Concerns regarding declining literacy and numeracy outcomes have become increasingly prominent within educational policy discussions in Fiji and across the Pacific region. These concerns are frequently framed as evidence of declining educational quality, inadequate teaching, curriculum shortcomings, or poor student performance. However, such interpretations often overlook a critical contextual reality: for the majority of students in Fiji, English is not their first language. Despite this, literacy and numeracy achievement is commonly assessed using benchmarks, standards, and expectations derived largely from English-speaking educational systems, particularly those of Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and other developed nations. This raises an important question: Are literacy and numeracy challenges in Fiji solely indicators of educational underperformance, or do they also reflect deeper linguistic, cultural, historical, and structural inequities embedded within assessment systems and educational policy frameworks?

This paper critically examines literacy and numeracy expectations in Fiji through a multilingual and postcolonial lens. Drawing upon literature from comparative education, language policy, sociolinguistics, postcolonial theory, literacy studies, and educational assessment, the paper argues that dominant deficit-based narratives often fail to acknowledge the complex realities of multilingual learning environments. It contends that literacy assessments may inadvertently measure English language proficiency as much as, or even more than, literacy itself, thereby disadvantaging learners whose primary languages differ from the language of assessment. Furthermore, the paper explores how colonial legacies continue to shape educational structures, curriculum frameworks, language hierarchies, and conceptions of academic success within Pacific education systems.

The analysis highlights the tensions between global educational benchmarking and local educational realities, questioning the appropriateness of comparing literacy and numeracy outcomes in Fiji directly with those of predominantly English-speaking nations. The paper argues that such comparisons risk obscuring important contextual factors, including linguistic diversity, socio-economic inequalities, cultural differences, educational resource disparities, and varying historical trajectories. Rather than viewing multilingualism as a deficit, the paper positions linguistic diversity as a potential educational asset that should be recognized and integrated into teaching, learning, and assessment practices.

The paper concludes that improving literacy and numeracy outcomes in Fiji requires a shift from deficit-oriented approaches toward more contextually responsive, culturally grounded, and linguistically inclusive educational policies. It advocates for the development of assessment systems and educational frameworks that better reflect Fiji’s multilingual realities while maintaining high academic standards. Ultimately, the paper contributes to emerging debates on educational equity, language justice, decolonizing education, and the meaning of educational success within multilingual and postcolonial societies. In doing so, it calls for a reconsideration of how literacy and numeracy are conceptualized, measured, and interpreted in Fiji and other Pacific Island nations.

Literacy, Numeracy, Multilingual Education, English as a Second Language, Educational Assessment, Language Policy, Postcolonial Education, Educational Equity, Fiji, Comparative Education, Language Justice, Decolonizing Education, Educational Reform, Cultural Context

1. Abedi, J. (2002). Standardized achievement tests and English language learners: Psychometrics issues. Educational Assessment, 8(3), 231–257. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326977EA0803_02

2. Barnett, R. (2012). Learning for an unknown future. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(1), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.642841

3. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. University of Chicago Press.

4. Benson, C. (2004). The importance of mother tongue-based schooling for educational quality. Commissioned Study for EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005. UNESCO.

5. Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. Cambridge University Press.

6. Biesta, G. J. J. (2022). World-centred education: A view for the present. Routledge.

7. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press.

8. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W. W. Norton.

9. Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222–251. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543049002222

10. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.

11. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.

12. Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2006). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching, and research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

13. Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149

14. Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.

15. Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019

16. Fullan, M. (2020). Leading in a culture of change (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

17. Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Pearson.

18. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Macmillan.

19. Goos, M., Geiger, V., & Dole, S. (2014). Transforming professional practice in numeracy teaching. In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.), Mathematics curriculum in school education (pp. 81–102). Springer.

20. Harari, Y. N. (2018). 21 lessons for the 21st century. Spiegel & Grau.

21. Mangubhai, F., & Mugler, F. (2006). The language situation in Fiji. In R. B. Baldauf Jr. & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Language planning and policy in the Pacific (pp. 15–47). Multilingual Matters.

22. Marginson, S. (2019). Limitations of human capital theory. Studies in Higher Education, 44(2), 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1359823

23. Masten, A. S. (2014). Ordinary magic: Resilience in development. Guilford Press.

24. Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century. Routledge.

25. Ministry of Education, Heritage and Arts. (2023). Strategic development plan for education in Fiji. Government of Fiji.

26. Morin, E. (2020). Change our course: The challenge of the pandemic. Other Press.

27. Moschkovich, J. N. (2015). Academic literacy in mathematics for English learners. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 40, 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.01.005

28. Nabobo-Baba, U. (2006). Knowing and learning: An indigenous Fijian approach. Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.

29. Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o. (1986). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature. James Currey.

30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing.

31. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). OECD learning compass 2030: A series of concept notes. OECD Publishing.

32. Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat. (2022). 2050 strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent. Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat.

33. Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.

34. Robinson, K., & Aronica, L. (2015). Creative schools: The grassroots revolution that is transforming education. Viking.

35. Schultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in human capital. American Economic Review, 51(1), 1–17.

36. Schwab, K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Business.

37. Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2018). The OECD and the expansion of PISA: New global modes of governance in education. Palgrave Macmillan.

38. Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.

39. Sharma, D. (2025). Repositioning education for the twenty-first century in Fiji: Policy, practice, and future challenges. Unpublished manuscript.

40. Sharma, D. (2026). Future-capable education in Fiji and the Pacific: Rethinking educational purpose in an age of uncertainty. Manuscript in preparation.

41. Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective on the uses of language tests. Longman.

42. Smith, L. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples (3rd ed.). Zed Books.

43. Thaman, K. H. (2009). Towards cultural democracy in teaching and learning with specific references to Pacific Island nations. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030206

44. Tikly, L. (2004). Education and the new imperialism. Comparative Education, 40(2), 173–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006042000231347

45. Tikly, L. (2016). Language-in-education policy in low-income, postcolonial contexts: Towards a social justice approach. Comparative Education, 52(3), 408–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2016.1185262

46. United Nations. (2023). The Sustainable Development Goals report 2023: Special edition. United Nations.

47. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO.

48. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2022). From learning recovery to education transformation. UNESCO.

49. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education—A tool on whose terms? UNESCO.

50. Valencia, R. R. (2010). Dismantling contemporary deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice. Routledge.

51. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

52. Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for twenty-first century competencies: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938

53. World Bank. (2018). World development report 2018: Learning to realize education's promise. World Bank.

54. World Economic Forum. (2023). The future of jobs report 2023. World Economic Forum.

55. Zhao, Y. (2012). World class learners: Educating creative and entrepreneurial students. Corwin Press.