Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 10 / 10 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 12:28 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
9 / 10 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 10 selected publications.
9 / 10 with data · 1 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 10 selected publications.
10 / 10 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 10 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 9 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 10 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 10 / 10 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T07:22:57.860150+00:00 — 2026-10-22T12:28:29.620121+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 6 | 10 | 10/10 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 5 | 10 | 10/10 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Records with full publication dates only. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2024-10 | 1 |
| 2024-12 | 4 |
| 2025-05 | 1 |
| 2025-08 | 1 |
| 2025-12 | 1 |
| 2026-05 | 1 |
| 2026-10 | 1 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4/4 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 50.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 6 | 7 | 8 | 6/6 | 1.17 | 1.0 | 50.0 | 6/6 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This systematic review examines the initiatives and challenges faced by the South African government in promoting indigenous languages following the end of apartheid. This study evaluates progress, identifies barriers, and offers recommendations for future policy and practice. A systematic literature review approach was utilised to analyse government policies and initiatives aimed at promoting indigenous languages from 1994 to 2024. Searches conducted in electronic databases utilised terms such as "South Africa indigenous languages." The inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed articles, government reports, and policy documents that concentrate on language revitalisation initiatives. Findings reveal ongoing challenges stemming from historical marginalisation and systemic obstacles associated with colonial and apartheid-era policies. Indigenous languages, despite being constitutionally recognised, encounter significant implementation gaps, resource limitations, and societal attitudes that impede their incorporation into education, governance, and media. Recommendations emphasise the importance of improved policy implementation via augmented funding, initiatives for educational capacity-building, and the promotion of indigenous languages in media and public discourse. Addressing negative societal attitudes and promoting cultural pride is crucial for fostering linguistic inclusivity and preserving the diverse linguistic heritage of South Africa.
This study was inspired by the observation that code-switching is often discouraged in foreign language schools, where the target language and native language are strictly separated, with the target language designated as the 'official' language of instruction. The study sought to examine instances of code-switching in English as a First Additional Language (EFAL) acquisition among Sesotho native speakers in the Intermediate Phase in South Africa. Furthermore, it sought to illustrate the application of tag-code-switching, inter-sentential code-switching, and intra-sentential code-switching in English First Additional Language (EFAL) education for Sesotho native speakers in the Intermediate Phase in South Africa. This paper studied a particular multilingual phenomena, code-switching. While other linguistic behaviours exist, code-switching is the most popular in additional language contexts in South Africa. This research was founded on a literature review of code-switching in additional language situations. The paper examined the three roles of code-switching: repetition, emotional, and floor-holding. It also provided instances of how tag-code-switching, inter-sentential code-switching, and intra-sentential code-switching might be utilised by Sesotho home language learners to improve their comprehension of EFAL. One finding of the study is that, similar to translanguaging, code-switching fosters a sense of belonging and ownership among learners, and it is generally more accessible for the EFAL student to acquire knowledge from familiar concepts to unfamiliar ones. Another conclusion is that learners' restricted engagement in academic activities, attributable to their inadequate language proficiency, also impacts their motivation. The study advocates for the implementation of code-switching to improve learners' classroom involvement by allowing them to utilise their native language in the acquisition of a second language. The impact of code-switching on Sesotho home language learners' comprehension of EFAL in the Intermediate Phase in South Africa remains undetermined, necessitating further investigation into this important issue.
The South African English language curriculum states that by the time students reach Grade 7, they should have mastered certain English language skills that enable them to communicate effectively at both personal and educational levels. Therefore, a study was conducted to investigate the potential benefits of code-switching in improving students' oral participation in English classes. The study took place in a primary school in the Malamulele East circuit and involved all fifty Grade 7 students. The students' oral presentations were part of their formative assessment. Researchers used a rigorous methodology, including convenience sampling, to select participants, with the first ten girls and the first ten boys considered for the study. Data was collected during presentations, where each student had an opportunity to present. The qualitative method was used, with audio recordings and observations as data collection tools. Content analysis was employed to analyse the data collected from the Grade 7 students. Based on the students' performance in their oral presentations, code-switching seemed to help them to effectively communicate complex concepts in their primary language when there were no equivalent English words. The findings of this study showed that code-switching enhances students' oral communication skills and makes learning more enjoyable. students achieve their communication goals through code-switching, offering the audience a hopeful outlook on the potential benefits of this approach.
Monolingual ideologies remain alive in mainstream education, though the amount of evidence pointing to the benefits of multilingualism is increasing. Against this background, this paper aims to explore the importance of multilingual practices in multilingual classrooms, teacher input in enhancing multilingual practices in classrooms and assessment in multilingual classrooms. A systematic review of the literature was done to gather data. The findings revealed that the use of dominant national languages and/or colonial languages does not sufficiently account for the multilingual nature of the learners in the classrooms and their respective communities. Teachers need to allow any references to languages by their learners of which they have only basic knowledge or no knowledge at all. One way is to leave the role of expert to learners with home languages while taking on the role of learners of new languages. Also, in linguistically and culturally diverse classrooms, unintended bias in any assessment aspect can negatively affect learners whose home language is not the language of assessment. The study recommends that policymakers should establish official guidelines on interpreting competence aims for multilingual education, ensuring clarity and consistency across schools. Teachers should adopt collaborative teaching strategies that encourage learners to use their home languages in classroom activities. Partnerships between researchers and educators are essential for evaluating the effectiveness of multilingual pedagogies and refining teaching approaches. Assessment practices should be adapted to reflect learners’ diverse linguistic backgrounds, ensuring fair and valid evaluations of their competencies. Teacher training programmes should include modules on multilingual education, equipping educators with the necessary tools to manage linguistically diverse classrooms.
In a learning environment where the system is insensitive to the learners' different needs, this is likely to sideline specific learners' populations, preventing their full participation in the teaching and learning processes. This study aimed to explore how translanguaging can enhance an equitable language learning environment in additional English language classrooms. This systematic review addressed two research questions: How can translanguaging enhance an equitable language learning environment in additional English language classrooms? What are the hindrances to translingual practices in English first additional language learning? This data was retrieved from major databases, including Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and Web of Science. After identifying all the articles for the research review, we coded them according to the research questions and theoretical focus. The findings revealed that because of its global appeal in multilingual education, translanguaging has received a plethora of definitions; thus, presently, it has no absolute definition. Also, the paper reveals that translanguaging helps break the language barrier by enhancing the integration of the learners' home languages with the language of teaching and learning, which is English, in this context. Through translanguaging, teachers will employ learner-centred teaching and learning, and not a top-down approach, which is in line with the communicative approach to language teaching. Moreover, through translanguaging, language teachers can use the collaborative approach to language learning; it promotes teamwork, enhances communication skills, and allows for the exchange of diverse perspectives among students. Lastly, the paper shares that the current testing measures are devoid of multilingual approaches in language testing, though there is a call to include learners' multilingual repertoires in their constructs to reflect multilingual lifeworld.
Increasing linguistic diversity in higher education institutions across Southern Africa has highlighted translanguaging practices in academic discussions. In Zimbabwean universities, English serves as the official language of teaching and learning and international students frequently navigate complex multilingual settings that challenge conventional monolingual teaching methods. This study examines the challenges and opportunities associated with translanguaging practices among international students at a public university in Zimbabwe. The study aims to explore how international students use translanguaging in both academic and social settings, recognise the difficulties they face in largely English-medium environments and assess the potential advantages of translanguaging for achieving academic success and fostering inclusion. The research is grounded in translanguaging theory. A qualitative research approach was utilised and three focus group discussions were used as data collection methods. The groups comprised 17 international students studying at the chosen state university, enrolled in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) courses, from different nationalities and backgrounds. Participants were selected using purposive sampling. The data were analysed thematically to uncover recurring themes and insights. The study's findings indicated that translanguaging acts as an essential tool for constructing meaning, collaborating with peers and negotiating identity among international students. Nonetheless, institutional barriers, such as strict language policies and educators’ lack of understanding of translanguaging teaching methods, hinder its effective application. Students additionally expressed feelings of linguistic isolation and decreased involvement when confined to English-only practices. The research suggests that universities implement more adaptable language policies, offer training for instructors in multilingual teaching methods and establish supportive environments that acknowledge and utilise students' full linguistic skills. These measures may promote fairer and more efficient learning experiences for international students in Zimbabwean universities.
Despite extensive research on the language-related challenges that impede learners' comprehension and academic performance, gaps remain. There is inadequate exploration vis-à-vis how language-related challenges influence history learners’ epistemic access. Underpinned by Decoloniality theory, this study explores how language-related challenges learners encounter influence their epistemic access to History. A qualitative approach, guided by interpretivism and phenomenology, will drive this study. Purposive sampling was employed to select Grade 9 history learners, parents, and teachers. Semi-structured interviews were used alongside observations and document analysis. Thematic Analysis was employed to thematise our findings regarding the influence of LoLT on conceptual understanding, monolingualism as coloniality, lack of resource availability and use, and language in a multicultural space. Irrespective of the geographical and participants limitations of this study, the Department of Basic Education may find these results useful to conscientize other schools, with the similar context, of the language-related challenges that may impede learners’ epistemic access in history. It may encourage translanguaging pedagogy strategies such as the use of learners’ entire linguistic repertoire, semiotic resources, multimodality, parents and community involvement to be used to address the abovementioned language-related challenges. It is vital for teachers to be trained on implementing translanguaging pedagogy as well. Notwithstanding, more research needs to be undertaken which seeks to find innovative ways to increase parental and community involvement in history education, to enhance learners’ epistemic access in history.
This study investigates the contradictory role of missionary educators in the preservation of Tshivenda and other Indigenous languages in South Africa's Vhembe District from 1870 to 1950. This research utilises a decolonial theoretical framework, employing archival document analysis, historical textual analysis, and an examination of contemporary stakeholder perspectives to explore how missionary educators, operating within colonial systems for evangelical objectives, inadvertently established foundational resources for the preservation of Indigenous languages. The findings indicate that missionary educators functioned within a dual paradigm: advancing colonial linguistic dominance via assimilationist education while concurrently documenting, standardising, and safeguarding local languages through translation efforts, grammar formulation, and bilingual instructional methods. This preservation was inherently selective, emphasising religious material while sidelining traditional spiritual knowledge and dialectical diversity. The research illustrates that comprehending this intricate legacy is essential for modern language revitalisation efforts in post-apartheid South Africa, providing insights on leveraging historical linguistic foundations while mitigating their shortcomings through community-driven preservation initiatives that prioritise Indigenous cultural objectives over external interests.
Multilingualism also contributes to a more inclusive learning environment, reflecting the truth about the first and second language diversity of many?South Africa higher education (HE) students. This paper contributes to a multilingual perspective on the decolonization of knowledge in the teaching and learning practices at?South African higher education institutions. The study?aims to make sense of diverse conceptualisation of curriculum by the universities to examine students’ experiences on epistemic access in decolonisation discourses. A multilinguistic approach to curriculum work incorporates epistemological perspectives?while challenging the dominance of Eurocentric knowledge systems. Curriculum development?that resonates with local histories and global realities, is required in strengthening the relevancy of education in South African schools. In addition, the multilinguistic ideal is not only pedagogically beneficial, but also an important decolonising tool, making higher education in?South Africa reflective of its multilingual society and all students. A systematic qualitative literature review will be implemented in this study and the review process in this application will be?underpinned by literature and statistical evidence supplied by South African universities. This paper seeks to highlight that higher education can be supported to the fullest through reframing the social justice and?resilience theories. From a multilingual standpoint, the findings of this study will contribute to understandings of students’ perceptions of epistemic access and contribute towards the?epistemic decoloniality discourse in South African universities.
In a learning environment where the system is insensitive to the learners' different needs, this is likely to sideline specific learners' populations, preventing their full participation in the teaching and learning processes. This study aimed to explore how translanguaging can enhance an equitable language learning environment in additional English language classrooms. This systematic review addressed two research questions: How can translanguaging enhance an equitable language learning environment in additional English language classrooms? What are the hindrances to translingual practices in English first additional language learning? This data was retrieved from major databases, including Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and Web of Science. After identifying all the articles for the research review, we coded them according to the research questions and theoretical focus. The findings revealed that because of its global appeal in multilingual education, translanguaging has received a plethora of definitions; thus, presently, it has no absolute definition. Also, the paper reveals that translanguaging helps break the language barrier by enhancing the integration of the learners' home languages with the language of teaching and learning, which is English, in this context. Through translanguaging, teachers will employ learner-centred teaching and learning, and not a top-down approach, which is in line with the communicative approach to language teaching. Moreover, through translanguaging, language teachers can use the collaborative approach to language learning; it promotes teamwork, enhances communication skills, and allows for the exchange of diverse perspectives among students. Lastly, the paper shares that the current testing measures are devoid of multilingual approaches in language testing, though there is a call to include learners' multilingual repertoires in their constructs to reflect multilingual lifeworld.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |