Language Policy and Education

in the Middle East and North Africa

Iair G. Or

Abstract
Language education policy in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is a
complex set of norms, beliefs, and practices deeply rooted in the history of the
region. Despite the appearance of uniformity, the MENA region is marked by
economic, religious, and linguistic differences. Language policies in MENA are
to be understood against the background of prolonged colonial rule and the
traditional opposition to colonialism and foreign intervention. Three major
aspects of language policy (LP) in the region are discussed: diglossia, which
involves the relatively rigid separation between the high, standard language and
the native, colloquial one; Arabization, which is the historical process of revers-
ing the linguistic consequences of colonialism, substituting Western colonial
languages with Arabic; and, finally, issues of linguistic minorities, multilingual-
ism, and language education, which pose significant challenges to language
policy in the region. Following the discussion of current issues in the field, a
discussion of work in progress and future directions in the field specifically
addresses the issues of political instability in some parts of the region and the
challenges of improving and researching language policy in contexts where
language ideologies often clash. Particular attention is given to ways in which
language policy can become more democratic and inclusive, the way new
language policy initiatives can be executed and monitored, the potential eco-
nomic value of certain policies, and the importance of research on the links
between language policy and religion.

I.G. Or (*)
Multilingual Education Program, School of Education, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
E-Mail: iairgor@gmail.com

# Springer International Publishing AG 2017 531

T.L. McCarty, S. May (eds.), Language Policy and Political Issues in Education,
Encyclopedia of Language and Education, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02344-1_40
532 I.G. Or

Keywords
Arabic • Colonialism • Diglossia • The Middle East and North Africa • Minorities

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532
Early Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533
Major Contributions and Work in Progress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533
Diglossia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534
Arabization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536
Minority Languages, Multilingualism, and Language Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537
Problems and Difficulties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539
Future Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 540
Cross-References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541
Related Articles in the Encyclopedia of Language and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541

Introduction

The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is a vast region spanning from the
Atlantic coasts of Morocco in the west all the way through the Mediterranean ports
of Africa and the Levant into the Red Sea inlets of the Arabian Peninsula and further
into the Persian Gulf. The most populous countries in MENA are Egypt
(ca. 91 million inhabitants), Algeria (40 million), Iraq (36.5 million), Morocco
(33 million), Saudi Arabia (31.5 million), Yemen (25 million), and Syria (23 million
in 2011). The term MENA partly overlaps “the Arab world,” since Arab regional
identity and the Arabic language, with nearly 300 million native speakers, are
extremely dominant in MENA. With the exception of Israel (ca. 8 million inhabi-
tants), as well as Iran (79 million) and Turkey (78 million), which are not always
considered part of MENA, Arabic is the official and majority language of all MENA
countries.
Despite the appearance of uniformity, the MENA region is marked by economic,
religious, and linguistic differences. Economically, while oil-producing countries
such as Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Saudi Arabia are
among the richest in the world, some MENA countries are among the poorest, often
facing problems of poor infrastructures, health care, and nutrition as well as limited
resources available for education. While the majority of MENA population is
Muslim, many religious, ethnic, and linguistic minorities contribute to the com-
plexity and variety of the region. Tensions are frequent, not only between religious
and ethnic sects but also between secular and clerical movements as well as
between authoritarian regimes and groups demanding democratization. Linguisti-
cally, the huge variety of the region is determined not only by minority languages
but also by countless Arabic dialects spoken as vernaculars in different parts of the
region.
Language Policy and Education in the Middle East and North Africa 533

Early Developments

The Middle East has traditionally been a crossroads of trade and migration, seeing
the rise and fall of some of the world’s greatest civilizations and empires. It was the
region where Judaism, Christianity, and Islam were born and the place of origin of
Western civilization and the Western alphabets. Although parts of MENA had been
invaded and ruled for relatively long periods by the Greeks and Romans, and later by
the Byzantine Empire, no single invasion or empire had had an impact as dramatic
and sustained as that of Islam. Starting in the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh
century CE, the Islamic conquests rapidly covered nearly the entire region and
beyond, and Arabic spread not only as the language of the Holy Qur’an but as the
language of administration, trade, science, and education. The various dialects of the
Arabian Peninsula came into contact with local populations, giving birth to the
immense variety of local Arabic dialects in the region. Nonnative speakers of Arabic
who wished to learn the language helped to advance the systematic study of Arabic
grammar, vocabulary, and culture.
The Ottoman Empire (1299–1923) ruled vast areas of the region for centuries.
While the religion of the empire was Sunni Islam, like that of the majority of its
inhabitants, its language of administration was not Arabic but Ottoman Turkish. The
contrast between Turkish and Arab cultures created tensions that pushed Arabs to
develop their separate, local identities (Suleiman 2003). This process of increased
national and local identities was reinforced by the Western colonization of MENA
countries, especially by France and Britain. The Napoleonic invasion of Egypt in
1798 marks the beginning of Arabic linguistic and literary revival known as al-
Nahḍa (Suleiman 2003). The culmination of European colonialism in MENA was
the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916, which divided most of the Arab world between
France and Britain, outlining the borders of future Arab countries. The colonial
period was characterized by attempts of the colonizers to downplay the role and
status of Arabic (Bassiouney 2009; Fassi Fehri 2013). Thus, Arab national as well as
local identities evolved to a great extent in a process of differentiation from foreign
colonial powers.

Major Contributions and Work in Progress

Language education policy in MENA is determined by numerous factors that link

general education issues with particular language policy (LP) issues. One of the main
problems in many MENA countries is the fact that high quality education is often
reserved for a small elite. Vocational tracking is common at an early age, as well as
the exclusion of certain groups from mainstream education. While literacy rates have
risen in the past few decades, illiteracy and particularly female illiteracy are still
widespread in some countries. Not all students have equal access to English or other
foreign languages as part of their education. Schoolchildren who do not get quality
534 I.G. Or

education are unlikely to pursue (and be admitted to) higher education, especially in
the high-demand faculties. Tests, particularly school-leaving examinations modeled
after the French Baccalauréat or similar designs, serve as gatekeepers. Other issues
often mentioned in connection with education MENA are the lack of consistency
between curriculum, teaching materials, and examinations and the fact that the
educational systems are highly centralistic. The lack of a professionalized teaching
force impedes innovation, leaving compulsory education at a very low level (Akkari
2004). In the following subsections, issues that particularly characterize the language
education policy of MENA will be discussed.

Diglossia

The most salient LP issue in MENA is undoubtedly the so-called Arabic diglossia,
discussed in Ferguson (1959) and revised in Ferguson (1991). Traditionally
described as a situation in which “two or more varieties of the same language are
used by some speakers under different conditions” (Ferguson 1959, p. 325),
diglossia involves the use of one language variety, designated as “H” (for “high”),
for formal, written interactions, alongside the use of the native variety, designated as
“L” (for “low”) in informal, everyday interactions. In Arabic, the H variety is
typically called Fuṣḥā (literally “the most eloquent one”) and is relatively uniform
across the Arab world. The many regional L varieties may have many different local
names but are more generally termed ‘āmmiyya or dārija, meaning the popular,
current, or colloquial language varieties. The spoken dialects usually suffer from low
prestige associated with the fact that they have never been officially standardized.
In most Arab countries, education is expected to be conducted only in Fuṣḥā, and
the fact that schoolchildren are expected to become literate in a nonnative variety
causes numerous problems. Upon entering school, children have to acquire a new
language variety with new phonemes, grammar, and vocabulary. Combined with the
complexities of the Arabic script and syntax, this amounts to difficulties that may
affect the level of literacy of students, especially students from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds or with language impairments (Saiegh-Haddad and Spolsky 2014). In
reality, the colloquial dialects are not always completely excluded, but standards of
literacy are almost exclusively focused on Fuṣḥā. Students are typically tested in
Fuṣḥā and not in their native dialect, which may be one of the factors leading to
relatively low achievement of Arabs in international exams such as the OECD PISA
survey.
The diglossic reality of Arabic is in some respects comparable to various scenar-
ios around the world analyzed by Fishman (1971), in which students are not
educated in their own native language but in a language of wider communication
(typically English). However, from a cultural and ideological point of view, while
languages of wider communication can be viewed as external standards imposed by
colonialism and globalization, Fuṣḥā is not typically seen as external but rather as
the epitome of Arabness, a language of high prestige that encapsulates Arabs’ own
heritage and glorious past. Throughout modern history proposals were made to
Language Policy and Education in the Middle East and North Africa 535

simplify Fuṣḥā or get rid of it entirely (Suleiman 2013). However, in terms of

language ideologies, language simplification and reform could hardly compete
with the religious value of preserving the language of the Qur’an and Hadith, as
well as with general trends of language purism and conservatism in the Arab world.
Moreover, the fact that proponents of simplification were often associated with
Western colonialism or Western ideals transformed Fuṣḥā into a way of countering
colonialism and maintaining precious linguistic heritage, for example, as part of the
postcolonial Pan-Arabism movement (Fassi Fehri 2013; Haeri 2003; Suleiman
2003).
In English usage, the modern, standardized form of Fuṣḥā is often termed
Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), though the term is somewhat misleading, since
the inclusion of the word “standard” in the name of the language makes any
discussion of nonstandard or substandard varieties of MSA, which no doubt exist,
extremely cumbersome. Indeed, one of the problems surrounding Fuṣḥā lies in the
fact that it is often treated prescriptively, and departures from the standard are
typically discarded as “errors” or interferences of the spoken dialects. Even in
descriptive studies based on written corpora, scholars tend to fill certain gaps (such
as the short vowels and case endings) based on prescriptive norms, disregarding the
actual linguistic knowledge of Fuṣḥā writers from different parts of society.
Although Fuṣḥā has traditionally been viewed as monolithic and resistant to change,
regional, social, and functional differences within the language variety are growingly
acknowledged and demand further research.
One aspect of the actual complexity of Arabic diglossia can be found in Hary
(1996, 2003), who points to the fact that rather than a clear dichotomy between L
and H, a continuum of language varieties is in place, which he terms “multiglossia”
and later “continuoglossia.” Such a continuum may be in the form of a true gradation
of language forms (e.g., phonemes or allophones) attached to various levels of
formality and variables of socioeconomic status and education. In many cases,
even among the colloquial dialects, clear hierarchies exist and some varieties
enjoy more prestige than others. Thus, over lifetime, speakers may change their
way of speaking as they move from a village to the city or pursue higher education,
and de facto processes of standardization may be taking place in spoken dialects of
prestige (Al-Wer 1997). In international settings, speakers of Tunisian Arabic may
switch to Egyptian (Cairene) Arabic in the presence of Egyptians or other Middle
Easterners, since Egyptian Arabic has more prestige and is more widely understood
due to the Egyptian movie, television, and music industry (S’hiri 2002). Thus,
prestigious forms of colloquial Arabic rather than Fuṣḥā may play a role in
connecting speakers of different dialects. The growing contact between vernaculars
due to immigration, satellite TV, and the Internet strengthens some (mainly presti-
gious) spoken dialects.
Additionally, the division of labor between Fuṣḥā and the spoken dialects is
constantly evolving. Colloquial dialects are gradually becoming legitimate written
languages frequently used in commercials, text messages, emails, and social net-
works as well as in literary works. Arabic as well as Latin (and, in Israel, Hebrew)
letters are used by Arabs to represent Arabic speech. Speaking the colloquial
536 I.G. Or

language in formal speeches is becoming acceptable in various social contexts, when

the excessive formality of Fuṣḥā is unwanted. Conversely, Fuṣḥā (or varieties close
to the Fuṣḥā ideal) is becoming a spoken language, being the language of news
broadcasts and some satellite television programming. Children’s cartoons are often
dubbed in Fuṣḥā, enabling children to become exposed to the high, standard
language from a very early age. The increased literacy in the Arab world helps to
blur the lines between the varieties. Lastly, it should be noted that there is constant
debate about diglossia, and some differences of approach can be discerned in
different parts of the Arab world.

Arabization

Arabization refers to a broad array of language policies designed to strengthen the

status of Arabic and reverse language shift initially caused by colonialism and later
by globalization. A specific context in which Arabization played a major role is the
countries of the Maghreb, where the French colonial authorities had introduced
French as the main language of instruction, administration, and the media. Quality
French education was generally reserved for the (often non-Muslim) elites, adding
both to the prestige of the French language and to the resentment toward these elites.
With independence in 1956 (Morocco and Tunisia) and 1962 (Algeria), the countries
of the Maghreb soon adopted a policy of Arabization, mainly using legislation and
the educational system to achieve this goal (Ennaji 2002; Fassi Fehri 2013; Marley
2004). This policy sought to eradicate French and (re)establish standard Arabic as
the norm, typically disregarding the vernaculars (both Arabic and Berber), thus
striving to create a monolingual nation out of a complex, multilingual society
(Marley 2004). The degree to which these Arabization efforts were successful is a
matter of debate, since French is still seen as the language of business and higher
education in the region, and Arabization is increasingly challenged by movements
promoting multilingualism, foreign language education, and minority languages.
However, the fact that Arabic is the main language of primary and secondary
education, of government documents and television, has certainly contributed to
the status of Arabic (Bassiouney 2009; Benrabah 2013).
Looking at other parts of MENA, Lebanon represents a case in which Arabization
was attempted but never fully achieved. When Lebanon gained independence in
1943, Arabic became the sole official language and an attempt was made to make
Arabic the language of instruction for all subjects. However, the 1975–1990 civil
war and the ailing public education system led to the proliferation of private
institutions teaching in English or French. French became associated with the
educated Maronite Christian elite, while English became associated with educated
Muslims or Orthodox Christians (Zakharia 2009). The post-civil war constitutional
amendments led to renewed efforts to bolster the status of Arabic, but French and
English are still used by schools as media of instruction for mathematics and
sciences. While Arabic is viewed as key to national unity and identity, Arabic
monolingualism is often regarded negatively, and foreign languages are perceived
Language Policy and Education in the Middle East and North Africa 537

as signs of modernization and good education. Thus, the importance of foreign

languages, especially for economic success, seems to undermine efforts to
strengthen Arab identity (Zakharia 2009). In most other MENA countries, Arabiza-
tion was typically more easily achieved, although considerable efforts were and are
still made to reinforce the status of Arabic, such as the establishment of Arabic
language academies in Amman, Baghdad, Damascus, and Cairo, special educational
activities commemorating the UN-proclaimed Arabic Language Day, or the framing
of a 2012 Arabic Language Charter in the UAE.
In Israel, similar trends can be found with regard to Hebrew. In the late nineteenth
and early twentieth century, the Jewish national movement known as Zionism led to
waves of Jewish immigration to Ottoman and British-ruled Palestine, accompanied
by a successful attempt to revive and renativize the Hebrew language. These revival
efforts came at the price of effacing much of the linguistic variety of both Palestine
and the Jewish people (Halperin 2015; Shohamy 2008; Spolsky 2014; Spolsky and
Shohamy 2001). Following Israel’s independence in 1948, the exile of Palestinians
and massive Jewish immigration created a situation in which Palestinian Arabs
became an ethnic, religious, and linguistic minority. Proponents of Hebrew-only
policies are fearful for the status of Hebrew even today, when it is the language of the
majority.

Minority Languages, Multilingualism, and Language Education

Despite the great uniformity imposed by national standards, the MENA region
exhibits a great deal of linguistic diversity. Among the Indigenous minority lan-
guages spoken in the region are the Berber dialects of North Africa; the Nubian
languages of Egypt; varieties of Neo-Aramaic in parts of Turkey, Syria, and Iraq;
Kurdish varieties in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran; as well as Turkic minority
languages in Turkey, Iran, and Syria. In Israel, Arabic is the largest minority
language of ca. 20.7% of the population. Western Armenian, Circassian, and Domari
are some of the smaller, endangered languages spoken in Turkey, Syria, Lebanon,
Jordan, Palestine, and Israel. Coptic and Syriac are long dormant and mainly survive
as liturgical languages, although some recent efforts have been made to revive
Coptic in Egypt and Syriac in multiple countries such as Israel, Lebanon, and
Turkey. In addition to Indigenous languages, recent waves of immigrants, migrant
workers, and asylum seekers bring numerous African, Asian, and European lan-
guages to the region. Particularly in the Gulf States and the southern Nile area,
Arabic-based pidgins and creoles have evolved as a result of the contact with
speakers of other languages. This diversity contributes to the fact that bilingualism
and multilingualism are very common in MENA, with or without formal education
(Rosenhouse 2013).
Historically, linguistic minorities have often been subordinated to broader
agendas. In some cases, foreign colonial rulers supported minorities in order to
weaken the dominance of Arabic. After independence and at the peak of the
Arabization process, linguistic minorities were often oppressed and banished, and
538 I.G. Or

in many MENA countries, linguistic minority rights are still far from being acknowl-
edged and addressed properly. In recent years, however, change is becoming visible,
as nations realize the benefits of preserving cultural diversity, no longer posing a
threat to national unity. In Morocco, for instance, Berber (Tamazight), the language
of almost half of the population (most of them bilingual with Arabic), was given
official status in 2011, and its teaching, study, and standardization are encouraged
(Fassi Fehri 2013). Similar trends exist in other MENA countries, partly in compli-
ance with the expectations of the international community.
The importance of foreign language education in MENA is becoming increas-
ingly recognized. English is the main foreign language taught, although in the
Maghreb and Lebanon many students opt for French as their main foreign language,
partly due to its value for social mobility in their own countries.
Cultural differences and opposition to foreign influences pose a challenge to
language education. Traditionally, English teaching in MENA has relied on foreign
(mainly British) textbooks and formal, grammar-based teaching methods. In the past
few decades, two major trends can be traced: (1) attempts to generalize, modernize,
and improve the quality of teaching by making English a compulsory school subject,
providing intensive English instruction, beginning English teaching at an early age,
recruiting better qualified teachers, and providing in-service training for existing
teachers and (2) attempts to counter linguistic imperialism by “indigenizing” English
education, e.g., hiring local rather than native-speaking teachers or replacing foreign
textbooks with locally produced ones, in which foreign influences are minimized
(Bailey and Damerow 2014; Borjian 2013; Kirkpatrick 2017). Textbooks in Israel
are locally produced but typically focus on the Jewish population and not the
Palestinian minority, which also uses them (Amara 2014). In Israel, Palestinians
are required to learn Hebrew, and Jews are required to learn Arabic as compulsory
subjects, although the level of Arabic in the Jewish sector is usually very low
(Amara and Mar’i 2002; Or and Shohamy 2016). Language assessment, especially
testing, is typically dominant in all MENA countries (Gebril and Hozayin 2014;
Inbar-Lourie 2014).
Current work on the language education policy of MENA countries involves
researching the consequences of political instability in the region. In the aftermath of
the so-called Arab Spring, which started in Tunisia in December 2010, the MENA
region has witnessed revolutions and counterrevolutions, social protests, armed
clashes, and wars. In some countries despotic regimes were toppled, while in others
sweeping reforms were pushed for. The changing reality also greatly affects linguis-
tic, ethnic, and religious minorities. While some are temporarily relieved after long
periods of oppression, others are faced with greater insecurity. Some local militant
groups such as the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) organization exhibit sharp contrasts
between the multilingual policies used for propaganda and recruitment and the anti-
minority policies they seem to promote. In most cases, current research still strives to
provide the most rudimentary information about the language situation and language
education policy in places such as Libya after the Gaddafi era, Syria during the
ongoing civil war, or war-ravaged Yemen (Kirkpatrick 2017).
Language Policy and Education in the Middle East and North Africa 539

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict provides a context for ongoing research of LP in a

conflict situation (Suleiman 2004). In Israel, Arabic enjoys official status, but there
are constant struggles for more equality, and the use of Arabic is politicized
(Tannenbaum 2009). Recent work by Hawker (2013) and Mar’i (2013) sheds light
on Arabic-Hebrew language contact. Historical work by Mendel (2014) shows that
political and security considerations have shaped the teaching of Arabic in Israel
throughout history. Wong et al. (2011) show that while certain points of contact exist
between Arabs and Jews, there are growing segregation, hostility, ignorance, and
mistrust that leave little hope for dialogue. A study by Peled-Elhanan (2012) deals
with representations of Palestinians in Israeli textbooks, which often reflect the
power relations between the groups. Bekerman and Horenczyk (2004) initiated
research on a growing trend of Arab-Hebrew bilingual schools in Israel. As these
schools become more popular, there is a growing body of research pointing to their
achievements and challenges.

Problems and Difficulties

The research on language education policy in MENA is fraught with methodological

and moral difficulties. First and foremost, one should consider the immense discrep-
ancies sometimes found in the way policies are interpreted and evaluated between
different groups in MENA as well as between Western and local scholars. For
obvious reasons, policies favoring linguistic minorities or foreign language educa-
tion may be seen by proponents of Arabization (or a Hebrew-only policy in Israel) as
threats to national ideals and unity. Since the appeal to justice by Arabization (and
Hebrew-only) supporters is typically based on a history of colonialism and perse-
cution, it is not an easy task for a researcher to be the judge of what policies ought to
consist of and how they should be carried out. Disputes may similarly occur in
relation to the effects of certain policies on opposing or competing groups, to the
proper allocation of resources, or to whether certain policies are effective or not
(Bassiouney 2009). Since the field of LP in the West is usually committed to ideals of
democratization, minority rights, and multilingualism, one of the most fundamental
moral questions, of whether these ideals should be relativized or imposed on groups
that do not share them, seems particularly pertinent.
In terms of methodology, while the MENA region is fertile ground for research,
the lack of standardized, official statistics, particularly such that afford a comparison
between MENA countries, limits the possibilities of obtaining a fuller picture of the
situation across the entire region. While some works such as Bassiouney (2009) do
contain valuable data, most of the research is done on a per-country, per-language, or
per-setting basis, leaving little for comparative or integrative analysis. While com-
parative work can barely capture the complexities of so many disparate contexts and
settings, much could be done in the way of collecting data and figures regarding the
foreign languages taught in each country, whether or not languages are compulsory
540 I.G. Or

and in which grades, the number of students learning each language, and the medium
of instruction used in every grade and subject. Some international organizations such
as the OECD do provide data, but only in select countries. Testing organizations
such as IELTS provide test results by country, but these only reflect a very small
percentage of the population that has access to those tests. Therefore, comparative
research in education and LP is often limited to discussing isolated cases, and
generalizations are often bound to be made impressionistically.
In some cases, even reliable qualitative information cannot easily be reached,
especially regarding policies in war zones or under rapidly changing regimes.
Certain traditional or religious communities may be hard to access because commu-
nity leaders or members, anxious to protect their identity against external influences,
refuse to cooperate with researchers or limit their possibilities. Bureaucratic barriers
also impede access to information as well as the implementation of policies. While
these and other difficulties exist, they can also indicate how much is yet to be
explored and done in the field.

Future Directions

As our understanding of Arabic and Arabic sociolinguistics expands (Al-Wer 2013;

Bassiouney 2009; Suleiman 2013; Versteegh 2014), patterns of a shared history and
other forms of commonality emerge, paving a road for future research. While Arabic
and other languages in the region are often perceived as rigid prescriptive standards,
it is important to uncover the ways in which LP can become more democratic and
inclusive, and the ways in which this is already taking place, if not on the national,
official level then in other domains such as the municipality, school, classroom,
family, or social media.
As discussed in previous sections, LP in the MENA region cannot be understood
without the legacy of resistance to colonialism and foreign intervention. One of the
challenges would be for policy makers to look beyond this legacy into the goals and
ideals that MENA societies wish to achieve for the greater good of their population.
In language education, this may include the introduction or generalization of immer-
sion schools, content and language integrated learning (CLIL) – some of which are
only nascent and met with some opposition (Shohamy 2014) – as well as the
improvement and modernization of existing programs. The challenge for research
is to investigate new policies and initiatives as they emerge, evaluate them, and help
policy makers become better informed.
Fassi Fehri (2013) points out that the economic value of languages should not be
neglected. There is great demand worldwide for Arabic, for instance, in the form of
Arabic courses, Arabic learning materials, and Arabic translators. Some countries
see some gains from students who come to learn the language or tourists interested in
local culture, but these are easily deterred by the political instability and violence in
the region. MENA countries can profit by creating the conditions for overseas
students and expatriates to take language courses as well as by producing books,
dictionaries, applications, and media in their local languages. Research on this topic
Language Policy and Education in the Middle East and North Africa 541

can benefit policy makers wishing to convince others of the benefits of language
education and multilingualism or businesses and individuals struggling to capitalize
on the linguistic and cultural resources they possess.
Since religion plays a major role in MENA, another future avenue for research
has to do with religion, secularization, and their implications for language and LP
(Or 2016; Suleiman 2003; Versteegh 2014). Whereas language ideologies of con-
servatism and purism are often deeply rooted in religion, in many cases throughout
history, religious institutions tended to be more forgiving and tolerant than the
secular nationalistic regimes that pushed for language standardization and unifica-
tion. Ongoing changes in the power relations between religion and the state make the
study of LP and religion a crucial part of our understanding of language in the region.

Cross-References

▶ Language Endangerment and Revitalization

▶ Language Policy in Education: Practices, Ideology, and Management
▶ Linguistic Human Rights in Education

Related Articles in the Encyclopedia of Language and Education

Mahmoud A. Al-Khatib: Innovative Second and Foreign Language Education in the

Middle East and North Africa. In Volume: Second and Foreign Language
Education
Zeena Zakharia: Bilingual Education in the Middle East and North Africa. In
Volume: Bilingual and Multilingual Education
Jeroen Darquennes: Language Awareness and Minority Languages. In Volume:
Language Awareness and Multilingualism
Saeed Rezaei: Researching Identity in Language and Education. In Volume:
Research Methods in Language and Education
Teresa L. McCarty and Lu Liu: Ethnography of Language Policy. In Volume:
Research Methods in Language and Education

References
Akkari, A. (2004). Education in the Middle East and North Africa: The current situation and future
challenges. International Education Journal, 5(2), 144–153.
Al-Wer, E. (1997). Arabic between reality and ideology. International Journal of Applied Linguis-
tics, 7(2), 251–265.
Al-Wer, E. (2013). Sociolinguistics. In J. Owens (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Arabic linguistics
(pp. 241–263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Amara, M. (2014). Policy and teaching English to Palestinian students in Israel: An ecological
perspective to language education policies. In D. Gorter, V. Zenotz, & J. Cenoz (Eds.), Minority
languages and multilingual education (pp. 105–118). Dordrecht: Springer.
542 I.G. Or

Amara, M. H., & Mar’i, A.-R. (2002). Language education policy: The Arab minority in Israel.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bailey, K. M., & Damerow, R. M. (Eds.). (2014). Teaching and learning English in the Arabic-
speaking world. New York: Routledge.
Bassiouney, R. (2009). Arabic sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Bekerman, Z., & Horenczyk, G. (2004). Arab-Jewish bilingual coeducation in Israel: A long-term
approach to intergroup conflict resolution. Journal of Social Issues, 60(2), 389–404.
Benrabah, M. (2013). Language conflict in Algeria: From colonialism to post-independence.
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Borjian, M. (2013). English in post-revolutionary Iran: From indigenization to internationaliza-
tion. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ennaji, M. (2002). Language contact, Arabization policy and education in Morocco. In A. Rouchdy
(Ed.), Language contact and language conflict in Arabic: Variations on a sociolinguistic theme
(pp. 70–88). Abingdon: Routledge.
Fassi Fehri, A. (2013). Language policy in Arab countries: Searching for a natural, just, demo-
cratic, beneficial environment. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Jadid al-Muttahida (in Arabic).
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15, 325–340.
Ferguson, C. A. (1991). Diglossia revisited. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 10(1), 214–234.
Fishman, J. A. (1971). National languages and languages of wider communication in the develop-
ing nations. In W. H. Whiteley (Ed.), Language use and social change. Problems of multilin-
gualism with special reference to Eastern Africa (pp. 27–57). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gebril, A., & Hozayin, R. (2014). Assessing English in the Middle East and North Africa. In A. J.
Kunnan (Ed.), The companion to language assessment (pp. 1649–1657). Chichester: Wiley-
Blackwell.
Haeri, N. (2003). Sacred language, ordinary people: Dilemmas of culture and politics in Egypt.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Halperin, L. R. (2015). Babel in Zion: Jews, nationalism, and language diversity in palestine,
1920–1948. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
Hary, B. (1996). The importance of the language continuum in Arabic multiglossia. In A. Elgibali
(Ed.), Understanding Arabic: Essays in contemporary Arabic linguistics in honor of El-Said
Badawi (pp. 69–90). Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press.
Hary, B. (2003). Judeo-Arabic: A diachronic reexamination. International Journal for the Sociol-
ogy of Language, 163, 61–75.
Hawker, N. (2013). Palestinian-Israeli contact and linguistic practices. Abingdon: Routledge.
Inbar-Lourie, O. (2014). Assessing Hebrew. In A. J. Kunnan (Ed.), The companion to language
assessment (pp. 1799–1814). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kirkpatrick, R. (Ed.). (2017). English education policy in the Middle East and North Africa. Cham:
Springer.
Mar’i, A. A.-R. (2013). Walla bseder: A linguistic profile of the Israeli-Arabs. Jerusalem: Keter
(in Hebrew).
Marley, D. (2004). Language attitudes in Morocco following recent changes in language. Language
Policy, 3, 25–46.
Mendel, Y. (2014). The creation of Israeli Arabic: Political and security considerations in the
making of Arabic language studies in Israel. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Or, I. G. (2016). “A seed blessed by the Lord”: The role of religious references in the creation of
Modern Hebrew. Language Policy, 15(2), 163–178.
Or, I. G., & Shohamy, E. (2016). Asymmetries and inequalities in the teaching of Arabic and
Hebrew in Israeli educational system. Journal of Language and Politics, 15(1), 25–44.
Peled-Elhanan, N. (2012). Palestine in Israeli school books: Ideology and propaganda in educa-
tion. New York: I. B. Tauris.
Rosenhouse, J. (2013). Bilingualism/multilingualism in the Middle East and North Africa: A focus
on cross-national and diglossic bilingualism/multilingualism. In T. K. Bhatia & W. C. Ritchie
Language Policy and Education in the Middle East and North Africa 543

(Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism (pp. 899–919). Malden: Wiley-
Blackwell.
S’hiri, S. (2002). Speak Arabic please!: Tunisian Arabic speakers’ linguistic accommodation to
Middle Easterners. In A. Rouchdy (Ed.), Language contact and language conflict in Arabic:
Variations on a sociolinguistic theme (pp. 149–174). Abingdon: Routledge.
Saiegh-Haddad, E., & Spolsky, B. (2014). Acquiring literacy in a diglossic context: Problems and
prospects. In E. Saiegh-Haddad & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Handbook of Arabic literacy
(pp. 225–240). Dordrecht: Springer.
Shohamy, E. (2008). At what cost? Methods of language revival and protection: Examples from
Hebrew. In K. A. King, N. Schilling-Estes, L. Fogle, J. J. Lou, & B. Soukup (Eds.), Sustaining
language diversity: Endangered and minority languages and language varieties (pp. 205–218).
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Shohamy, E. (2014). The weight of English in global perspective: The role of English in Israel.
Review of Research in Education, 38, 273–289.
Spolsky, B. (2014). The languages of the Jews: A sociolinguistic history. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Spolsky, B., & Shohamy, E. (2001). Hebrew after a century of RLS efforts. In J. A. Fishman (Ed.),
Can threatened languages be saved? Reversing language shift, revisited: A 21st century
perspective (pp. 350–363). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Suleiman, Y. (2003). The Arabic language and national identity. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Press.
Suleiman, Y. (2004). A war of words: Language and conflict in the Middle East. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Suleiman, Y. (2013). Arabic in the fray: Language ideology and cultural politics. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Tannenbaum, M. (2009). What’s in a language? Language as a core value of minorities in Israel.
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(6), 977–995.
Versteegh, K. (2014). The Arabic language (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Wong, S., Nasser, I., & Berlin, L. N. (2011). Where is the hope? A call for action. In I. Nasser, L. N.
Berlin, & S. Wong (Eds.), Examining education, media, and dialogue under occupation: The
case of Palestine and Israel (pp. 233–240). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Zakharia, Z. (2009). Positioning Arabic in schools: Language policy, national identity, and devel-
opment in contemporary Lebanon. In F. Vavrus & L. Bartlett (Eds.), Critical approaches to
comparative education: Vertical case studies from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and the
Americas (pp. 215–231). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.