential to enhance people's aspirations, philosophies and pedagogic processes. The fact that students in these institutions grapple with mother tongue competency, with disagreements and disruptive contestations on how the language policies ought to be implemented, indicates that the mother tongue should not be regarded as a panacea to all challenges facing student epistemic success. This is especially the case in universities from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Funding Open access funding provided by University of Johannesburg.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.