an evaluation of the quality of education at mufungu basic school following the governments revision...
TRANSCRIPT
THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA
SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF POPULATION STUDIES
DEM 9114: MONITORING AND EVALUATION
TOPIC:
An Evaluation of the quality of Education at Mufungu Basic School following the government`s revision of the education policy among grade 1-4 pupils.
By
NKHUMBULANI CHAMBISHA (11057815), MOONGA NGOBEKA (11029901)
&
TREVOR MACHILA (11089148)
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Award of Bachelors of Arts Degree in
Demography
Coordinator:
MR. E. Tembo
© 1st June, 2015
ii
DECLARATION
We declare that this work is our own and that the work of other persons utilized in this evaluation
study has been acknowledged. This work presented here has not been previously presented at this
or any other university for similar purposes.
NAME SIGNATURE
1. NKHUMBULANI CHAMBISHA (11057815) ……………………………..
2. MOONGA NGOBEKA (11029901) ……………………………..
3. TREVOR MACHILA (11089148) ……………………………..
SUPERVISOR
Name Signature Date
…………………………………. ………………………… ……………………………..
iii
Table of contents
Declaration.................................................................................................................................................. vi
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... v
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. v
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................. vi
Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................................................... vii
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. viii
1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 Statement Of The Problem................................................................................................................... 5
4.0 Programme Goal: .................................................................................................................................. 5
4.1 Programme Objective: ......................................................................................................................... 6
5.0 Evaluation Objectives: .......................................................................................................................... 6
5.1 Evaluation Questions: ........................................................................................................................... 6
4.2 Indicators ............................................................................................................................................... 6
6.0 Logic Model ........................................................................................................................................... 7
7.0 Evaluation Approach ............................................................................................................................ 8
7.1 Type of Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 9
8.0 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 8
8.1 Evaluation Design ................................................................................................................................... 9
8.2 Sampling Size and Sampling Procedure ................................................................................................. 9
8.3 Data Collection Method ........................................................................................................................ 10
8.4 Data Processing And Analysis .............................................................................................................. 10
9.0 Limitations of the Study ..................................................................................................................... 11
10.0 Ethical Considerations ...................................................................................................................... 11
11.0 Evaluation Findings .......................................................................................................................... 12
11.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics .................................................................................................... 12
11.2. Reading Outside School. .................................................................................................................... 13
11.3. Access To Reading Material .............................................................................................................. 13
11.4 Basic Literacy Among Respondents At Mufungu Basic School ........................................................ 14
11.5 Numeracy Among Respondents At Mufungu Basic School ............................................................... 15
11.6 Findings From Interviews With Teachers ........................................................................................... 15
11.7 Findings From Observations ............................................................................................................... 16
iv
12.0 Discussion Of Findings ..................................................................................................................... 16
12.0 Conclusion and Recommendations .................................................................................................. 18
12.1 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 18
12.1 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 19
References .................................................................................................................................................. 20
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................. 22
Appendix A: Administered Pupil Questionnaire ........................................................................................ 22
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Schedule .................................................................................................. 27
Appendix C: Observation Checklist ........................................................................................................... 28
Appendix C: List of Interviewees ............................................................................................................... 28
v
List of Tables Table 1: Socio-Demographic Characteristics Of Respondents ................................................................... 12
Table 2: Mean Scores (Standard Deviation) Per Grade On Word Reading Tests). .................................... 14
Table 3: Mean Numeracy Test Scores Among Respondents At Mufungu Basic School By Grade ........... 15
Table 4: Number Of Pupils Per Books By Grade ....................................................................................... 16
List of Figures Figure 1: Percentage Distribution Of Whether Pupil Reads At Home Or Not. .......................................... 13
Figure 2: Percentage Distribution Of Respondents With Access To Reading Material ............................ 14
vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CSO : Central Statistical office
ESRC : Economic and Social Research Council
ICT : Information and Communications Technologies
MOE : Ministry of Education.
SACMEC : Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality
UNZA : University of Zambia
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our sincere gratitude and appreciation to our supervisor/Lecturer, Mr. E.
Tembo for his kindness, guidance, encouragement and careful revision of our work. Without him
this evaluation report would not have been possible.
We would like to record our gratitude to the All the Lecturers from the Department of Population
studies at The University of Zambia, for their academic support throughout the period of our study
at the University of Zambia (UNZA).
We also wish to extend our appreciation to Mr. K. M. Ngobeka the headmaster for Mufungu Basic
School, Mr. J. Moomba the deputy Headmaster, Mr. H. Maambo and all the members of staff at
Mufungu Basic School, for the positive assistance that we received during our data collection
process. Additionally, we would like to record our gratefulness to the pupils of Mufungu Basic
School for the cooperation that they rendered unto us during the collection of data.
Finally, our sincere thanks also go to the Government of the Republic of Zambia through the
Bursaries Committee for the financial support. If we were not sponsored, it would not have been
easy for us to settle all the costs encountered during the study.
viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on an evaluation study aimed at assessing the improvements in the quality of
education following the government`s decision to change the education policy. A case study of
Mufungu Basic School, Pemba Southern province.
The evaluation design was cross-sectional and non-experimental in nature as it was done at one
point in time and had no control group for comparison. The evaluation revealed that although the
pupils exhibited basic literacy and numeracy sill, the quality of education is moderately low as the
school does not have all the necessary teaching materials which are in line with the
recommendations of the new education curriculum.
The evaluation findings show that the new education policy is not fully implemented and in parts
where it is followed, the impact is minimal as teaching materials are not enough to cover all the
syllabus requirements. The school faces challenges of scarcity of books as well as lack of training
and retraining programmes to meet the requirements of the new education curriculum.
It’s also worthy to mention that, the evaluation findings are affected by both internal and external
validity threats, the external validity threats include the sample size which was too small to allow
generalization to the entire population of Mufungu Basic School pupils.
With regard to recommendations, the government of the republic of Zambia need to procure
more of all the teaching materials so as to strength the delivery of education to all pupils at
Mufungu Basic School and indeed across the nation.
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents an evaluation of the quality of education at Mufungu Basic School in Pemba
district of southern province, following the government`s change of the new education curriculum.
The programme was introduced to address the changes in the quality of education in Zambia. The
target population comprises all pupils at Mufungu basic school. The program has been running
from 2011 up to date. It is a formative kind of evaluation, and will seek to assess the changes in
the quality of education for the target population following the changes in the education
curriculum. The methodology used is both quantitative and qualitative so as to provide in depth
understanding since both methods manifests themselves differently and have their own prones and
cones. The quantitative method is that which looks at figures usually expressed in terms of numbers
or percentages, while the qualitative method is expressed in terms of words, concepts, things or
categories rather than numbers. The combination of the two gives an in depth understanding of the
respondents.
2.0 BACKGROUND
In 1965, English was introduced as a medium of instruction form grade one up to university
(Chanda, 2008).The sole aim was to unify the country. However, due to limited teaching materials
in English, local languages were used as medium of instruction in unscheduled led schools (i.e.
schools for Africans) until such a time when materials and teachers were available. With the
passing of time, performance of children in reading and literacy skills was poor and hence by 1975-
1976 government through the Ministry of Education carried a study to find out the root cause of
poor performance. The recommendation on language was that local languages should be used as
medium of instruction from grade one up to grade 4. Unfortunately there recommendation was not
included in the final 1977 educational reform document and English continued being used as a
medium of instruction.
The 1992 education policy document on education, “Focus on Learning” pointed that the role of
education should be to promote knowledge acquisition. However, the policy still upheld the use
of English as a medium of exchange. The 1996 reform document “Educating our future” upheld
English as the official medium of instruction though it was suggested that learners should learn
initial literacy in a local language in grade one so that literacy in English could be introduced in
2
grade two. The decision was done to the low reading levels in Zambia (Nkamba and Kanyika,
1998). According to the 1995 study undertaken by SACMEC (Southern and Eastern Africa
Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality) 25 % of grade 6 could read at a minimum level
of proficiency and only 3 % at a specified desirable. Among the contributing factors were “lack of
reading materials at home and in the surroundings, absence of or failing of pre-school education,
scarcity of books, and a whole language method that did not pay systematic attention to Phonics”
(Tambulukani, 2011). The major contributing factor to delay in reading was due to initial reading
in English, a language that is unfamiliar to the majority of children.
Most research on reading in pre-school, lower basic and middle basic school of Zambia (now
primary) reveal that the reading levels are low. Lungu (2006:40) observed that “over the years,
many educators in English language teaching and learning in the lower primary school sector have
expressed fears that reading levels are low especially in grades 1 to 4”
In 1993, Eddy Williams (et al) conducted a study on reading levels in grades three, four and five,
both in English and Nyanja, one of the four Zambia local languages. In the study, it was revealed
that there were very low reading levels (Kotze & Higgins 1999). According to Nkosha (1992) the
essence of teaching reading comprehension is to help pupils to understand full and learn from a
particular piece of writing. This means that pupils who do not understand what they are learning
cannot be considered to be learning.
As a result of the low literacy level, the government through the ministry of education instituted
deliberate measures aimed at raising reading achievement levels in the country. The Primary
Reading Programme (PRP) and the New Break Through to Literacy were introduced with the
primary objective of improving the reading skills of all Zambian school going children. From its
inception, PRP aimed at teaching children how to read and write in their first grade, through the
use of mother tongue as medium of instruction. A pilot study was carried in Kasama and evaluated
in 1999. According to the evaluation report, Matafwali (2005) highlighted that Non-NBTL grade
two pupils were virtually unable to read while those under NBTL could read.
As of January 13- 2014, the government of the republic of Zambia implemented the new education
Curriculum. Under the leadership of President Michael Chilufya Sata (may his soul rest in peace),
a new national curriculum framework was introduced, which was officially launched at Lusaka’s
3
Munali Secondary School in 2014. Before this development, Zambia used a curriculum which was
based on the 1966 repealed Education Act. The then Minister of Education Dr. John Phiri observed
that Zambia needed to revise the education curriculum as the 1966 Education Act had become “in
many ways archaic and required serious attention.” (Ministerial Statement to Parliament, 21st
February 2014). The new curriculum is currently being implemented at pre-school, grade 1, grade
5, grade 8 and grade 10.
A curriculum can be regarded as a course of study to be followed in the process of acquiring
education (Brennan 1985). In other worlds, a curriculum can be defined as a set of goals, content
to be taught and teaching methods. It can also be defined as a specification of the desired
knowledge, competencies, skills, values and Attitudes which school going children need to
achieve. A curriculum includes an overall plan of how the schools are to achieve these goals,
detailing syllabuses, time tables, recommended text books, examination requirements, and other
Ministry directives affecting teaching and learning, (MOE, 2000:6)
The new curriculum framework offers learners with a choice of career pathways at secondary
school; either academic or vocational pathways. This responds to the developmental needs of the
nation as well as those of the individual learner by according learners an opportunity to progress
according to their abilities and interests.
The new education curriculum incorporated the learning of Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) at primary and secondary school level so as to create ICT awareness among
learners. Alas, the biggest challenge has been the lack of availability of learning materials and
equipment for ICT. However, the move will in the long run improve relevance of the education
sector due to a world that is becoming more and more computerized. The education curriculum
was reviewed to incorporate entrepreneurship and Information Communication Technology-ICT-
skills with a view that school leavers should have entrepreneurship and ICT skills when they
complete school. Furthermore, the new education curriculum will enable school leavers become
self-employed because of survival skills they will have acquired at school.
It has been recognized that the curriculum used in Zambia until lately was compartmentalized,
overloaded, and inflexible. It is therefore important to evaluate the quality of education in Zambia
4
specifically at Mufungu Basic School following the implementation of the new Education
Curriculum.
Mufungu Basic School is one of the old schools in Pemba District. The school was commisioned
in the year 1931 by the Jesuit Fathers of Chikuni Catholic in Monze District of southern province
of Zambia. The school has a total number of 444 pupils of which 209 are males and 235 are
females. The school has 11 members of staff of which 7 are males and 5 are females. The school
is currently running morning and afternoon classes due to inadequate infrastructure to handle all
the pupils at the same time. The school has 8 classrooms which are insufficient to accommodate
all the pupils at once or at normal times. Regardless of the above challenges, the school has
increased the grade one enrolment from 20-30% in the past 5 years to more than 40% in 2014 and
2015. Mufungu Basic School has been facing a number of challenges, among the challenges that
the school has been facing is deterioration in the teaching and learning environment, which has
not improved much despite the change of the education Curriculum and increase in pupil
enrolments.
The increase in the student enrolment, at all levels, has taken place in a situation where there is
lack of physical expansion in facilities to accommodate the ever increasing demand for education
and the consequential increase in enrolment. The school has continued to experience dilapidation
and deterioration of the physical infrastructure making it very difficult to have a favourable
teaching and learning environment. Furthermore, the introduction of the new education curriculum
has worsened the teaching environment in a way that some of the new subjects demand for the use
of computers of which the school does not have. The situation has also been compounded by the
shortage of academic staff. This has led to excessively high teacher-pupil ratio. In such a situation
the quality of teaching and learning tends to be compromised, especially given the inadequate
library facilities and lack of the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in the
development and delivery of instructional resources.
Following the change of the education curriculum, it is therefore to evaluate the quality of
education among the pupils and specifically Mufungu basic school pupils in Pemba district in
southern province.
5
3.0 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Prior to the implementation of the new education curriculum in 2014, Zambian schools used
English as the main medium of instruction for the seven years of the primary school course.
Various studies and research showed that Zambian students were performing below grade level in
both English and local languages. Williams (1991) found out that reading levels among 452
students from five different schools were poor in both English and the local language, Cinyanja.
Further, most students were reading at two levels below their appropriate 3 grade level (Sampa,
2003). Also, a report from the Ministry of Education showed that only 25% of sixth grade students
could read at minimum levels and only 3% at desirable levels as of 1995.
The 2010 Census population and housing report revealed that the literacy rate at national level was
only 70.2 percent. Literacy rates for rural and urban areas were 60.5 and 83.8 percent, respectively.
Males had a higher literacy rate (73.2 percent) than females (67.3 percent). At provincial level
(southern), the literacy rate was at 71.2 per cent which was comparatively low. The highest
literacy rates in 2010 was recorded for Copperbelt (83.1 percent) followed by Lusaka (83.0
percent). Eastern Province had the lowest literacy rate at 54.4 percent, (CSO, 2012).
Therefore, it became obvious that an intervention had to be made in order to change these
unacceptable results according to the current standard of the world we are living in. Finally, in
2014, the new educational policy, which required the use of local language as a medium of
instruction, was implemented. As policy, local languages are being used as a medium of instruction
and English remains being taught as subject to help children achieve initial literacy skills. The
curriculum also requires the use of computers in order to enhance ICT knowledge and skill among
pupils. Therefore, there is need to evaluate the programme in order to find out the ICT awareness
as well as literacy and numeracy competence among primary school learners following the change
in the education curriculum.
4.0 PROGRAMME GOAL: The goal of the programme is to:
To promote and improve the quality of education among pupils in Zambia.
6
4.1 PROGRAMME OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the new education Curriculum are outlined below:
i) To improve literacy knowledge and skill among primary school pupils in Zambia.
ii) To improve numeracy knowledge among primary school pupils in Zambia.
iii) To improve basic technological knowledge among pupils in Zambia.
5.0 EVALUATION OBJECTIVES: i) To find out whether primary school pupils are able to read and write at Mufungu Basic
School.
ii) To determine whether primary school pupils have numeracy knowledge at Mufungu Basic
School.
iii) To determine whether pupils have basic computer knowledge at Mufungu Basic School.
iv) To find out whether school personnel (teachers) at Mufungu Basic School are adhering to
guidelines stipulated in new education curriculum in 2014.
5.1 EVALUATION QUESTIONS: The evaluation seeks to answer the questions outlined below to assess the progress made by the
new education curriculum at Mufungu Basic School are:
1. Are pupils using computers?
2. Does the school have computers?
3. Are the teaching personnel adhering to the stipulated guidelines?
4. Has the school incorporated the suggested methods of teaching?
5. Are the pupils able to read and write in a familiar language?
6. Does the school have adequate learning/teaching material?
7. Do pupils have adequate numeracy knowledge?
4.2 INDICATORS Below are indicators that have been identified to measure the achievement of the objectives.
1. Percentage of pupils who are able to read and write in a familiar language.
2. Percentage of pupils with technological knowledge.
3. Proportion of pupils with basic numeracy knowledge.
4. Number of teachers adhering to the new curriculum methodology.
5. Overall performance of the pupils
7
6.0 LOGIC MODEL
1. Schools are supplied with the
required Materials on time.
2. Teacher training and retraining
programmes have been structured.
3. Teachers are adhering to the new
teaching methodology.
4. Teachers are trained in ICT and are
Familiar in Language of instruction.
Financial Resources
Teaching Staff
Syllabus
Teaching/Learning Material
Computers
Learning of basic literacy
skill in Familiar
Language of instruction
Teaching of numeracy skill
in Familiar Language of instruction
Teaching/Training of pupils
in ICTs.
Improved basic literacy skill among
pupils
Improved basic
numeracy skill among pupils
Improved basic ICT
knowledge among pupils
Improved quality of Education
among pupils
Assumptions Inputs Activities [Strategies]
Outcome [Goal]
Output [Objectives]
Indicators
Percentage of pupils with
basic literacy skill
Percentage of pupils with improved
basic
Proportion of pupils wit Improved
basic ICT skill
Number of pupils with access to quality
Education
Programme Goal = To promote and improve the quality of education among pupils in Zambia.
Target Group = Primary School Pupils in Zambia
8
7.0 EVALUATION APPROACH
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the new education curriculum on improving the quality of
education in Zambia, the evaluation used both qualitative and quantitative data collection
instruments. This Mixed approach is necessary as the evaluation seeks to collect quantitative data
as well as in-depth information about the programme. The quantitative approach collected data
that is numerical in nature while the qualitative approach collected explanatory type of
information. However, the evaluation weighs more on the quantitative approach than the
qualitative one. The evaluation design is a non-experimental one that is there is not control group
for comparison to assess and attribute changes due to the programme.
In terms of the research paradigm, the evaluation employs positivism and interpretivism to guide
the perception of the whole process. The positivism paradigm applies to the quantitative part of
the evaluation. The positivism paradigm is mostly used for such evaluations collecting quantitative
data. The positivism paradigm is based on the premise that it is possible to be truly objective when
studying reality as one can suspend his/her own values as an evaluator such that the findings can
be generalized to the rest of the population.
The positivism paradigm provides an opportunity for an evaluation to determine quantitative
changes in terms of set targets by the programme objectives. The positivism paradigm also puts
one in a position of control with technical expertise and sees things objectively rather than
subjective. However, the positivism paradigm has been criticized and is seen not to be the best
paradigm for evaluation of primary health care programmes. The positivism paradigm has been
criticized as it is seen not to be participatory involving the community or clients. It is also seen to
be inducing a political aspect based on the decisions made on the programme’s performance.
The interpretivism paradigm is employed in the qualitative part of the evaluation, this enables the
collection of in-depth and explanatory information about the quality of education. The
interpretivism paradigm is premised on the assumption that knowledge and meaning are a product
of interpretation of one’s perception of the situation, and as a result there is no objective knowledge
which is devoid of thinking and reasoning (Gephart, 1999). Hence, the interpretivism approach
seeks an in depth understanding and interpretation of the situation by the people.
9
7.1 TYPE OF EVALUATION
This is a process evaluation, a kind of formative evaluation of an intervention usually conducted
during the program/project. Its purpose is to understand the factors of success or failure as the
program is going so as to correct the failure at a tender stage. Such a type of evaluation is done to
assess if the program/project is moving towards the set objectives and goals.
8.0 METHODOLOGY
The evaluation study area is Mufungu Basic School in Pemba district southern province, with a
population of about 500 pupils and 10 staff. The school is a natural setting with a population of
diverse personalities and characteristics. It provides an environment for enhanced teaching and
learning so as to ensure excellence in teaching and learning.
The selection of Mufungu Basic school in southern province is no a geographically representative
sample. The sampling is descriptive rather than based on random sampling, a procedure which
shortage of time and resources made impossible. This means that the evaluation is in a selected
school rather than a random sampled. The generalization made are accordingly logical rather than
statistical, (Kamil, Langer and Shanahan, 1985: 53).
8.1 Evaluation design
The study used a cross-sectional non-experimental design. The design was adopted in that the
evaluation was a one-time-one and no control group was used. The study had both external and
internal threats to validity. Internal validity could have resulted from the use of close-ended
questions.
External validity of the evaluation emanate from the fact that purposive sampling instead of
probabilistic sampling was used. This means that the sample studied was not representative of all
schools and the findings realised cannot therefore be generalized to the whole.
8.2 Sampling size and sampling procedure
The study used purposive sampling in the selection of the school rather than randomly selected
due to constraints in time and money. Therefore, the generalizations are rather logical than
statistical. Pupils at Mufungu Basic School were randomly selected. Random selection was used
to select 26 pupils from grade 1, 2, 5 and 6 from the current class registers. The criterion was
effective as it accorded each pupil from the listed grades to have an equal and non-zero chance of
10
being included in the sample. Four teachers, one form each grade sampled, and the Headmaster
were sampled.
8.3 Data collection method
Data collection was conducted starting from 12th May to 15th May, 2015. The evaluation collected
both quantitative and qualitative data. This was achieved through interviews with teachers,
observation checklist as well administered questionnaires with pupils.
An administered questionnaire with closed-ended questions and test was developed to collect
quantitative data from pupils. Test were obtained from the prescribed text books. Consent was
sought from all the pupils by use of the introduction on the cover page of the questionnaire. Two
tests were administered to pupils to assess word reading fluency, one in the Zambian language of
instruction, Tonga and one in English. Additional literacy test administered were word finding as
well as listening comprehension. As there were no standard language and reading tests currently
available, tests were devised based on the appropriate English and Chi Tonga course books.
Numeracy tests were conducted in addition and subtraction, (see appendix A).
Another instrument, an interview schedule was developed to collect qualitative and quantitative
dada from teachers (See Appendix B). Interviews were recorded using a recorder on a smartpone
phone. An Observation checklists was used to capture teaching method adherence observed during
lessons (see appendix C).
The two research instruments were pre-tested to pupils at the Kalingalinga Basic School before
the actual data collection. The pre-test assisted in fine-tuning some questions and the overall
logical sequence of the instruments.
8.4 Data Processing and Analysis
The data collected using the questionnaires were checked for uniformity, consistency and
accuracy. The raw data collected was subject to coding, for fast and efficient processing of data
with appropriate computer software. Data entry was done using MS-EXCEL. This program was
ideal for quantitative data. The data was then exported to statistical package for social sciences
software (SPSS) for further analysis. Frequency tables and cross tabulations were then produced
and graphs also were created using SPSS. Frequency tables and graphs were used to facilitate the
11
findings. For qualitative data (recordings) from interviews were transcribed and analyzed using
content analysis of text to summarize the views of the teachers.
9.0 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The evaluation study was constrained in terms of time to further explore the issues of the quality
of education. This means that the sample was not representative of the entire student population
and thus the findings are only limited to the sample. Therefore, no generalisation can to be made
to the entire population of primary school pupil. The limitation in terms of generalisation comes
in also because of the use of purposive sampling which is not probability based.
Further, the study was unable to capture information from the implementers of the education
curriculum, the Ministry of Education. This due to the fact that researchers were unable to schedule
interviews with stakeholders from the ministry and by the time of writing this report, interviews
were not scheduled. This implies that the views of the Ministry of Education officials are not
represented in this report.
Furthermore, the evaluation study did have baseline data about the pupils prior to the
implementation of curriculum in 2014 and therefore could not good pupil performance to entire
the new education curriculum.
10.0 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Prior to investigation, the researchers obtained initial consent from the gatekeepers (that is, Parents
and Headteacher) as required by the general ethical clearance guidelines (ESRC, 2015). Parents to
pupils were notified about the study through the Headteacher. Additionally, consent was also
obtained from participating pupils before collection of data and they were reminded that
participation was voluntary and would withdraw from the exercise if they so wished.
Teachers were assured of confidentiality and that the study was purely for academic purpose and
that no information would be used otherwise.
12
11.0 EVALUATION FINDINGS
11.1 Socio-demographic Characteristics
A total of 26 respondents were captured in the study and Table 1 provides a summary of some of
their socio-demographic characteristics which included; age, sex and grade.
Table 1: Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents at Mufungu Basic School, Pemba District
Characteristics Frequency Percentage
Age 6 1 3.8 7 1 3.8 8 4 15.4 9 5 19.2 10 6 23.1 11 2 7.7 12 3 11.5 13 2 7.7 14 2 7.7 Total 26 100
Sex Male 14 53.8 Female 12 46.2 Total 26 100
Grade Grade 1 7 26.9 Grade 2 7 26.9 Grade 5 7 26.9 Grade 6 5 19.2 Total 26 100
The sample also shows that there were slightly more males than females (54 percent versus 46
perceent). In tems of Grade, there were 8 percent fewer grade 6 respondents compared to the rest
of the grades sampled.
The majority of respondents were 10 years old and nine years old (23.1 and 19.2 percent,
respectively. Thity-five percent were aged above 10 years and 22 percent were below 9 years old.
13
11.2. Reading outside school.
Pupil reading at home has a bearing on literacy and overall performance of the pupil in class. Pupils
where asked whether they read at home with or without help. Figure 1 shows the distribution of
students who read or do not read.
Figure 1: Percentage distribution of whether pupil reads at home or not.
Figure 1 shows that, the vast majority (77 percent) of respondents read at home compared to 23
percent do not read at home.
11.3. Access to reading material
Just as pupil’s ability to read at home, pupil’s access to reading materials also plays a fundamental
role in enhancing pupil learning. Figure 2 shows the percentage distribution of respondents with
have reading material.
The majority (58 percent) of respondents do not have reading material, whether in any language
of instruction at home compared to 42 percent who have
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Reads at Home Does Not Read atHome
76.9%
23.1%
Per
cent
age
Response
14
Figure 2: Percentage distribution of respondents with access to reading material
11.4 Basic Literacy among respondents at Mufungu Basic School
In order to find out the basic literacy among pupils, a reading test of familiar words course books
at grade 4 and below, both in English and Chi Tonga, was administered to pupils. The tests each
had a maximum score of 20 points. Table 3 below shows the descriptive statistics of the test.
Table 2: Mean scores (Standard Deviation) per grade on word reading tests).
Grade
Reading Test score in English
(Max=100)
Reading Test score in Tonga
(Max=100)
Grade 1 23.57
(33.00) 19.29
(36.34)
Grade 2 41.43
(38.59) 50.71
(47.65)
Grade 5 73.57
(14.06) 80.71
(31.68)
Grade 6 91.00
(13.42) 95.00
(11.18)
Total 54.81
(37.13) 58.85
(44.44)
Pupils’ mean scores in reading test ranged from 19 % (SD=19.29) to 95% (SD = 11.18). Overall
pupils had higher scores in Chi Tonga reading test than English (55% versus 59%) indicating that
42.3%
57.7%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Have Reading Material Do not have ReadingMaterial
Per
cent
age
Response
15
pupils were more familiar with the vocabulary of Chi Tonga (The Language of instruction) than
with English.
11.5 Numeracy among respondents at Mufungu Basic School
To determine basic numeracy skill, pupils were given a numeracy test based on course books at
grade 4 and below. Table 3, shows the summary descriptive statistics of the numeracy test.
Overall, pupils the mean score was 55 percent indicating that pupils have minimum numeracy
skill at primary level. The mean lowest 0 and the highest was 90 percent
Table 3: Mean numeracy test scores among respondents at Mufungu Basic School by Grade
Grade Mean Std.
DeviationRange Maximum Minimum Median
Grade 1 37.86 26.75 75 95 20 25
Grade 2 45 23.8 70 70 0 45
Grade 5 57.86 23.43 60 95 35 50
Grade 6 90 3.54 10 95 85 90
Total 55.19 28.27 95 95 0 50
11.6 Findings from Interviews with Teachers
In addition to the quantitative data that was collected, interviews with teachers at Mufungu Basic
School were also conducted. The interview captured the worldview of the teachers about the new
education curriculum. Teachers interviewed were grade teachers for each of the grades sampled.
All the 4 participants argued that the new education curriculum is more effective to pupil learning.
However, teachers argued that the implementation of the new education has come with a number
of challenges. Challenges faced by the school following the introduction of the new curriculum
are reflected in the following extracts from interviews with teachers
a) “The new curriculum is very good but there is lack of supporting books
like pupils books to match with the syllabus of the new curriculum. Even
when the books are supplied, the not supplied in good time and are not
enough compared to the required number of books”.
b) “The school is lacking teaching and reading resources and there is a
poor retraining programme”.
16
Generally, the most of the teachers have much confidence in the new education curriculum
compared to the old curriculum to improve the quality of education.
Further, teachers were asked the number of pupils and books, both Tonga and English, in each
class. Table 4, shows a summary of the number of pupils per book.
Table 4: Number of Pupils per books by Grade
Grade Number of Course Books
Number of
Pupils in Class
Number of pupils per book
Tonga
English Tonga Course Book
English Course book
Grade 1 29 30 55 1.90 1.83 Grade 2 20 25 40 2.00 1.60 Grade 5 6 5 53 8.83 10.60 Grade 6 32 50 54 1.69 1.08
Generally, there is a shortage of books among pupils. About 11 and 9 grade 5 pupils share 1
English and Tonga text book. Overall, at least two pupils a book.
11.7 Findings from Observations
In order to evaluate the teachers are following teaching methodology as well as determining
whether school uses computers, the researchers used an observation checklist. Observations were
made in English, Tonga lessons and Mathematics lessons.
All teachers used the stipulated language of instruction (Chi Tonga). However, 1 out of the 4
teachers did not pay attention to phonics, word building (spellings) and initial letter sounds.
Further, the school did not have computers required to teach ICT skill.
12.0 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The evaluation findings show that pupils at Mufungu basic school have basic knowledge in literacy
and numeracy. However, pupil reading at grade five especially in English compared to Tonga is
low. This is in line with the study by Chikalanga (1990: 69) which reports the conclusion of another
1973 Zambian study of 583 pupils at year 5, namely readers in most classes and they are unlikely
to be able to cope with the English course nor be able to do much of the work in other subjects.
Further, a Zambian review found in 1992 that “too earl an emphasis on learning through English
17
means the majority of children form hazy and indistinct concepts in language, mathematics,
science and social studies. A number of studies show that children’s subsequent learning has been
impaired by this policy” (Ministry of Education, 1992: 28)
Practicing reading in a familiar Zambian language (chi Tonga) is also an incentive for learning to
read in English probably because a better understanding of the relationship between spelling and
phonology in the Zambian language as a result of learning in a familiar language facilitates
learning to read in English.
The poor overall performance of Zambians in reading Tonga is probably due to two reasons. First
the variety of language used in the text, and second lack of exposure to written Tonga. Lack of
exposure to written Tonga, contributes Zambian pupils’ low achievement in reading it. Not only
are Zambian languages not used as media of instruction, they are also neglected as subjects in
primary school teaching, since they “do not contribute in any way to the overall mark for secondary
selection” (Ministry of Education, 1992: 45).
All the grade 6 pupils showed basic literacy skill in both English and Tonga, contrary to a 1995
study in Zambia conducted under the f SACMEQ which found that only 25% of Grade 6 pupils
could read at a minimum level of proficiency and only 3% at a specified desirable level (Ministry
of Education 1995).
The evaluation also showed that the use local languages has not been effectively resolved
education quality among pupils. The school still faces challenges of shortages of learning books
and teaching materials. Even if Zambians learned to read in a familiar language of instruction,
there are few Tonga books for pupils. Moreover, these test results suggest there is little learning
going on in English either.
Further, there are poor retraining programmes of teachers as required by the new education
curriculum. Even though most teachers paid attention to letter sounds and spellings, they did not
pay attention to phonics which is required at lower grade level. Teachers also lack knowledge in
ICT which has an effect on the administering lessons in computers.
Furthermore, Mufungu basic school and probably many other schools around the country
especially in rural areas do not offer an environment that is conducive to learning in line with the
18
new education policy. This is because some of the programs that are integrated in the new
education curriculum are nowhere to be seen. For example, almost all the schools in rural areas
(Mufungu basic school inclusive) do not have accessing to computers. Above all even the teachers
themselves were not retrained to handle the demands of the new education curriculum. E.g. the
use of computers. It’s worth to mention that, the Problems relating to integrating information and
communication technology (ICT) need much attention.
These findings are in line with what national studies in Zambia that have revealed that the major
contributing factor to the delay of poor initial reading is lack of reading material at home and in
the surroundings, absence of or failing preschool education, scarcity of books, a whole-language
method that did not pay systematic attention to phonics, up to 80 pupils per classroom, and loss of
teachers because of HIV/AIDS, (Williams 1993; Kelly 1995; Ministry of Education 1996;
Williams and Mchazime 1999; Tambulukani et al. 2001; Sampa 2003; Heugh 2006).
Despite these challenges faced at Mufungu Basic School, there is room for improvement of the
implementation of the new education curriculum.
12.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
12.1 Conclusion
This evaluation study using a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches with
positivism and interpretivism paradigms has attempted to evaluate the quality of education among
grade 1 to 4 pupils at Mufungu Basic School. The evaluation design is non-experimental as no
control group was used for comparison.
The evaluation revealed that pupils showed basic literacy and numeracy skill. However, most
teachers did not pay attention to phonics as required by the new education curriculum. However,
there is scarcity of reading and teaching resource, untimely supply of learning materials as well as
poor retraining of teachers.
The areas of concern which should be given attention in education institutions so as to provide
quality education are inadequate student support services, inadequate channels of communication,
inadequate training and professional development, problems relating to integrating information
19
and communication technology in education delivery, problems concerning instructional materials
and problems relating to staffing. The introduction of the new curriculum is not an end but a means
to an end. The implementation the programme should also pay attention to challenges faced by the
schools
12.1 Recommendations
The recommendations from the Evaluation:
1. Extending library facilities, The Ministry of Education through the Zambia Library Service
and cooperating partners should establish libraries in schools/areas where there are no
libraries and equip them with books as indicated in the 1996 Zambia National Policy on
Education. The Ministry should also stock the libraries in the existing learning institutions
with appropriate books.
2. Accentuating continuing professional development The Ministry of Education, through the
Directorate of Open and Distance Education, should ensure that institutions that offer teacher
education programmes have their teachers continuously trained in the latest education
methodology.
3. The government through the Ministry of Education must ensure the integration of ICT in
education delivery across the country by equipping schools ICTs.
4. The Ministry of Education, should assist all learning institutions with integrating ICT into
the education delivery. Information communication technology digital learning facilitates
include access to various collections such as journals, magazines, books and websites.
5. The Ministry of Educaiton, should supply teaching and learning materials on time.
20
REFERENCES
Brenna W. H. (1985) Curriculum for Special Needs, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Chanda, C. (2008) Teaching and learning of English in Secondary School. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Chikalanga, I.W. (1990), Inferencing in the reading process, Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Reading: University of Reading.
Central Statistical Office (CSO) (2012). Population and Housing Census Report. Lusaka: CSO.
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) (2015). The Research Ethics Guidebook. Available at www.ethicsguidebook.ac.uk/research-with-childern-105. Viewed on 1st June, 2015.
Heugh, K. 2006. ‘Theory and practice – language education models in Africa: research, design, decision- making and outcomes.’ Paper presented at the ADEA Biennial Meeting, Libreville, Gabon.
Kotze, H. & Higgins (1999). Breakthrough to Ichibemba Pilot Project: An Evaluation Report. Lusaka: Ministry of Education.
Lungu, E. C. (2006.). The Effectiveness of Communicative Approaches and Traditional Methods on Reading and Writing Achievements in English in Grade Eight in Selected Zambian Basic Schools. PhD Dissertation. University of Zambia, Lusaka.
Matafwali, B (2005) Nature and Prevalence of Reading difficulties in the Third Grade: Lusaka and Rural and Urban schools. M.ED Thesis, University of Zambia, Lusaka.
Ministerial Statement to Parliament, 21st February 2014).
Ministry of Education (Zambia) (1995). The Zambian National Reading Forum: Final Report and Recommendations. Ministry of Education (Zambia), Lusaka.
Ministry of Education (Zambia) (1996). Educating our Future. Ministry of Education (Zambia), Lusaka.
Ministry of Education [Zambia] (1992), Focus on learning, Lusaka, Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education (2000) The Basic School Curriculum Framework: Curriculum Development
Centre, Lusaka
Phiri J N. Statement on the New School Curriculum to Be Presented To the National Assembly. February, 2014
Sampa, F. K. (2003). Country Case Study Republic of Zambia. Primary Reading Programma (PRG): Improving Access and Quality Education in Basic Schools. Biennial Meeting of Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA).
Tambulukani G & A. G. Bus (2011) Linguistic Diversity: A Contributing Factor to Reading Problems in Zambian Schools. ELT journal. Available at
21
http://applij.oxfordjounals.org/content/early/2011/11/04applin.amro3. Viewed on 20th April, 2014.
Williams, E. (1993), “First and second reading proficiency of year 3, 4 and 6 children in Malawi and Zambia”, Reading in a Foreign Language 10(1), 915-29.
Williams, E. and H. Mchazime. 1999. ‘Bilingual literacy: evidence from Malawi’ in S. Manaka,’ Proceedings of the 1st Pan-African Conference on Reading for All. International Reading Association, pp. 218–27.
22
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Administered Pupil Questionnaire
Questionnaire Identity…….
THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA
SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
DEPARTMENT OF POPULATION STUDIES
MONITORING AND EVALUATION (DEM 9114)
TOPIC:
An Evaluation of the quality of Education at Mufungu Basic School following the government`s revision of the education policy among grade 1-4 pupils.
Consent
Hello! My name is ______________. I am from the University of Zambia (UNZA), Lusaka and we are trying to understand how you pupils learn at school. I am going to ask some questions and if you do not want to participate, you can say so.
We are also going to play some games in English and Maths. This will not affect your grades (results) in class. Do you have any Question? Remember, you do not have to participate if you do not want to.
23
SECTION A: BACK GROUND INFORMATION
Question #
Questions Tick [√] answer For official use only
1. How Old are you? ……………
2. What is your sex? 1. Male 2. Female
[ ] [ ]
3. What Grade are you in? 1. Grade 1 2. Grade 2 3. Grade 5 4. Grade 6
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
5. What language do you speak at home?
1. Chi Tonga 2. Lozi 3. Nyanja 4. Bemba 5. English 6. Other
(specify)…………..
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
6. In what grade did you come to this School?
1. Grade 1 2. Grade 2 3. Grade 3 4. Grade 4 5. Grade 5 6. Grade 6
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
7. Do you read at home (By yourself) 1. Yes 2. No
[ ] [ ]
8. Does anyone else help to read or do your homework at home?
1. Yes 2. No (Skip to Q10)
[ ] [ ]
9. Who helps you to read? 1. Mother/ Father 2. Uncle/Aunt 3. Brother/Sister 4. Grand(mother/father) 5. Other
(Specify)…………….
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
10. Do you have reading books (story books, course books)
1. Yes 2. No
[ ] [ ]
11. In What language are the books you have?
1. English 2. Chi Tonga 3. Other
(Specify)………………
[ ] [ ] [ ]
12. Do you use a Computer or Tablet at home?
1. Yes 2. No
[ ] [ ]
v
v
v
v
v
v
24
SECTION B: TEST IN LITERACY Now, we are going to play a game in English. I want you to try you best. Remember this is not a test and will not affect your results at school.
13. Word Find Test (Reading test)
i) English
going him road the bananas farm
Moonga is walking along the . He is to the to buy some . There is a dog on the road outside house.
ii) Tonga
Cikolo nzila mabbusu cintoolo
Moonga uleenda mu . Wiinka ku kukuula akusama ku_______ .
14. Familiar words
For each of the categories listed below, Indicate 1 for Correct and 2 for incorrect (i) English (ii) Chi Tonga
Book Boola
Tree Bbuku
That Cisamu
Boy Mulyango
Look Chikolo
Cat Kulya
Box Musimbi
No Bayi
Girl Mupika
Banana Musankwa
Is Mapopwe
She Bulo
On Muungo
Tree Muunda
My Mulundu
Sit Cisani
Cup Baama
Come Mubwa
Are Mabbusu
make Bataata
25
15. Listening comprehension
i) English
Moonga goes to school with her sister every morning, she always carries a book and a pencil in her bag. One day she forgot to put her pencil in her bag. She had to go back home for it. When she heard the bell ringing. She ran back to school.
Questions
For each of the categories listed below, Indicate 1 for Correct and 2 for incorrect 1. What did Moonga forget one day? 2. What did she remember to carry? 3. What did she do when she heard the bell ringing?
ii) Chi Tonga
Bumwi buzuba ciindi camvula Mutinta wakagambwa kapati, wakali kuya ku cikolo ino nzila yoonse kwakali mankandya maningi. Nakasika ku cikolo bayi bapati bakamubuzya kuti ino mabbusu abija nzi? Wakabaambila kuti kwakali mankandya mu nzila nkaambo ka mvula.
Questions
For each of the categories listed below, Indicate 1 for Correct and 2 for incorrect 1. Nkaambo nzi kwakali mankandya munzila? 1. Nguni wakabuzya kuti ino mabbusu abija nzi? 2. In cakali ciindi cazyi?
SECTION B: TEST IN NUMERCY Now, we are going to play a game in Math’s. I want you to try you best. Remember this is not a test and will not affect your results at school.
For each of the categories listed below, Indicate 1 for Correct and 2 for incorrect 17. Addition
Level 1
Level 2
(only if pupil finishes level 1 within 1 minute)
Question Result Question Result
2 + 5 = 7 18 + 2 = 20
7 + 2 = 9 16 + 9 = 25
3 + 2 = 5 30 + 57 = 87
6 + 4 = 10 100 + 41 = 141
4 + 5 = 9 120 + 32 = 152
26
18. Subtraction
Level 1
Level 2
(only if pupil finishes level 1 within 1 minute)
Question Result Question Result
5 - 4 = 1 18 - 2 = 16
9 - 4 = 5 25 – 7 = 16
8 – 6 = 2 32 - 8 = 24
10 - 4 = 6 125 - 10 = 115
5 - 5 = 0 100 - 20 = 80
THE END
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION
27
Appendix B: Teacher Interview Schedule
Teacher Interview Schedule
Introduction and Consent
We are fourth year students in the school of Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of Zambia, Great East road Campus. We are carrying out a study on various issues concerning the quality of Education among primary school pupils at Mufungu Basic School, following the change of the education curriculum as of January 2014, as a partial fulfillment of the Bachelor of Arts degree requirements. Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary and therefore you can decide not to participate or answer questions you may not be comfortable with.
However, we hope that you will be willing to participate fully as your information would be helpful in this study. You are also assured that the information you shall provide by answering the questions in this questionnaire will be treated confidentially and will be used only for the purpose of this study.
SECTION A: Evaluation of the quality of Learning and Teaching Environment
1. How many pupils are in your class? 2. Are there enough Desks? 3. Are there adequate reading materials? 4. How many English course books do you have? 5. How many Chi Tonga course books do you have? 6. Do you use a computer in your classroom? 7. Are you conversant with the use of a computer? 16. How would you rate the overall pupil performance?
SECTION B: Evaluation of the quality of New Education Curriculum
17. Do you think the new education curriculum is more effective to pupil learning? 18. If yes to Q14 above, how would you rate its effectiveness? 19. Which language of instruction do you prefer? 20. Are you conversant with the new language of instruction? 21. How do you rate your fluency in the language of instruction? 22. How would you rate the performance of the pupils after the change of the Education
curriculum? 23. What are the challenges the school faces with regards to implementing the new education
curriculum? 24. What are your suggestions on how to improve the implementation of the new education
curriculum? THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION
28
Appendix C: Observation Checklist
1. Grade
Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 5 Grade 6
2. Number of pupils in Class
1. Boys 2. Girls 3. Total
3. Teaching Methodology
Is the teacher paying attending to;
1. Yes 2. No a) Phonics [ ] [ ] b) Initial Sounds [ ] [ ] c) Word Building (Spelling) [ ] [ ]
4. Class is Using Computers
Yes
No
5. There are enough teaching and learning materials
Yes
No
6. Are the Course book Enough
English Chi Tonga Math
Yes Yes Yes
No No No
7. Average number of pupils per book.
English Chi Tonga Math
29
Appendix D: List of Interviewees
NAME POSITION PHONE NO. 1. Mr. K.M Ngobeka Headteacher +260977143753 2. Mr. J. Moomba Teacher +260973808801 3. Mr. H. Maambo Teacher
+260977194835 4. Mr. F. Milambo Teacher
+260978321560 5. Mr. E. Munsanje Teacher
+260978093652