Changing the medium of instruction (MOI) from English to a bilingual English–Kreol Morisien (KM) model represents a major pedagogical, socio-cultural, and organisational reform. In contexts where students possess low academic ability or limited proficiency in English, the need for a structured, research-based change management process becomes even more critical. This article analyses how strategic curriculum leadership can guide this transformation using Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Model, integrating insights from bilingual education research, linguistic justice, and school leadership theory. Emphasis is placed on the principal’s role as change agent, curriculum leader, and advocate for equity.
1. Introduction
In multilingual societies such as Mauritius, the current educational debates increasingly acknowledge the mismatch between learners’ home languages and the school’s medium of instruction. Research consistently demonstrates that learning in the mother tongue enhances comprehension, cognitive development, and learner confidence, particularly among low-ability learners (Cummins, 2017; Heugh, 2011). Transitioning from an English-only MOI to a bilingual English–Kreol Morisien approach requires strategic curriculum leadership, clearly articulated policies, and culturally responsive implementation.
Kotter’s (1996) Eight-Step Change Model offers a widely accepted framework for managing large-scale school reforms. When applied to curriculum redesign and MOI transformation, it provides a structured pathway for building urgency, mobilising stakeholders, designing new practices, and sustaining change.
2. Establishing a Sense of Urgency
Strategic curriculum leaders must first articulate why maintaining English-only instruction disadvantages low-ability students. Key urgency messages include:
-
Learning barriers: Studies show that English-only instruction in early years lowers comprehension and widens achievement gaps (Ball, 2011).
-
Equity and inclusion: Using KM supports linguistic accessibility for disadvantaged learners (UNESCO, 2016).
-
National policy alignment: MOI reform aligns with contemporary multilingual and decolonial educational agendas.
-
Pedagogical efficiency: Bilingual scaffolding reduces cognitive load (Sweller, 2011).
The leader must present data—reading levels, failure rates, diagnostic assessments—to demonstrate that the status quo is no longer viable for low-achieving learners.
3. Forming a Powerful Guiding Coalition
Successful bilingual curriculum change requires a cross-disciplinary coalition comprising:
-
School leaders and heads of departments
-
Language teachers (English and Kreol Morisien)
-
SEN coordinators and literacy specialists
-
Parent and community language representatives
-
Ministry advisors or external bilingual-education experts
This coalition should reflect linguistic diversity and provide authority, expertise, and legitimacy to drive reform.
4. Creating a Vision and Strategy for Curriculum Change
Strategic curriculum leadership involves articulating a vision that frames bilingual MOI not as a lowering of standards, but as pedagogical strengthening. The vision may include:
-
A bilingual MOI model where KM is used for conceptual understanding, and English for academic literacy development.
-
Dual-language lesson planning, where translanguaging becomes a scaffold rather than a “last resort”.
-
Curriculum adaptation for low-ability learners using simplified texts, KM explanations, bilingual glossaries, and structured language progression.
The strategy should specify timelines, pilot phases, learning resources, and professional development needs.
5. Communicating the Change Vision
According to Kotter, communication must be “frequent, multi-channelled, and aligned with leader behaviour.” Examples include:
-
Stakeholder briefings for teachers, parents, and school boards
-
Demonstration lessons showcasing effective bilingual pedagogy
-
Policy documents outlining curriculum expectations
-
School assemblies emphasising pride in Kreol Morisien and multilingual identity
Leaders must model translanguaging acceptance and reassure teachers that KM integration is academically legitimate.
6. Empowering Staff and Removing Barriers
Common obstacles include teacher resistance, fear of lowered standards, lack of bilingual materials, and low confidence in teaching KM. Strategic leaders must:
-
Provide training on bilingual pedagogy, translanguaging strategies, and KM literacy development (García & Wei, 2014).
-
Supply bilingual teaching materials, visual aids, and modified assessments.
-
Reform timetable structures to allow co-teaching or language-support periods.
-
Ensure teachers understand that the aim is not replacing English, but strengthening learning through KM.
Removing psychological barriers—such as the stigma historically attached to KM—is central to this stage.
7. Generating Short-Term Wins
To maintain momentum, leaders must identify quick, visible successes within the first year. Examples include:
-
Improved comprehension scores in pilot bilingual classes
-
Increased classroom participation among low-ability learners
-
Successful KM-supported literacy interventions
-
Positive teacher testimonies from early adopters
Short-term wins provide evidence that bilingual MOI enhances learning and reduces failure rates, countering scepticism.
8. Consolidating Gains and Producing More Change
Once initial successes are visible, curriculum leaders must continue refining systems:
-
Expand pilot bilingual classrooms to additional grade levels
-
Revise schemes of work to integrate bilingual objectives
-
Develop a bilingual assessment policy
-
Strengthen teacher collaboration and cross-linguistic planning
-
Introduce academic KM resources such as dictionaries, grammar tools, and reading books
This stage ensures that progress does not regress under pressure and that practices become embedded.
9. Institutionalising Bilingual MOI into the School Culture
For change to endure, new practices must become part of the school identity. Leaders should:
-
Align bilingual MOI with the school’s mission and values
-
Celebrate linguistic diversity during school events
-
Recruit teachers with bilingual competencies
-
Integrate bilingual expectations into teacher appraisal
-
Embed translanguaging as an accepted pedagogical norm
Institutionalisation ensures that bilingual MOI survives leadership turnover and external policy fluctuations.
10. Conclusion
Administering MOI change from English to a bilingual English–Kreol Morisien model represents a transformative curriculum reform with profound implications for learner equity, school culture, and instructional practice. Kotter’s model provides a structured pathway for leaders to navigate resistance, align stakeholders, and sustain long-term change. Ultimately, strategic curriculum leadership in this context becomes a moral and professional imperative—centred on linguistic justice, pedagogical effectiveness, and the right of all students, including those with low ability, to learn in languages they understand.
References
- Ball, J. (2011). Enhancing learning of children from diverse language backgrounds. UNESCO.
- Cummins, J. (2017). Bilingual education and cognition: The interdependence hypothesis. Routledge.
- García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Heugh, K. (2011). Theory and practice of language-in-education models in Africa. In A. Ouane & C. Glanz (Eds.), UNESCO.
- Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
- Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 37–76.
- UNESCO. (2016). If you don’t understand, how can you learn? Global Education Monitoring Report. UNESCO Publishing.
