PUPIL'S ATTITUDES IN THE COOK ISLANDS
TO THE EXTENT OF BILINGUALISM
Douglas H. Bray
INTRODUCTION
The extent to which there is concensus or conflict in attitudes towards
particular languages or dialects has been shown to influence the efficacy with
which two or more languages, or dialects, are learned or cease to be acquired.
Thus, in some cases two or more languages have been well maintained
because of general social approval; in other cases minority languages have
been undermined and collapsed from competition of a majority language given
greater status by the many.1
One form of positive attitude found by W.E. Lambert and his associates in
Quebec to be beneficial to speakers of English in learning Frnech was termed
'integrative'. The intergrative learner has a favourable attitude to speakers of
the language being learned and wishes to identify with them and take part
with them in their way of life. In contrast, those with 'instrumental' motivation
serving other aims, such as to attain an educational qualification or get a good
job, have been found to learn less well. In confirmation, Spolsky found
significantly better performance by those learners of English as a foreign
language who tended to wish to have characteristics attributed to the English-
speaking population as compared with those of their own people, the speakers
of their mother tongue2.
In contrast to acquiring in Montreal an additional language of similar status, as
in French for speakers of English, Polynesian languages in the South Pacific
have been in competition with one or other of these European languages to
which for many years higher status has been claimed and accorded. Thus, the
Maori language in New Zealand is in such serious decline that there are few
native speakers of it among the young. In the past there has been denigration,
of the Maori language as not merely useless but even harmful to Maori
children for their advancement in New Zealand society for which English has
been accepted as essential. Many Maori people adopted this view of the
majority Pakeha, the bringer of 'civilisation;3. However, by the 1970s a strong
transformation of attitudes among Maori people was evident with a campaign
to save Maori as a living language4. The recommendations concerning the
language by a mainly Maori committee, the National Advisory Committee on
Maori Education, in their recent report, He Huarahi, reflect this urgent concern
over the serious degree of language loss5. This change in attitude has of recent
years been receiving support in policies of the Department of Education to
foster the language in schools but the severe harm associated with previous
1
attitudes will require a supreme effort to counter. An effect of attitudes may
also be inferred by the greater degree to which Samoan is flourishing in
Western Samoa compared with American Samoa where it is relatively less
valued than English*.
In the Cook Islands as early as 1891 during the British Protectorate, the British
resident, Moss, attempted to initiate a public school system using English and
prohibiting Maori in school hours thereby supplanting missionary education
conducted in Maori. However, this attempt failed apart from the survival of
the publicly subsidized Tereora and Araura Schools which taught exclusively
in English. The desire for an English education drew to the former Maori pupils
from leading families from many of the islands7.
In the public schools system set up by New Zealand English as the medium of
instruction was advocated in 1929 by Apirana Ngata as Minister for the Cook
Islands and in 1934 he directed that Maori should not be used during school
hours8. In 1937 D.G. Ball, Inspector of New Zealand Native Schools, reported
adversely on an over-emphasis on teaching English. So much time was being
spent on this that other subjects were being neglected. In 1945 a Commission
of Enquiry, headed by C.E. Beeby, the Director of Education in New Zealand,
found that in Rarotonga and Aitutaki schooling, geared to 'Europeanisation',
was in English which was of a poor standard while the pupils were not learning
to express themselves in the vernacular. It was recommended that Maori be
the sole medium of instruction during the first two or three years of primary
school and thereafter English be introduced gradually as a second medium of
instruction9.
It is apparent that Cook Islanders tended to approve the emphasis on learning
English that developed in the schools in the first half of the nineteenth century.
When in 1904 the London Missionary Society proposed that the New Zealand
Government take over their school buildings and provide instruction in English
as far as possible, Gudgeon, the Resident Commissioner of the Cook Islands,
then recently annexed by New Zealand, noted that, though the number of jobs
was so few that Tereora was sufficient, the people wanted an English
curriculum to enable their children to obtain jobs with the Administration or in
the trading companies10. When in 1914 Pomare gave his approval that some
primary schools should be taken over by the Government and the instruction
should be in English with Maori being used only to introduced this language,
one reason given for the use of English was that the Islanders wanted this. It
was also considered that new ideas could be communicated better in
English11. When the policy was changed to reintroduce Maori in the late 1940s
there was widespread resistence of the Islanders to this and by 1950, though
there was some use of the vernacular, some English was still being taught in
the infant classes in accordance with the people's wishes: oral English in the
first year of schooling, reading in the second year and writing in the third
year12.
2
The attitude of particularly valuing English that has developed over the years
continues today. In the words of the Cook Islands Secretary of Education,
T.A. Short, in a seminar paper in 1980:13
T o date we are in a state of quandary. Parents and teachers feel that
English is the key to passing examinations and there is pressure on the
Department and schools to give more emphasis to the teaching of
English at the expense of Maori language.'
He goes on to say that with the exception of one primary school in Rarotonga
(to which must be added provision for some pupils in another), the teaching in
the first three years at school is in Maori and that 'from Grade 4 upwards, the
language of instruction is English'. His paper affirms that bilingualism in Maori
and English is an important objective of education. It is added that:
'Maori is now an examination subject for the Cook Islands School
Certificate. The heart is in earnest to make Maori a compulsory subject
for this certificate but the realities of today, the public opinion is yet to
be sampled.'
Further, many Cook Island parents have been sending their children in
Rarotonga to Avatea Primary School (which has grown from Nikao Side
School) where instruction is entirely in English. An apparent advantage of so
doing is born out by the fact, as related to the author by the Principal, P.
Etches, in 1980, that of the intake of 42 to Tereora College from Avatea in that
year, 40 were placed in the 'top' two form 3 streams. A contributing factor in
this achievement is the likelihood that many of the pupils at Avatea come from
well-to-do educated families. Under the Government that come to power
under Dr Tom Davis a further opportunity for education in English in
Rarotonga, for pupils from the Takitumu District, has been the introduction of
an entirely English instruction sequence of classes from the start of schooling
as a part of Ngatangiia Primary School.
If, then, bilngualism is Cook Island policy and attitudes to a language influence
its future, it is relevant to investigate views indicate of the relative importance
of Maori and English in these Islands. Language preference is an aspect o an
investigation carried out in 1980 planned by the Summer Institute of
Linguistics and was further probed by the writer in an enquiry carried out later
that year.
THE SUMMER INSTITUTE OF LINGUISTICS INVESTIGATION
In a report to the Cook Islands Secretary of Education by the Summer Institute
of Linguistics14 an account is given of a language survey carried out in March
1980 among pupils in Cook Island schools in Rarotonga and four other islands
of the Southern Group, Aitutaki, Atiu, Mangaia and Mauke. The pupils
3
investigated were in Form 1 and 4, with the exclusion of those both of whose
parents were papaa (European/foreigner). As part of the survey 'more than
600' pupils answered a 'general questionnaire' which sought such information
as the language they believed they 'speak best' and which languages should
be spoken in the Cook Islands in the future.
The results of the pupils' perceptions of what language they speak best is
shown in Table 1 (page 13). It will be noted that only some 14 per cent con-
sider they speak English best at form 1 level but by form 4 this has risen to 21
per cent.
As reported by the pupils of both forms combined, the languages spoken by
the parents were, in pecentages:
(a) both spoke Maori and English 7.7
(b) both Maori only 70.4
(c) one Maori, the other Maori and English 5.5
(d) both English only 8.4
(e) one English, the other Maori and English 2.8
(f) one English, the other Maori 5.2
It may be noted that in so far as the pupils have reported accurately, the
addition of the last three of these categories (d,e, and f) shows the percentage
of pupils who would need to speak English to at least one of the parents, that
is some 16 per cent. Most of the cases where both parents spoke only English
were on Rarotonga (56 per cent) and Aitutaki (25 per cent).
The pupils' answers as to 'What language do you think the children in the
Cook Islands should all learn in the future' are shown within Table 2 (page 14)
as a comparison with findings from the author's similar preferred language
enquiry which will be described later. The wording quoted for this question,
not stated verbatim in the Report, is from a copy obtained of the General
Questionnaire which is set out to be given as an interview in either Maori or
English individually which informants confirmed to be the procedure that was
to be followed. The report, however, refers to 'hinderances' to data collection
caused for example by 'inadequate public relations and briefing of school
administrations, misunderstanding of instructions by key interviewers in
survey locatons' in carrying out the investigation in 'a very tightly scheduled
three week period.'
A MULTIPLE QUESTION ATTITUDE ENQUIRY
Items and Procedure
Since in the Summer Institute investigation interview schedule 'language' was
in the singular in the future learning item and there was no indication that
4
more than one language might be preferred it is not surprising that in some
schools not a great many pupils expressed a desire for both Maori and English
to be taught. Further, where only English is preferred, does the pupil, as New
Zealand Maori people once believed, assume that Maori even if not taught in
schools, will remain a generally spoken language in the Cooks and wish this to
be so? Again, except for t w o primary schools in Rarotonga, the respondents
were attending secondary schools where Maori is no longer a medium of
instruction and has become merely one subject. Thus, was the question
thought of in a secondary rather than a primary school context? Because of
these considerations three questions were framed for a follow-up enquiry, the
first to be asked being:
(1) What is best? All Cook Island people speak:
(a) only Maori,
(b) only English,
(c) Maori and English
With the same three choices as to 'What is best?', two further questions asked
as to which of these options:
(2) 'children at primary schools of the Cook Islands should learn in the
future' and
(3) 'pupils at secondary schools of the Cook Islands should learn in the
future'.
Each of the questions was given to school classes as a whole in both English
and Maori (for which see the Appendix) as also were oral introductory
instructions in which it was emphasised: T h a t is not a test. There are no right
or wrong answers. You are being asked what you want — what you think is
best.' A Maori person was always present to give the instructions and read
through the questions aloud in Maori while the writer, a papaa (of European
stock), did the same in English. In introducing himself he had explained that
his involvement with the teachers of Cook Island pupils in New Zealand had
made him interested to learn the views of Cook Island people and so of the
pupils. The pupils were instructed to write their form, sex, age and time spent
in the Cook Islands but not their names. After answering the third question
they were asked to give a reason for this answer: because / no te mea
Sample. Excluding 6 pupils with answers not communicated or with sex not
given and 12 boys and 6 girls who had lived less than 5 years in the Cook
Islands and therefore were liable to be temporary, not Cook Islander,
residents, the sample was made up of 358 pupils, 11 to 16 years old, of whom
77 boys and 86 girls were in Form 1(114 being aged 12 years) and 88 boys and
107 girls in Form 4 (154 of 15 years). The sampling as to schools and classes in
them, shown in Table 2, was the same as for the Summer Institute study with
the exceptions that the language preference results for Tereora College were
5
omitted from their Report while Aitutaki and Mangaia were not able to be
visited in this follow-up enquiry. The Tereora College pupils were from Form 4
and the pupils of Arorangi and Avarua primary schools which feed in to this
College were from Form 1. Otherwise Forms 1 and 4 were from the same
secondary schools which begin at Form 1, except that on Mauke those pupils
who remained at the Catholic primary school for Form 1 were also included.
The sample was made up of those pupils present in class during visits to the
schools in October and November 1980.
Results. The results of the three language choice questions are given in Table
2 where, for comparison, the results of the Summer Institute language
preference question given earlier in the year are also shown. In contrast to the
earlier findings where the tendency is shown in only two cases (Titikaveka and
Mauke), the high percentage choice of both Maori and English on all three
questions in the follow-up study is noteworthy. On Question (3) relating to
secondary school the percentage wanting English only is at its maximum (12.6
per cent) but somewhat offset by the Question (1) numbers wanting only
Maori in the Cook Islands (9.2 per cent).
A break-down into form and sex gives not much variation from the nine total
sample percentages shown in the table, only in one case more than a 6 per
cent difference: for Form 1 girls the percentage choice of both languages on
Question (2), the primary school question, was rather lower at 82.6 per cent
(their other responses on this question being 9.3 and 8.1 per cent respectively
for only Maori and only English).
It is noteworthy that of the 19 pupils who had attended the English medium
primary school, Avatea, and were included in the sample because of not less
than 5 years residence in the Cook Islands, only one of them thought it best
that in the primary schools English only be learned. While 4 of them also chose
only English at secondary school, the remaining responses on all three questions
were for both languages. Further, of the 7 ex-Avatea pupils excluded from the
sample because of less than 5 years in the Cook Islands, all but one response
over the three questions were for both languages, the one exception relating
to secondary schooling.
The pupils' reasons for their answers to Question (3) were, if written in Maori,
translated by a teacher for whom it is the mother-tongue so that the writer
could analyse them. The percentage justification of only Maori and of only
English, which might occur even when the two languages option was chosen,
were for Form 1 pupils respectively 6.5 and 16.5 and for Form 4 pupils
respectively 6.0 and 22.0. Both languages were explicitly justified by 44.6 of
Form 1 and 50.0 per cent of Form 4 pupils. In addition some answers were
circular, not clear or incomplete: 32.4 per cent of the Form 1 and 22.0 per cent
of the Form 4 answers.
6
In Lambert's terms most by far of the justifications might be described as
'instrumental' in that the reasons were mostly usefulness for life in the Cook
Islands and elsewhere. Thus, English was seen as useful for speaking to
tourists, for progress in schooling and generally for advancement in life. As to
the use of English for future life beyond the Cook Islands which on occasion
referred to future education, New Zealand was mentioned by 5.0 per cent of
Form 1 and 8.7 per cent of Form 4 pupils.
As employed by Lambert the contrasting term of 'integrative' referred to a
language other than the mother tongue. Among the pupils sampled non-
instrumental reasons could be detected only in the different context of loyalty
to one's own language, culture and people: 'integrative' towards one's o w n .
This was shown in a concern that the Maori language should not be lost,
expressed by only 4.3 per cent of Form 1 pupils but by considerably more, 14.8
per cent, at Form 4 level. Thus, in the words of t w o fifteen-year old fourth
form pupils in a secondary school on Rarotonga:
'Because we don't want to loose our Maori language and sometimes we
do want to learn English. For your own sake to learn the English better
rather than Maori.'
'Because in the future, there is only papaa ideas coming in, we should
learn their language and also not to forget our real language in the Cook
Islands.'
Again, t w o answers translated from Maori by other fourth form pupils on the
island of Atiu, aged 14 and 15 years respectively:
'Because when we want to go to New Zealand and work for money if
you don't know how to speak English what will happen to you? And the
other thing is our Maori speaking, we don't want that to be lost.'
'Because Maori is our ancestors' language and as for the English
language it is useful for us to learn it and when a European person asks
us an English question then we shall answer it quickly.'
Though most of the pupils would consider Maori their best spoken language
(Table 1), Maori and English were fairly evenly used for the responses in this
enquiry, the latter being the usual medium at school by Form 1. As might be
expected, there was a somewhat increased use of English by Form 4 and by
Rarotongan pupils15.
DISCUSSION
The English language is tending to be dominant in a number of ways in the
Cook Islands. In Rarotonga, being a centre of commerce, tourism and
7
administration, English is widely used, and not only in business. Extending its
use beyond the cinema it has been the sole language used in the recently
established private F/M radio station in competition with the Government
station which has sessions in Maori. The English medium primary school,
Avatea, has become a prestige school and recently an English medium stream
for all grades has been established at Ngatangiia primary school. Moreover,
for all the other primary school pupils there is the policy that instruction from
the fourth year should be in English. Further, on the Summer Institute
evidence some 16 per cent of the children sampled had at least one parent
who was monolingual in English. In addition, on the 1976 Census figures there
were approximately the same number of Cook Islanders in New Zealand as in
their islands of origin. With so many relatives and acquaintances in New
Zealand there is the pervading prospect for the young of living in this English
speaking country. For such reasons it may be contended that the Maori
language in the Cook Islands is under some threat. There is perhaps a lesson
to be learned from the rapid decline in the use of the Maori language in New
Zealand.
However, there is a high degree of approval for learning Maori as well as
English in the three item language preference enquiry which thus contrasts
with the Summer Institute findings. Which is the more valid? It is widely
recognised that valid measuring of attitudes is difficult where one invalidating
tendency is to give the answer thought to be wanted by the person posing the
question. This is likely to apply especially to an interview as used in the
Summer Institute survey. On the other hand in the three question language
preference enquiry not only was it impressed that the pupils' choices were to
be 'what you want — what you think is best', but also the answering was
anonymous. Moreover, to equalise the conditions for the t w o languages the
enquiry was conducted in both Maori and English speaking person of
European origin both taking an equal part. Further, there was not a possible
implication that only one language might be chosen: all three possible choices
were offered. Overall, too, greater reliability can be claimed for three questions
as compared with one. There are, therefore, a number of reasons for believing
that the high degree of choice of both languages truly showed the views of the
pupils. That the former pupils of the English language medium primary school,
Avatea, so largely held the same view in spite of their lack of Maori when
previously at primary school bolsters the support for Maori as well as English.
So, too, does the concern of the proportion, some 15 per cent, of Form 4
pupils that Maori might be lost as a language in the Cook Islands.
This concern was the one theme in the justification of answers that was clearly
not 'instrumental'. It is possible that some of the pupils did want to be like a
'papaa' and enter 'integratively' into his way of life but the one open-ended
question asking for the explanation of the third answer choice failed to elicit
this attitude, if it did exist.
8
Whatever the underlying reasons the major outcome of this enquiry is an
overwhelming choice for Maori and English to co-exist in the Cook Islands and
be learned in the schools in the future. This outlook supports the fostering of
bilingualism which is the official policy as stated by the Secretary of
Education. So do the Summer Institute results in that among those who did
not express preference for both languages the Total Sample choices for only
Maori and for only English were fairly evenly balanced. The important question
remains as to how this bilingual goal may best be promoted.
Without going fully into this question a few words on the early years of
schooling will be offered. In the Secretary of Education's paper referred to
earlier it is stated that English becomes the medium of instruction in the fourth
year at school on the basis of the preceeding three years' preparation by the
Tate oral method. This does not indicate when the reading and writing of
English should start and it may be questioned whether some teachers have
been starting this inadvisedly before reading the writing of Maori have been
sufficiently mastered, for example, during the second year of schooling. The
learning of English reading using the Fiafia Readers which was so successful
in Niue commenced with the third year of schooling16. This followed two years
when English was taught orally using the Tate method while reading and
writing were learned in the mother tongue with its familiar structures,
meanings built up since infancy and, in contrast to the irregularities of English,
its regular relationships between sound and written form. In a country with
similar conditions, including teaching expertise, a similar policy would seem
appropriate.
Though it has been found that pupils in Fiji who have had English as the
medium of instruction from class 1 have tended to be ahead of others in class
6 it is pointed out that they have generally been selected for this 'on the basis
of their ability to handle English in Class One'17. There is no dispute about
English being introduced as soon as possible but it is questioned: Should this
not be kept oral in the first two years of schooling as a general rule in the Cook
Islands? The same contention would apply to other similar Pacific Island states
such as Western Samoa and Tonga. English can be used in these years in
giving instructions but orally. Further, if the aim be bilingualism, it would seem
unreasonable to rule out the indigenous language as a medium of instruction
in these early years. Indeed, with this aim it may be queried whether the
indigenous language should be so fully displaced as a medium of instruction as
early as at present. In the Cook Islands the mother tongue is taught as a
subject up to the first year fifth form. However, if the language is to flourish as
a versatile means of communication beyond everyday and traditional uses,
should not some time be set aside in the school week for some use of Maori in
teaching a range of schools subjects. As schools tend to direct their teaching
towards examinations perhaps some place could be found for requiring the
9
use of Maori for some questions over a range of suitable school subjects in the
Cook Island School Certificate Examination taken at the end of the first year
fifth form.
While such a suggestion as this might require a considerable amount of public
persuasion to allow its implementation, it should be less difficult to persuade
schools that in general English be kept oral in the first t w o years of schooling.
Readers w i t h both Maori and English versions on adjacent pages w i t h
common illustrations have been recently in preparation. It may be found that
these can be quite satisfactorily used in grade 2 for many pupils. However, it
might be found that their introduction would be generally more beneficial in
the third year. Pressures to advance in English have been present throughout
this century on Cook Island schools. Some restraints on impatience deriving
from this attitute may be helpful towards advancement in both this language
and Maori.
What would make such restraint much more beneficial would be sufficient
good quality material for promoting reading in the vernacular. There is a
dearth of this, particularly in some Pacific Island countries. Thus there is a
strong inducement to start using too soon what is available in English such as
the South Pacific Commission reading material associated with the Tate
programme. A good way of assisting Pacific Island states towards their
chosen goal of bilingualism would be the giving of generous foreign aid to
promote progress in the vernacular in schools both for junior classes and for
those older.18
REFERENCES
1. Holmes, J . , 'Attitudes to Language: Some Consequences for the Child'
in Association for the Study of Childhood, Children and Language,
Association for the Study of Childhood, Wellington, 1975, pp. 41-55.
2. Spolsky, B., Educational Linguistics, Newbury House, Rowley,
U.S.A., 1978, pp. 137-43.
3. Benton, R.A., 'Language and the Maori Child' in Association for the
Study of Childhood, op cit, pp. 19-29; Who Speaks Maori in N e w
Zealand? The Maori Language in the Nineteen Seventies, Policy
Implications for English-Maori Bilingual Education in N e w Zealand
being papers for symposia at the 49th ANZAAS Congress, Auckland,
January 1979, New Zealand Council for Educational Research,
Wellington, 1979.
4. Metge, J . , The Maoris of N e w Zealand: Rautahi, Routledge and
Kegan Paul, London, 1976, pp. 95-102.
5. National Advisory Committee on Maori Education, He Huarahi,
Department of Education, Wellington, 1980, pp. 3-20.
10
6. Benton, R.A., 'Problems and Prospects for Indigenous Languages and
Bilingual Education in New Zealand and Oceania', in Spolsky, B. and
Cooper, R.L. (eds), Case Studies in Bilingual Education, Newbury
House, Rowley, U.S.A. 1978.
7. Coppell, W . G . , 'Education in the Cook Islands 1923-1965', N e w Zealand
Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 8, 1973, pp. 97-100; Gilson, R.,
The Cook Islands 1820-1950, Victoria University of Wellington, 1980,
pp. 73-7. Araura on Aitutaki was closed in 1911.
8. Coppell, op. cit., pp. 101-2, Gilson, op. cit., p. 177.
9. Coppell, op. cit., pp. 102-3; Gilson, op. cit., pp. 213-4.
10. Gilson, op. cit., p. 169.
11. Ibid. p. 172.
12. Ibid., p. 214.
13. Short, T.A., 'Education Curricula', paper for the Seminar on Culture
and Development for the 1980s, Department of Education, Rarotonga,
1980.
14. Summer Institute of Linguistics, 'Cook Islands Language Survey',
Report to the Cook Islands Department of Education. Pacific Area
Office, Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1980. Tables 1 and 2 include
amended Report figures by R. Early of the Institute.
15. The following percentages give the use of Maori and English respectively
(with Rarotongan figures in brackets): for boys of Form 1, 60.5 (45.5)
and 35.5 (49.1) and of Form 4, 46.6 (38.2) and 51.1 (59.2); for giris of
Form 1, 57.0 (36.2) and 40.7 (60.3) and of Form 4, 52.3 (40.0) and 45.8
(57.6). In each of these 8 (including the Rarotongan) categories small
percentages used both languages (ranging from 1.9 to 5.5).
16. Elley, W . B . , 'A Comparison of 'Content-Interest' and 'Structuralist'
Reading Programmes in Niue Primary Schools', N e w Zealand Journal
of Educational Studies, Vol. 15, 1980, pp. 39-53.
17. Elley, W . B . and Mangubhai, F., 'Research Project on Reading in Fiji', Fiji
English Teachers' Journal, Vol. 15, 1979, pp. 1-7.
18. If this goal of bilingualism were rejected, bitter might be the fruits as for
the New Zealand Maori. Though mainly monolingual in English, Maori
pupils on the one hand are tending to perform relatively less well than
average on school achievement criteria and on the other hand suffering
loss in cultural heritage and in self esteem (see e.g. National Advisory
Council on Maori Education op. cit). The situation is complex e.g. the
minority status of the Maori ethnic group.
11
THE THREE LANGUAGE PREFERENCE QUESTIONS
(1) What is best?
Ko teea te mea meitaki rava atu?
All Cook Island people speak:
(a) only Maori
(b) only English
(c) Maori and English
Ko te au tangata Kuki Airani katoatoa kia tuatua:
(a) Maori ua
(b) Papaa ua
(c) Maori e te Papaa
(2) What is best
Ko teea te mea meitaki rava atu?
Children at Primary schools of the Cook Islands should learn in the future:
(a) only the Maori language
(b) only the English language
(c) both Maori and English languages
E mea tau no te tuatau ki mua te au tamariki apii rikiriki o te Kuku Airani kia apii
ia:
(a) i te reo Maori ua
(b) i te reo Papaa ua
(c) i te reo Maori e te Papaa
(3) What is best?
Ko teea te mea meitaki rava atu?
Pupils at Secondary schools of the Cook Islands should learn in the future:
(a) only the Maori language
(b) only the English language
(c both Maori and English languages
E mea tau no te tuatua ki mua te au tamariki apii teitei o te Kuki Airani kia apii
ia:
(a) i te reo Maori ua
(b) i te reo Papaa ua
(c) i te reo Maori e te Papaa
12
TABLE 1
Self Perceptions of 'Best' Spoken Language (Percentages)
(from Summer Institute of Linguistics Report)
Form 1
Form 4
Maori English Maori English
RAROTONGA:
Rarotonga North*
86.9 13.1 69.2 30.8
Titikaveka
75.7 24.3 73.4 26.6
OTHER ISLANDS:
Aitutaki
86.4 13.6 86.5 13.5
Atiu
83.9 16.1 78.8 21.2
Mangaia
97.9 2.1
97.7 2.3
Mauke
100.0 0.0
94.1 5.9
Total Sample
86.4 13.6 78.8 21.2
* 'Rarotonga North' refers to Tereora College and Arorangi and Avarua
Schools which feed into it.
13
TABLE 2
Language Preferences (Percentages)
Three Questions Enquiry
Summer Institute
ISLANDS:
N
Only Maori
Only English
Both Languages
Schools
Maori English Both
Q.1 Q.2 Q.3 Q.1 Q.2 Q.3 Q.1 Q.2 Q.3
RAROTONGA
Arorangi (F.1)
29
10.3 3.4 3.4 - 6.9 17.2 89.7 89.7 79.3 33.3
38.1
28.6
Avarua (F.1)
25
8.0 4.0 4.2 - - 16.7 92.0 96.0 79.2 33.3
51.9
14.8
Tereora (F.4)
123
9.0 1.5 .8
- 7.3
91.0 98.4 91.9
Titikaveka
98
5.1
2.0 5.1 6.1 92.9 94.8 93.9 10.7
21.4
67.9
OTHER ISLANDS
Aitutaki
61.8
32.7
5.5
Atiu
46
13.0 10.9 6.5 - 4.3 23.9 87.0 84.8 69.6 13.8
55.2
31.0
Mangaia
38.1
42.9
19.0
Mauke
37
16.2 8.1
- 10.8 27.8 83.8 81.1 72.2 2.9
14.2
82.9
Total Sample
358
9.2 3.4 1.7 .6 3.7 12.6 90.2 93.0 85.7 27.7
36.3
36.0
|
