Original Research

Bridging the language gap: Exploring strategies for supporting speakers of African languages in an Open Distance e-Learning environment

Jacobeth Nkosi

Received: 28 Jan. 2026; Accepted: 24 May 2026; Published: 20 June 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Author. Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

In South African universities, English predominates as the medium of instruction, despite institutional language policies advocating for the inclusion of African Indigenous languages. The Council of Higher Education observed that the student protests in 2015 and 2016 highlighted deep-rooted issues that led to student dissatisfaction, mainly because course content was delivered in the dominant language. This study examines the ongoing exclusion of African language speakers in Open Distance e-Learning (ODeL) environments in South Africa. Using translanguaging concepts within a phenomenological qualitative research framework, the research aims to understand students’ lived experiences regarding language in an ODeL institution and to identify challenges faced by African language speakers, such as difficulties understanding course materials in English.

Contribution: Through reflective and dialogical methods, combined with interpretation, the study reveals how the dominance of English in ODeL, along with technological factors, creates barriers to knowledge access, whereas the use of African languages without mediation encourages positive attitudes towards learning. It recommends that ODeL institutions make better use of African languages to support student self-learning, improving accessibility, understanding, and pass rates. Because of colonial history and global power dynamics, English is often viewed as the language of opportunity and success. There is an urgent need to reflect on how globalisation continues to disempower African groups within knowledge systems.

Keywords: Open Distance eLearning; African languages; translanguaging; multilingualism; language gap.

Introduction

Language is the primary tool through which people create, share, and access knowledge, and it plays a crucial role in thinking, social engagement, and education. However, many learners are excluded from written knowledge and formal education because of their language backgrounds. Students from more privileged environments often acquire reading and comprehension skills early on, whereas those from less advantaged backgrounds may find academic texts difficult (Murray 2016). In South African higher education, English is the predominant language used for teaching, assessment, and institutional communication, even though it is not the first language for many students (Council on Higher Education [CHE] 2016). This situation restricts participation and understanding for speakers of African languages. Although policies support the inclusion of African Indigenous languages, most courses continue to be taught in English. The CHE (2016) highlighted that student protests in 2015 and 2016 revealed weaknesses in higher education, with the dominance of English being a significant source of dissatisfaction. In Open Distance e-Learning (ODeL), the heavy dependence on English and limited interaction with lecturers further exacerbate difficulties for students from marginalised backgrounds, who are already disadvantaged by the underdevelopment of their home languages.

Open Distance e-Learning is an educational approach where students learn remotely through digital platforms, increasing access to higher education for traditionally marginalised groups (Oladejo & Gesinde 2014). This method relies on information technology and allows learners to study at their own pace, often seen as making education more accessible by removing location barriers. However, ODeL presents challenges, including limited interaction between lecturers and students, insufficient academic support, and over-reliance on English as the primary language of instruction (Cele 2021). For many students, English is neither their first language nor their mother tongue; they face difficulties understanding, communicating, and participating fully. African languages are still underdeveloped academically, lacking the necessary vocabulary and resources for advanced learning. South Africa’s national language policy has been largely ineffective in fostering social inclusion because of poor implementation and limited resources (Cele 2021). This language environment marginalises students who speak African languages, hindering inclusive education and underscoring the critical need for intentional language development and supportive measures within ODeL.

The ongoing predominance of English as the primary language of academic communication in South African higher education contradicts the country’s constitutional commitment to multilingualism and language equality. Although national language policies aim to promote the use of all official languages, they have been criticised for poor implementation and inadequate funding (Cele 2021). As a result, African languages remain underdeveloped for academic use and are mostly limited to informal or spoken contexts. These issues are even more pronounced in ODeL settings, where students often study alone with minimal support from instructors. Students with limited English proficiency struggle to comprehend course material, structure their responses, and engage fully. In ODeL, the dependence on English and the lack of development of African languages perpetuate educational disparities and prevent students from accessing education that aligns with their linguistic and cultural identities. This research explores ways to assist African language speakers in successfully navigating primarily English-language ODeL systems.

Talayhan (2024) observes that teachers encounter difficulties in multilingual classrooms because of varying levels of English proficiency and cultural diversity. Still, these classrooms are essential for fostering 21st-century skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and cultural awareness. Oladejo and Gesinde (2014) observe that ODeL in Africa struggles with infrastructure constraints and relies on various models rather than advanced technological solutions. Schroeder (2020) contends that the growing economic and educational disparities in Africa are primarily caused by educational shortcomings among rural children, with language barriers playing a significant role in hindering academic and economic advancement.

This study is significant in several respects. Firstly, it highlights the intersection between language and digital inequality in ODeL environments. Secondly, this study underscores the need to incorporate African languages into online educational methodologies to enhance cognitive engagement, foster social inclusion, and affirm cultural identity. Fundamentally, by employing García’s (2017) framework of translanguaging, the study presents an alternative viewpoint that regards multilingualism as a valuable resource rather than an obstacle to learning. The anticipated findings are expected to inform and enrich current debates surrounding the transformation of higher education institutions and the development of e-learning platforms that inclusively integrate South Africa’s diverse languages. The primary goal of this research endeavour is to identify pathways through which speakers of African languages can access English-medium ODeL contexts.

The current enquiry’s objectives are as follows:

Describe the day-to-day challenges, coping mechanisms, and academic participation faced by African language speakers in ODeL institutions where English is the sole medium of instruction. Describe how academic participation and achievement are affected by instruction in English. The study will then continue by suggesting a variety of translanguaging-informed practices, alongside various institutional structures that might successfully overcome existing linguistic disparity in ODeL settings. Drawing inspiration from García’s (2017) insightful work on translanguaging, it is imperative to recognise language not as a static or predetermined system, but as a dynamic and fluid assemblage of communicative practices deliberately utilised by multilingual speakers. This framework acknowledges a broad spectrum of linguistic resources, including African languages and English, which can be utilised for academic learning and personal expression. This study aims to answer the following research questions: What are the lived experiences of African Language speakers regarding the linguistic barrier in an English-dominated ODeL context? And how can translanguaging strategies be integrated into ODeL institutional and pedagogical practices to enhance access, comprehension, and academic success for African language speakers? In a specific context of an ODeL environment, this approach holds significant potential to empower students substantially. It enables them to engage more effectively with complex and challenging academic concepts while preserving a unique linguistic and cultural identity.

Literature review

Linguistic diversity and the hegemony of English in higher education

Although South Africa’s post-apartheid education policies officially recognise 11 languages, English remains predominantly entrenched within academic contexts (Mugwaze 2025). Despite the objectives outlined in the 1997 Language in Education Policy to promote equal status for African languages in educational settings, limited progress has been made because of financial constraints and the persistence of colonial ideologies that link academic legitimacy with the English language (Wolff 2017). Consequently, African languages continue to experience marginalisation in the domain of knowledge production (Omodan 2023).

Empirical studies in higher education substantiate the role of English monolingualism in reinforcing linguistic exclusion. Probyn (2009) emphasised that learners from rural and township schools, where English is infrequently used outside the classroom, struggle to grasp subject-specific concepts presented exclusively in English. Furthermore, Nondabula and Nomlomo (2023) demonstrated that academic literacy interventions predominantly focus on English, neglecting to leverage students’ existing multilingual competencies. Consequently, the disparity between knowledge acquired in students’ indigenous languages and their proficiency in English within academic contexts hinders student retention and success in ODeL environments, where self-directed learning is essential.

Open Distance e-Learning and the amplification of linguistic inequality

Open Distance e-Learning has expanded access to higher education for formerly marginalised students, overcoming geographic and financial constraints (Carow, Schmitz & Pretorius 2023). However, ODeL also amplifies challenges related to language inequity. Diminished interaction between lecturers and students in online environments limits opportunities to address language misunderstandings (Sevnarayan 2022). Consequently, students’ comprehension in virtual classrooms is hindered by the lack of immediate feedback and limited language support.

Recent studies also validate that ‘linguistic exclusion is linked with the phenomenon commonly called the “digital divide”’. Mudau (2024) contends that rural students face dual challenges: insufficient internet connectivity and a lack of digital literacy skills necessary to engage proficiently with English-language platforms for academic purposes.

As a result, language proficiency is an exclusionary practice in accessing the ‘digital world’ in addition to epistemic knowledge.

Translanguaging as a pedagogical and epistemological resource

Translanguaging is a concept that redefines language use as flexible, in which bilingual or bicultural people draw on their full range of language and cultural resources to communicate, teach, and learn (García 2017). It challenges the idea of using only one language and instead supports the bilingual approach commonly found in African classroom settings (Wei 2018). In addition, Wei (2018) emphasises the importance of developing a practical language theory that is socially just and rooted in decolonial principles.

In African settings, translanguaging is increasingly seen as a means to connect students’ language backgrounds with the demands of educational institutions. Charamba (2023) demonstrated that allowing students in multilingual science classrooms to use African languages and English greatly enhanced their grasp of concepts and boosted their confidence. Similarly, Likewise, Makhanya and Levy (2024) contend that translanguaging serves as both an educational strategy and a means of epistemic resistance, allowing African students to express knowledge in ways that align with their cultural backgrounds.

Despite these successes, the integration of translanguaging in web-based and ODeL settings has yet to be adequately investigated in academia. As face-to-face learning environments have begun adopting an ideology that embraces multilingualism in constructing meaning, web-based learning is likely to remain English-centric, as it is technologically limited (Yafele 2024).

Multilingualism, technology, and emerging Open Distance e-Learning pedagogies

When appropriately employed, technology is also key to enabling language inclusion. Existing research on the design of e-learning content demonstrates the use of open educational resources (OERs) and bilingual electronic glossaries to support understanding (Makhanya & Levy 2024). Also, Kukulska-Hulme and Pegrum (2018) demonstrate that collaboration using mobile technology enables bilingually engaged learners through WhatsApp and learning management systems.

However, these institutions lack an obvious guiding principle for multilingual e-learning. According to the Council on Higher Education (2023), commitment to multilingualism is unlikely to feature in online course development, let alone in massive ODeL, in lecturers’ training.

The reviewed literature converges on three key insights.

Firstly, the prevalence of English in higher education in South Africa further limits the epistemic opportunities for African-language speakers. Secondly, while ODeL delivery continues to expand access, it also exacerbates language disparities by increasing technological and communication barriers. Thirdly, translanguaging is theoretically valid and suitable for promoting language inclusivity, but its application in ODeL settings is limited. Therefore, there is a clear need to clarify how translanguaging strategies can be adapted for ODeL to enhance access, comprehension, and results for speakers of African languages. This is the study’s focus.

Theoretical framework

This study draws principally on the concept of translanguaging as a theoretical lens, complemented by perspectives from multimodal and distance-learning theory to situate the ODeL context.

The term translanguaging, as developed by Ofelia García and colleagues, refers to the process by which multilingual speakers draw on their full linguistic repertoires to make meaning, rather than treating languages as discrete, bounded systems. García and Lin (2017) point out that translanguaging challenges monoglossic ideologies and facilitates the development of more authentic pedagogical approaches for bilingual and multilingual learners. Within the context of higher education involving speakers of African languages, translanguaging provides a means to acknowledge and utilise students’ linguistic repertoires, including their home languages and English, rather than marginalising or disregarding these resources.

Key theoretical premises include:

• Language use is socially situated and fluid; speakers mobilise features from across ‘named languages’ as part of a unified repertoire (Wei 2018).
• Pedagogy that recognises and values this repertoire (i.e. translanguaging pedagogy) can scaffold comprehension and expression in learners who may otherwise be constrained by English-only instruction (Hornberger 2004).
• Translanguaging is not simply code-switching or alternating languages; it is about enabling multilingual identities, cognitive access, and critical engagement (Creese & Blackledge 2015).
• In summary, translanguaging theory positions multilingual students as agents of meaning-making, whose full (often undervalued) linguistic repertoires can be harnessed to promote greater inclusion and learning equity.

Application to Open Distance e-Learning contexts and African languages

In the ODeL setting, particularly within the South African higher-education landscape, learners who speak African languages as their first language often face multiple barriers: the language of instruction being English; limited interaction with lecturers; physical separation; reliance on digital platforms; and possible limited academic language support. The theoretical lens of translanguaging provides an explanatory and normative orientation: it explains how students may draw on their African languages and English to negotiate meaning and invites pedagogical strategies that accommodate such multilingual practices (Hibbert 2023).

Moreover, ODeL research emphasises that distance contexts require attention to learner support, interaction, and the design of linguistically accessible material. Studies of South African ODeL students highlight issues of access, digital readiness, and feedback systems (Akintolu, Mitwally & Letseka 2024). This study integrates translanguaging theory with findings from ODeL to explore two main areas: how multilingual language practices can facilitate learning in English-centred ODeL settings, and how the design of institutions, teaching methods, and digital platforms can be redesigned to enhance this facilitation.

Methodology

This study employs a qualitative, phenomenological research design grounded in an interpretivist framework. As a research approach, phenomenology focuses on comprehending and interpreting the core meaning of experiences as they are personally perceived by individuals involved in a particular phenomenon, observed by the researcher. The phenomenon examined in this study is the experience of African language speakers within an English-dominated ODeL setting.

The selection of a phenomenology research type is informed by its concern with subjective meanings and experiences rather than observation from a distance. It enables the researcher to understand, in depth, how students and the lecturer or researcher experience and interpret the linguistic barriers arising when the lecturer uses translanguaging within the same learning environment (Creswell & Poth 2016; Van Manen 2016).

The study was conducted at a South African ODeL institution where English is used as the language of instruction, and most students speak African languages. The researcher’s role in this context provides an insider’s perspective, enabling a thorough interpretation of the subject in its real-world institutional context. This setting is characterised by a high student population, asynchronous learning methods, technology-facilitated communication, and minimal face-to-face interaction between instructors and students, all of which influence the linguistic and cognitive environment for both lecturers and students at the institution.

The population consists of 150 students registered at an ODeL institution in South Africa, whose first language is one of the official African languages and who receive instruction in English. A purposive sampling method was used to select a diverse group of 20 participants who could provide detailed and meaningful perspectives on real-life experiences of language use in ODeL. The selection deliberately included students from diverse home languages, academic years, genders, and geographic areas, including both rural and urban settings, to ensure participants could provide valuable information on the studied topic.

Selection criteria included:

• Enrolment in an ODeL programme where English is the primary language of instruction
• Having an African language as their first or primary home language
• Being willing to reflect on their learning experiences in digital environments thoughtfully
• Actively participate in at least one online discussion forum or digital assignment.

The researcher’s continuous engagement with students served as a naturalistic sampling method, as phenomenological research emphasises understanding the depth of meaning rather than numerical representation.

Data were gathered using a mix of reflective observations, conversational interviews, and document analysis, all of which aligned well with the phenomenological methodology:

• Reflective Observation: Field notes and reflective writings were maintained about experiences, student interactions, and self-organisation during language-related activities conducted online in class, supporting reflective observation.
• Collaborative Interviews: Certain students participated in semi-structured interviews via online platforms (MS Teams or Zoom), allowing them to express their personal experiences with language in their own words.
• Institutional Documents: Supplementary materials such as institutional language policies, course guidelines, and communication documents provided additional insight into institutional experiences, which could be cross-checked with observational data.

These approaches focused on openness and conversation, allowing students and the researcher to create meaning rather than simply gather answers collaboratively. Interviews and reflections were transcribed verbatim, with ethical approval ensuring confidentiality and voluntary participation.

The data were examined using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), guided by Van Manen’s (2016) Hermeneutic method, which seeks to reveal the core nature of the phenomenon through an ongoing process of understanding both parts and the whole. The process included the following steps:

• Immersion: Reading transcripts, reflective notes, and organisational documents multiple times for familiarity
• Meaning Units Identification: Highlighting key statements and expressions that showcased the nature of the linguistic experience within ODeL
• Thematic Clustering: Categorising units of significance into themes (e.g. Linguistic Barriers, Digital Literacy and Institutional Support)
• Description, textural, and structural: Describing the nature of experiences that the participants went through in relation to their experiences in ODeL contexts
• Interpretive Integration: The integration of the living experiences with theoretical understandings from Garcia’s concept of translanguaging to discern the structural essence of multilingualism in ODeL.

The study received ethical clearance from the Research Ethics Committee of the university where the participants are registered, as well as from the University of Technology with which this study is affiliated. All participants were provided with informed consent forms outlining the study’s purpose prior to data collection. They were assured of anonymity, confidentiality, and their right to withdraw from the study at any stage without penalty. All data were stored on a password-protected device accessible only to the researcher. Given the researcher’s dual role as both lecturer and researcher, careful measures were implemented to minimise any perceived pressure on participants, including recruitment through a neutral third party and conducting interviews only after final grades had been submitted.

Trustworthiness was ensured through prolonged engagement with the ODeL environment, as the researcher, in their capacity as a practising lecturer, interacted with students across multiple modules over two academic semesters. Multiple sources of data were used to strengthen the study’s credibility, including personal observations, interviews, and institutional documents. To ensure accurate interpretation, preliminary findings were shared with five participants, who confirmed that the researcher’s interpretations accurately reflected their experiences of language barriers and multilingual communication. In addition, the researcher consulted a colleague with expertise in ODeL who was not involved in the study. This peer debriefing process helped to challenge assumptions and refine the emerging themes.

Findings and discussion

The data analysis revealed four dominant and interconnected themes: Linguistic barriers within ODeL environments; Digital literacy and technological access; Institutional and pedagogical support systems; and Translanguaging as a transformative learning strategy.

These themes are discussed next in relation to the refined literature and García’s translanguaging framework.

Linguistic barriers in Open Distance e-Learning environments

Participants consistently identified language as the most significant barrier to success in ODeL learning settings, mainly because English dominates course materials, assessments, and online communication, particularly for students whose first language is an African language. One student shared:

‘I find it hard to understand the content since it’s all written in English, which is not my first language. It helps when someone can summarise in isiZulu, the language I speak and understand best.’ (Participant 1, 18-year-old, male)

This supports Mugwaze’s (2025) view that the dominance of English in higher education is a lingering effect of colonial rule, in which educational systems in most South African institutions are structured around English, a language often not spoken at home (Mafandala 2015), and English is effectively equated with knowledge. Similarly, Wolff (2017) notes that this linguistic dominance remains firmly rooted in universities, while Omodan (2023) points to epistemological exclusion faced by learners of African languages in knowledge production.

Another participant identified the absence of face-to-face teaching as a barrier, stating:

‘I do not like studying online, as it is difficult to ask questions and receive immediate answers.’ (Participant 2, 19-year-old, female)

The lack of a lecturer’s physical presence to support students’ understanding appears to contribute to these challenges, consistent with findings on face-to-face learning by Probyn (2009) and Nondabula and Nomlomo (2023). This issue is also evident in the ODeL context, where the absence of immediate lecturer support intensifies language barriers, leading many students to rely on memorisation rather than developing a clear understanding of concepts. Many African languages have underdeveloped written forms in academic contexts, which results in a strong reliance on educational resources produced in English.

In addition, curriculum frameworks often neglect cultural aspects because most African educational resources are developed using Western models that fail to reflect local realities. Another participant mentioned that:

‘[I]t is difficult to respond to some assessments, as I find myself having to disregard my culture and embrace the Western culture. For example, in Western culture, it is considered disrespectful not to maintain eye contact when addressing someone, whereas in my culture, I am expected not to look directly at elderly people when speaking to them.’ (Participant 3, 20-year-old, female)

This misalignment between learning materials and students’ lived experiences worsens educational inequalities and increasingly marginalises communities. As a result, students are more likely to experience low self-confidence, adversely affecting their academic achievement and engagement (Vakoufari, Angelaki & Mavroidis 2014).

Twelve of the 20 participants reported similar experiences. However, two participants disagreed, stating:

‘English is fine; I prefer it because all my materials in all my modules are written in English. I also have an English background, as in high school I studied English as a home language and Afrikaans as a second language.’ (Participant 7, 20-year-old, female)

Digital literacy and technological access

The second theme highlights that technological obstacles worsen linguistic difficulties. Students from rural or economically disadvantaged backgrounds frequently encounter challenges when navigating English-language interfaces, online learning platforms, and submission systems, resulting in a dual form of exclusion, both linguistic and digital. In South Africa, these challenges are further intensified by limited internet connectivity and inadequate digital infrastructure in remote areas, which significantly restrict access to advanced technologies. One participant explained:

‘I come from a rural area, and it is a struggle to connect, even though there is Wi-Fi at home.’ (Participant 10, 25-year-old, male)

As Wafula (2014) observes, the uneven outcomes of technology-enhanced education disproportionately affect marginalised and non-English-speaking populations, who often lack access to high-quality ODeL content, skilled facilitators, and sufficient digital literacy. Consequently, the transformative potential of ODeL to promote equitable and multilingual education remains only partially realised.

This dual challenge aligns with Mudau’s (2024) assertion that the digital divide in South Africa extends beyond mere access to the internet, including the related issues of language proficiency and digital literacy. One participant observed:

‘I am very good at using my phone; however, I struggle to use a laptop, as I am not used to it. It would help if computer training were offered so that I can learn how to use a laptop.’ (Participant 12, 21-year-old, male)

In the same way, Carow et al. (2023) argue that while ODeL expands geographic access, it also increases inequalities for students who lack proficiency in English and sufficient technological skills.

Observations on student responses to these paths also propose developing multilingual guidance tools, bilingual helpdesks, and introductory modules in African languages to cultivate student confidence. Such evidence verifies the need to conceptualise Internet competency linguistically, reinforcing the importance of language accessibility in Internet competency, in line with the principles of translanguaging, where meaning-making is inseparable from language practice.

Institutional and pedagogical support systems

Prolonged engagement with students, tutors, and the educational system indicates that the linguistic support provided in ODeL contexts is not adequately aligned with the needs of multilingual learners. For example, although orientation activities and writing centre support are well-intended, they tend to concentrate mainly on English language proficiency in relation to academic performance. One participant explained:

‘Since English was not my first language at school, I struggle to present my work in the correct academic manner that is expected of me at the university level.’ (Participant 8, 19-year-old, female)

The current approach places greater emphasis on grammatical accuracy than on developing a better understanding of ideas in academic writing.

As the lecturer was thoroughly involved in such an environment, it was easy to gain first-hand insight into how these systems structurally disadvantage students who think, reason, and learn in African languages. The system is premised on English being a neutral means of communication, but it functions more as a gatekeeping system. Certainly, this aligns with the Council on Higher Education’s 2023 conclusion that multilingual commitments articulated in policy documents are not effectively reflected in the design of courses or instructional practices in higher education.

In ODeL institutions, the instructional framework exemplifies what Wolff (2017) describes as the ideological monopoly of English, wherein English is established as the prevailing language of knowledge dissemination. This linguistic dominance is further exacerbated by the limited interaction between students and lecturers (Sevnarayan 2022), resulting in insufficient support for students to address language-related challenges independently. Collectively, these dynamics contribute to a persistent language disparity, in which students lacking proficiency in English face systemic disadvantages relative to their peers. This scenario underscores the complexity and ongoing nature of efforts to bridge the language gap, as lecturers and students continue to contend with these inequities within the existing educational paradigm.

An analysis of journaling and experiences related to module management reveals that policy and practice operate concurrently yet lack meaningful interaction. Although institutional policies ostensibly advocate for inclusivity, teaching practices continue to uphold linguistic hierarchies. This situation reflects a phenomenological awareness marked by a disjunction between the aspirational goals articulated in policy and their actual implementation. To prevent ODeL from merely reinforcing its own agenda rather than advancing it, there is a pressing need to reconceptualise multilingualism within the system as a functional principle rather than a symbolic, language-based policy.

Translanguaging as a transformative strategy

Through consistent daily student participation, it is apparent that instructional approaches have effectively fostered the use of self-directed cognitive and affective strategies. Learners organically engage in translanguaging by alternating between isiZulu, Sesotho, isiXhosa, and English while interpreting texts, completing assignments, or supporting peers during online tutorial discussions. This multilingual practice facilitates a deeper comprehension compared to the monolingual academic language mandated by the institution.

Makhanya and Levy (2024) characterise translanguaging as a form of epistemic resistance, a perspective that aligns with recent classroom observations showing how students assert their agency through their mixed-language use. However, translanguaging is still not officially recognised within institutional settings. No formal systems for acknowledging or evaluating multilingual meaning-making and learning management platforms continue to favour English-only communication. As Yafele (2024) cautions, digital learning environments often reinforce monolingual norms because of their technological design. Nonetheless, professional experiences have shown that translanguaging usually emerges as an instinctive survival strategy; a practical example of what García & Lin (2017) describes as praxis.

From a phenomenological perspective, these findings emphasise the existential conflict between mandated policies and students’ experiences. Translanguaging represents a mode of existence within the digital learning environment, where learners navigate academic demands on one side and their cultural backgrounds on the other. Institutional acknowledgement of this would enable the development of purposeful bilingual resources, community glossaries, and virtual collaboration tools equipped with multilingual software (Kukulska-Hulme & Pegrum 2018). This would transform the practice’s traditionally hidden nature into a prominent educational approach that embraces multilingualism in digital scholarship.

Integrative discussion

Engaging thoughtfully with the ODeL environment reveals complex links between language, technology, and institutional authority. The continued dominance of English monolingualism in the institution is not the result of opposition to change or malicious intent, but rather because it is firmly ingrained in its daily routines, including assessment criteria and the software used.

Given how students’ adaptability aligns with their online research experiences, it is evident that being multilingual is an advantage rather than a weakness. The regular translanguaging practices during sessions can serve as a form of intellectual negotiation, allowing students to draw on all their language skills to overcome the knowledge gap created by English-only policies.

When these insights are viewed through the lens of García’s work on ‘translanguaging’, they represent a fundamental change in thinking; ODeL institutions must intentionally shift from a corrective approach focused on ‘fixing’ learners’ English to one that values their language practices for their own sake. Ultimately, the phenomenological reflection aims to position ‘translanguaging’ within the ODeL system for African learners, transforming it from a mere teaching method into an experiential principle of inclusivity within Africa’s existing sociolinguistic context to address epistemic exclusion in digital distance education.

Conclusion

While steps have been taken to enhance access to higher education, language barriers remain a significant challenge in ODeL settings, especially for speakers of African languages. This qualitative, phenomenological study examined the experiences of South African ODeL students whose first languages are African, uncovering both their difficulties and the strategies they use in multilingual learning within higher education. The results emphasise the need for multilingual teaching and learning practices to promote fairness, accessibility, and academic achievement, while also highlighting ongoing structural and knowledge-related obstacles in ODeL environments.

Research shows that English continues to dominate ODeL contexts, marginalising African languages and creating an ideological monopoly that equates academic excellence with proficiency in English, thereby sustaining exclusion and inequality (Zongozzi 2021). Despite policies aimed at inclusivity, the linguistic reality in many institutions often enforces exclusivity, restricting students’ ability to express complex ideas in their African languages. Nonetheless, students demonstrate resilience and intellectual agency by using translanguaging – seamlessly switching between African languages and English, to understand academic material and reclaim learning within their cultural and linguistic frameworks.

Simultaneously, classroom and learning experiences reveal a form of resilience among the students. Their natural ability to switch between African languages and English to understand the world around them demonstrates a kind of intellectual empowerment, where learning is reclaimed through its cultural roots and linguistic flexibility. This research concludes that achieving Linguistic Justice requires ODeL to move beyond mere policy statements and become a genuine teaching practice. Linguistic Justice can only be realised if African languages hold a central, rather than peripheral, role in academic discourses.

Based on the findings and phenomenological experiences, recommendations can be made emphasising the need for systemic change in ODeL institutions in South Africa. At the policy level, institutions are advised to redefine multimodality as a dynamic practice rather than a mere symbolic concept. In doing so, ODeL institutions should develop language-inclusive policies concerning their digital platforms to ensure their learning management systems are friendly to African languages. This should be complemented by multimodal help desks equipped with translation plugins to support students and lecturers. Furthermore, it is suggested that ODeL institutions develop a Translanguaging Implementation Framework to guide the application of translanguaging principles in their policies.

Pedagogically, ODeL institutions should integrate translanguaging strategies into their curriculum design and delivery. The curriculum development team should include bilingual or multilingual members who can create discussion spaces where learners can engage in their own languages. They should also provide opportunities for students to express their understanding in English and their African languages. Moreover, lecturers at ODeL institutions should pursue ongoing professional development in multilingual teaching methods that support translanguaging, ensuring their instructional practices align with their students’ diverse linguistic backgrounds. In addition, Writing Centres should be reimagined as Multilingual Literacy Hubs, focusing more on meaning construction rather than solely on correcting grammar and syntax.

From a technological perspective, institutions are advised to create open, bilingual repository systems for African languages to enhance the use of African academic terminology across disciplines. This development should involve collaboration with students, graduates, and experts in African languages to ensure the initiative is genuine and sustainable. According to Kukulska-Hulme and Pegrum (2018), online learning platforms can be utilised to promote multilingual student participation beyond conventional Learning Mangement Systems (LMS) frameworks. Creating open multilingual educational resources can increase content accessibility and encourage collaborative interaction with the material.

At the research level, further studies on language in ODeL should incorporate lecturers’ perspectives and prioritise the creation of African-centred theoretical frameworks that combine translanguaging, indigenous knowledge systems, and decolonial epistemology. Collaborative comparative research among African universities and open-source multilingual publications can share best practices and improve epistemic inclusion. There is also scope for research collaboration among African universities on comparative research, the dissemination of best practices, and open-source publication in multilingual research journals. Ultimately, these recommendations imply that ODeL institutions should shift from corrective interventions that address students’ English language proficiency deficiencies to more transformational approaches that celebrate and leverage the power of language diversity for its own sake. Only by doing so can the promise of open and distance e-learning for epistemic inclusion be realised in Africa.

Acknowledgements

This article is based on a study presented by Jacobeth Nkosi, a lecturer at an Open Distance e-Learning (ODeL) institution and a student in the Faculty of Humanities, Department of Applied Languages, at the Tshwane University of Technology. Jacobeth Nkosi presented the paper at the inaugural conference of the Linguistic Society of South Africa (LSSA), held in collaboration with the University of South Africa (UNISA), the University of Johannesburg (UJ), and the Tshwane University of Technology (TUT), together with the Gauteng Department of Sport, Arts, Culture, and Recreation, in Ekurhuleni, Gauteng, South Africa, in August 2025. Jacobeth Nkosi confirms that the paper was adapted into a journal article, has not been previously published or shared, and meets ethical standards for original publication.

Competing interests

The author declares that no financial or personal relationships inappropriately influenced the writing of this article.

CRediT authorship contribution

Jacobeth Nkosi: Conceptualisation, Writing – original draft. The author confirms that this work is entirely their own, has reviewed the article, approved the final version for submission and publication, and takes full responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Tshwane University of Technology Human Research Ethics Committee (No. HREC2024=07=001-HUM).

Funding information

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the Tshwane University of Technology Digital Open Repository (https://tutvital.tut.ac.za/home).

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency, or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings, and content.

References