Changing pedagogical practice in kenyan primary schools by Heurística Educativa

This article was downloaded by: [Loera, Armando] On: 2 June 2010 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 922736866] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Comparative Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713410081

Changing pedagogical practice in Kenyan primary schools: the impact of school-based training Frank Hardmana; Jan Abd-Kadirb; Catherine Aggc; James Migwic; Jacinta Ndambukuc; Fay Smithd a Department of Educational Studies, University of York, York, UK b Centre for English Language Teaching, University of York, UK c Kenya-based education consultant, d School of Education, Communication and Language Studies, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

To cite this Article Hardman, Frank , Abd-Kadir, Jan , Agg, Catherine , Migwi, James , Ndambuku, Jacinta and Smith,

Fay(2009) 'Changing pedagogical practice in Kenyan primary schools: the impact of school-based training', Comparative Education, 45: 1, 65 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; 86 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/03050060802661402 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050060802661402

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Comparative Education Vol. 45, No. 1, February 2009, 65–86

Changing pedagogical practice in Kenyan primary schools: the impact of school-based training Frank Hardmana*, Jan Abd-Kadirb, Catherine Aggc, James Migwic, Jacinta Ndambukuc and Fay Smithd aDepartment

of Educational Studies, University of York, York, UK; bCentre for English Language Teaching, University of York, UK; cKenya-based education consultant; dSchool of Education, Communication and Language Studies, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Comparative 10.1080/03050060802661402 CCED_A_366310.sgm 0305-0068 Original Taylor 102009 45 fh514@york.ac.uk FrankHardman 00000February and & Article Francis (print)/1360-0486 Francis Education 2009 Ltd (online)

This study reports on an investigation into the impact of a national, school-based teacher development programme on learning and teaching in Kenyan primary schools. Building on a national baseline study (n=102), 144 video-recorded lessons, covering the teaching of English, maths and science at Standards 3 and 6, were analysed to investigate whole-class teaching and group-based learning. Interviews were also conducted with school management committees, head teachers, teachers and pupils to elicit their views on the impact of the school-based training programme on learning and teaching. The study found that compared to the earlier baseline, teachers were more interactive with the pupils in their wholeclass teaching and greater use was being made of group work. Lesson plans, teaching resources and flexible classroom layouts were also much more in evidence. However, the greatest impact on classroom practice was seen in the classrooms of those teachers who had undergone the most systematic in-service training. The wider implications of the findings for improving the quality of classroom learning in Kenyan primary classrooms are considered.

Introduction As with many other sub-Saharan African countries, poverty levels in Kenya are high: with a population of 31 million, 47% of its people are unable to meet their basic food requirements as they have to live on less than US $2.00 a day (UNICEF 2004). The country has a large percentage of children, with over 40% of the population aged 0– 14 years, and primary education is the only schooling most Kenyans have. During 1980s and 1990s the International Monetary Fund and World Bank encouraged the Government of Kenya to adopt structural adjustment policies in an effort to control the economy better and manage rising debt. As a result, parents faced an increasing range of charges for their children’s education for things like school fees, uniforms, learning materials and textbooks. As the cost of education for parents rose, and the perceived quality of education fell, the Gross Enrolment Rate (GER) in Standard 1, which had once stood at around 97%, fell markedly. These withdrawals particularly affected the children from poor families, and most seriously girls living in rural areas, pockets of poverty, informal settlements and arid and semi-arid areas, resulting in

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

F. Hardman et al.

declines in the primary GER to a low of around 78% in the early 1990s with less than 50% of the pupils enrolled in Standard 1 completing Standard 8 (Ackers et al. 2001). During the 1990s, policy-makers working in government along with development partners attempted to address some of the downside effects of structural adjustment polices through the implementation of various poverty mitigation measures. The Strengthening Primary Education (SPRED) project funded by the UK Department for International Development was one such initiative primarily designed as a quality support and enhancement programme to help alleviate poverty and counter some of the negative effects of the structural adjustment programmes, particularly declining enrolment rates. In the early 1990s SPRED I laid the foundations for a textbook supply system through mobile libraries and teacher professional development programmes through the establishment of a teacher advisory service and resource centres. In the later 1990s and early 2000s SPRED II emphasised broad education reform, while SPRED III, the final phase, attempted to shift the emphasis towards direct budgetary support. All phases of the three SPRED projects supported the development of a national textbook initiative, along with head teacher training and school-based in-service training. The rationale was that if the direct costs of schooling to parents could be reduced (by supplying instructional materials free) and the quality of education could be improved (through mass in-service training for head teachers and teachers), parents would increasingly send their children back to school and this would reverse the falling GER. They also paved the way for devolving control of education to districts, schools and communities through a variety of interventions. The need to upgrade and enhance the capacity of head teachers and teachers in the developing world was given an added impetus as a result of targets agreed in the Millennium Development Goals (EFA 2005). Therefore one of the main challenges facing Kenya has been the improvement of its primary education system. It was recognised from research that in order to change pedagogical practices, professional development programmes needed to focus on the school and classroom as the best level of intervention for improving the quality of teaching and learning by involving the school head and all the teachers in creating a genuine teaching community through ownership of the process (Craig et al. 1998; Scheerens 2000; Anderson 2002; Dembele 2003; Verspoor 2003; Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Sullivan 2004). Improving the quality of teacher-pupil interaction in whole-class, group-based and individual activities was also recognised as being central to the process of enhancing teaching and learning as ultimately educational quality is obtained through pedagogical processes in the classroom: through the knowledge, skills, dispositions and commitments of the teachers in whose care pupils are entrusted (Carron and Chau 1996; Alexander 2001; Feiman-Nemser 2001; Farrell 2002; Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Sullivan 2006). Efforts to attain the goal of universal primary education by 2015 have focused attention on scaling up country-wide in-service programmes. In response to these challenges, the Kenyan government selected distance education as the most appropriate way of running primary in-service programmes. It was assumed that the flexibility inherent in open and distance learning, and the fact that it can be combined with a full or near full-time job, would make it particularly appropriate for the often widely distributed force of teachers and school managers in Kenya. While there is an extensive literature on distance learning in the developing world, most of the studies have concentrated on description rather than evaluation and it is therefore difficult to make judgments about effectiveness (UNESCO 2001, 2004; ADEA 2002).

Comparative Education

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Primary School Management Project As part of SPRED 2, the Primary School Management Project (PRISM) was launched by the Ministry of Education (MoE) in 1996 to provide leadership and management training so that head teachers could lead on curriculum and administrative reform (Herriot et al. 2002; Crossley et al. 2005). Throughout its four-year period, PRISM introduced new systems of school-based support through distance learning materials that reached the majority of state primary school head teachers (estimated to be over 14,000) in Kenya and involved professionals at all levels of the Kenyan education system. Over 40,000 copies of a school management guide were distributed to schools and local support networks for head teachers were established. School-based curriculum review meetings were also set up and education management reform was explicitly linked with gender awareness and poverty alleviation. The success of PRISM gave confidence to the MoE to attempt a similar initiative with classroom teachers building on the experience of using a distance learning model that was more school based under SPRED 3.

School-based Teacher Development and Instructional Materials Project As part of SPRED 3, the MoE, through a newly established in-service unit, ran a national, distance-led teacher education scheme for classroom teachers called the School-based Teacher Development (SbTD) programme. The aims of the programme, which ran from 2001â&#x20AC;&#x201C;2005, were primarily to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of teaching and learning in primary schools through teachers acquiring new skills that promote active learning, and through the use of new textbooks. In July 2003, following the election of National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) party, the MoE also launched a national programme, called the Instructional Materials Programme (IMP), to deliver quality instructional materials to primary schools throughout Kenya, thereby further reducing the costs of education to all Kenyan primary age children (MoEST 2006). Like SbTD, IMP was largely conceptualised as improving classroom teaching and learning by promoting reading skills and active forms of learning among pupils. Textbooks were therefore also seen as being at the core of new approaches to teaching and learning which involved whole-class, group-based and individual instruction. Teachers were recommended to use the textbooks to promote more active and independent forms of learning, and to develop reading and higher levels of thinking. Therefore, as well as using textbook exercises in traditional whole-class question-and-answer instruction, teachers were expected to develop a wider repertoire of teaching-and-learning activities by using the instructional materials in whole-class, group-based and individual activities. For example, pupils were expected to carry out research and participate in practical, problem-solving group activities. Throughout the four-year period, the SbTD programme reached and successfully graduated over 47,000 primary school teachers throughout Kenya in the three core subjects of English, mathematics and science. As a result, three teachers from every school, called Key Resource Teachers (KRTs), were trained through the programme to lead school-based professional development within their subject area in their school. The programme was supported by a zonal-based teacher advisory system of over 1000 Teacher Advisory Centre (TAC) tutors. The TAC tutors were trained so that they could provide an effective group-based support service to the KRTs who were

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

F. Hardman et al.

working with their distance learning materials while carrying a full-time teaching load in the schools. Head teachers also received training materials so that they could support the KRTs in providing school-based training. SbTD was developed as a programme of self-study using distance learning modules combined with regular face-to-face cluster meetings. The programme commenced with a one-week induction where KRTs were introduced to their study materials and orientated to the SbTD training and support system. This was followed by a five- to six-month period of study in the schools using the study modules. During this time KRTs were to have regular fortnightly visits from their TAC tutors to observe lessons, review progress and deal with assignments. KRTs in a zone also visited their local TAC centres to share experience with other KRTs and take part in tutorials and seminars, once every two weeks. The self-study components were divided into one compulsory core module ‘Principles of Primary Practice’ (PPP) of 54 hours study duration. The module was divided into nine units. Each unit was equal to approximately six hours study duration. In addition, KRTs were enrolled as subject specialists in English, maths or science and hence took one additional subject specialist module from the three on offer: Teaching and Learning Mathematics in the Primary Classroom, Teaching and Learning English in the Primary Classroom, or Teaching and Learning Science in the Primary Classroom. Each specialist subject module was also designed to take 54 hours to study and was divided into 9 units each of 6 hours study. In addition to the self-study from the modules, KRTs were required to write three reflective assignments during the programme. One assignment was required at the end of the PPP module, and two further assignments were submitted for their chosen subject specialist module. The assignments were tutor-marked by the TAC tutors, with a 10% sample of the tutor-marked assignments (TMAs) being moderated by the District TAC tutors (DTACs). The SbTD programme thus had a total minimum study time of about 120 hours, depending on individual KRT reading speeds and study skills, and the amounts of time they spent on completing their assignments. At the end of the study period, KRTs who successfully completed all aspects of the programme and passed the three required assignments, received a Ministry of Education SbTD certificate. Central to the SbTD training modules was the concept of the reflective teacher encouraging critical reflection on beliefs and classroom practice (Schon 1983; Eraut 1994). Through such critical reflection the training sought to change pedagogical practices so as to ensure a better balance of teacher-led interaction and pupil-centred activities (i.e. collaborative forms of learning, problem solving, learning by doing, independent research). The role of the KRT in training and providing critical feedback to other school teachers was seen as being central. The in-service modules were designed to be strongly classroom focused, as reflected in both their titles and contents, so as to transform and improve the quality of teaching and learning by challenging teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices, and developing their skills in facilitating change. While the SbTD programme successfully reached teachers in every school, it was not clear how far it succeeded in developing diversified pedagogies and more active learning approaches, or what the longer term impact was on children’s learning achievement. An independent evaluation study was therefore commissioned, made up of a team of national and international researchers to investigate the impact of the SbTD programme on pedagogical practices on which this paper reports (MoEST 2005a).

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Comparative Education

Evaluating the impact of SbTD on teaching and learning In order to investigate the impact of SbTD on classroom practice, the study focused on the underlying pedagogy of teacher-pupil interaction (Alexander 2001). Systematic analysis of video recorded lessons and interviews with key stakeholders (school management committees, parents, head teachers, teachers and pupils) were therefore chosen as the best means of focusing on the nexus of learning and teaching in Kenyan primary classrooms. It also allowed for direct comparisons to be drawn with an earlier study of primary classroom interaction which formed part of the Kenyan National Primary Baseline (NPB) (MoEHRD 1999). As with other sub-Saharan African countries, the comparatively few observational studies that had been carried out in Kenya show a heavily directive form of teaching dominated by rote, recitation and the transmission of facts through teacher explanation (Cleghorn et al. 1989; Merritt et al. 1992; Bunyi 1997; Ackers and Hardman 2001; Pontefract and Hardman 2005). For example, the NPB, based on the analysis of 102 video-recorded lessons covering the teaching of English, mathematics and science at Standards 3 and 6, found an overwhelming predominance of teacher explanation and question-answer exchanges. The baseline study reported that: ●

●

● ● ● ●

● ●

●

lessons were dominated by lecturing punctuated by a question-and-answer routine, pupils copying from the chalkboard, written exercises and teachers marking pupils’ work; the vast majority of questions were ‘closed’ (i.e., calling for a single response or offering facts) as opposed to ‘open’ (i.e., calling for more than one answer): open-ended questions accounted for only 2% of the total; pupil questions were rare, making up 1% of the questioning exchanges; boys were nearly twice as likely to be asked a question by the teacher than girls; over a third of pupil responses were given by choral response; feedback to a pupil response was often absent, particularly in choral responses, non-committal or followed-up with a simple affirmation;. paired/group work was observed in only 3% of lessons; 96% of lessons used a traditional classroom layout with desks set out in rows facing the chalkboard; and teaching and learning resources were very scarce with an average pupil/textbook ratio of 6:1 at Standard 6 and 9:1 at Standard 3. This tended to reinforce practices whereby the teacher spent an excessive time writing up notes on the blackboard.

The main conclusions of the NPB were that the absence of in-service training and adequate learning resources were contributing significantly to the overall poor pedagogical practices. To what extent had the introduction of SbTD impacted on these earlier findings and improved the quality of teacher-pupil interaction?

Methodology To answer this question, the current study used a mixed-method approach to allow for methodological triangulation so as to achieve greater validity and reliability in the study: interaction analysis of video-recorded lessons and semi-structured interviews with pupils, teachers, head teachers, parents. Each of these research methods was

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

F. Hardman et al.

related to the others to ensure a fully integrated research design with a central focus on classroom learning. The SbTD study sample included 12 districts (Bureti, Garissa, Kitale Municiple, Kajiado, Kitui, Kuria, Kwale, Lugari, Meru South, Mombasa, Nairobi, and Nyeri) to be representative of high, medium and low potential areas and urban/rural schools. In each district an urban and rural school were randomly selected from a list provided by district education offices, giving a total of 24 schools. Each school was visited for a period of 2â&#x20AC;&#x201C;3 days and six teachers (including, where possible, a balanced mix of KRTs and non-KRTS) were observed teaching English, mathematics and science, at Standards 3 and 6, giving a total sample size of 144 lessons. Interviews were also conducted with school management committees (SMC), head teachers, KRTs, nonKRTs and groups of pupils from each of the 24 schools. The interviews explored participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perceptions of the effectiveness of the SbTD programme in terms of mode of delivery and impact on learning and teaching. The interaction analysis schedule analysed teacher-pupil interaction by recording the different types of discourse moves made by teachers and pupils. The coding system primarily focused on the initiation-response-feedback (IRF) structure adapted from the work of Sinclair and Coulthard (1992) by gathering data on the types of teacher questions, whether questions were answered (and by whom), and the types of follow-up given in response to answers. It also recorded the number of pupil initiations in the form of questions. Responses were coded according to whether a boy or girl answered, or whether there was a choral reply. Teacher follow-up to a pupil response was coded according to whether it was affirmed, praised or elaborated upon. Lesson plans, together with the subject content and layout of the video-recorded lessons, were also analysed to explore teaching objectives, curriculum coverage and length of time spent on different teaching/learning activities. Kenyan Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) data from each of the 24 schools was also analysed to monitor any changes in performance over the four years of the SbTD programme. Findings Whole-class teaching Across most of the 24 schools, lessons were timetabled to last 35 minutes. However, the average lesson of the recorded lessons in the sample was 25 minutes in length. In total, 137 out of 144 recorded lessons were analysed. Seven lessons had to be discarded because they were the wrong year group or subjects. Table 1 gives a breakdown of the subjects at Standards 3 and 6. Most of the lessons were mainly taught through the medium of English, although code switching to mother tongue was used to varying degrees in over a quarter of the classrooms, mainly at Standard 3. The average class size was 49 pupils. The total number of boys in the 137 lessons analysed was 3603 compared to 3157 girls, giving a mean of 26 boys and 23 girls per class. However, this figure reflects the fact that seven of the lessons filmed were made up of all boys. Table 1.

Breakdown of observed lessons by subject and year group.

Standard 3 Standard 6

English

Mathematics

Science

24 23

24 22

22 22

Comparative Education

Initiation moves The data were first analysed to see if there were any differences in the use of IRF moves across the three subjects of English, mathematics and science. Figure 1 shows the mean scores of the initiation moves across the three subjects. As in the 1999 NPB, the study counted all queries for information, including intonation questions and tag questions, as questioning sequences. One prominent ‘questioning’ discourse move, which was categorised as a cued elicitation, was the use of a mid-sentence rise in voice intonation that acted as a teacher elicit designed to get a response from the pupils during, or at the end of, an explanation or following a pupil response. Usually, the elicitation was in the form of a repetition or completion of a phrase or word. It was often direct and pupils often knew from the intonation of the elicitation whether it required an individual answer or a choral response. Similarly, teachers would also use a tag question to check on pupil understanding. Rather than being a genuine check on children’s understanding, it often constituted a pseudo-checking with the concomitant

Subject English Maths 30

Mean

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

During the whole-class sections of the lessons it was found that the discourse was made up of teacher initiated question-and-answer sessions interrupted by periodic, brief lectures. The average length of time spent on whole-class teaching across all 137 lessons was 17 minutes. Teacher explanation took up 57% of the time spent interacting with the whole class. The question-and-answer sequences took up 27% of the time and the rest was made up of reading from the chalk board or textbook, pupil demonstration, silences and interruptions. Teacher follow-up accounted for less than 3% of the time.

Science

0 Teacher informs

Figure 1.

Teacher question

Cued elicitation

Teacher check

Teacher direct

Means of initiation moves in English, maths and science.

Pupil question

F. Hardman et al.

convention that the only possible response was an affirmative. This was categorised as a teacher check. Cued elicitations and teacher checks therefore mainly functioned as ritualised participation strategies designed to keep the pupils involved rather than requiring an answer to a question. Only teacher elicitations that went beyond a strategy to get the pupils to participate, were classified as teacher questions. The interaction analysis system recorded whether teacher questions were open (i.e. defined in terms of the teacherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reaction to the pupilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s answer: only if the teacher accepted more than one answer to the question would it be judged as open) or closed (i.e. calling for a single response or offering facts). The system also recorded teacher directs where the teacher directed the class to do something that did not require a verbal response. Pupil questions were also recorded. The graph shows that teacher explanation, teacher questions and cued elicitations made up the majority of initiation moves. Further analysis of teacher questions shows that 95% of all such questions, across all three subjects, were closed, requiring recall of information. More thought-provoking, open-ended questions, eliciting a range of responses, were therefore rare, making up 5% of the questions compared to 2% in the NPB study. Pupil questions were also rare, making up 2% of initiations in both studies. The comparatively low use of teacher directs suggests classroom routines were clearly established and understood by the pupils, reducing the need for frequent reminders. A one-way unrelated ANOVA (Table 2) found that only one initiation move was significantly different across subject areas: pupil questions in mathematics were significantly higher (F=5.87, p<0.05). Overall, therefore, as in the 1999 NPB, there was little variation in teacher initiation moves across the teaching of the three subjects. In other words, teachers used the same patterns of whole-class interaction regardless of the subject.

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Figure 1. Means of initiation moves in English, maths and science

Table 2.

Comparison of initiation moves in English, maths and science.

ANOVA

Teacher informs

Between groups Within groups Total Teacher question Between groups Within groups Total Cued elicitation Between groups Within groups Total Teacher check Between groups Within groups Total Teacher direct Between groups Within groups Total Pupil question Between groups Within groups Total

Sum of Squares

1980.591 49589.044 51569.635 64.932 36059.564 36124.496 2605.758 73763.921 76369.679 4.862 7414.861 7419.723 219.414 6516.527 6735.942 320.365 3654.759 3975.124

2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136

Mean Square

Sig.

990.295 370.067

2.676

.073

32.466 269.101

.121

.886

1302.879 550.477

2.367

.098

2.431 55.335

.044

.957

109.707 48.631

2.256

.109

160.183 27.274

5.873

.004

Comparative Education

Response moves Figure 2 shows the means of the response moves across all three subjects. Responses were coded according to whether they were answered by a boy or girl, by a choral response or by a pupil demonstration to the class, often at the chalk board. The data shows that choral responses were the dominant method of responding to teacher initiations, particularly cued elicitations and teacher checks, followed by individual answers where boys, as in the 1999 NPB, were almost twice as likely to be asked to answer a question as girls. Pupil demonstration to the class made up 5% or less of the response moves, as in the 1999 NPB, and was therefore underutilised as a strategy for actively engaging pupils in the lesson. Where it was used, boys were twice as likely to be asked to demonstrate to the class, particularly in maths. A one-way unrelated ANOVA (Table 3) found only the number of answers from girls to be significantly different across subject areas: girls were more likely to be asked a question in English than maths or science. Follow-up moves Figure 3 shows the means of the follow-up moves across the three subjects. The mean scores show it was common for an answer to receive no teacher follow-up, particularly when a teacher elicitation called for a choral answer. When it did occur, teachers usually affirmed or accepted (‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘ok’) an answer or praised it (often by asking the class to clap). However, as in the 1999 NPB, teacher comments on pupil answers, whereby they would rephrase, build or elaborate upon an answer, were rare, as were teacher probes where a teacher would stay with a pupil and ask for further elaboration upon his/her answer. Figure 3. Means of follow-up moves in English, mathematics and science

Subject English Maths Science

Mean

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Figure 2. Means of response moves in English, maths and science

0 Boy answers

Figure 2.

Girl answers

Choral answer

Means of response moves in English, maths and science.

Pupil demonstration

F. Hardman et al.

Table 3.

Comparison of response moves in English, mathematics and science.

ANOVA

Between groups Within groups Total Girl answers Between groups Within groups Total Choral answer Between groups Within groups Total Pupil demonstration Between groups Within groups Total

Mean Square

Sig.

541.667 17663.340 18205.007 392.007 5599.059 5991.066 1350.694 126153.9 127504.6 45.338 4531.947 4577.285

2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136

270.834 131.816

2.055

.132

196.003 41.784

4.691

.011

675.347 941.447

.717

.490

22.669 33.820

.670

.513

A one-way unrelated ANOVA (Table 4) found the following moves were significantly different across subject areas: affirm, praise, negate, gives answer, and asks other. Teachers were more likely to give no response in maths, to affirm an answer in science, to praise and negate an answer, and to ask another pupil to answer a question if they do not get an acceptable answer, or to answer it themselves, in English. Overall, however, comparison of the IRF moves suggests that there was little variation in whole-class teacher-pupil interaction across the three subjects, as in the 1999 NPB.

Subject English Maths Science

Mean

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Boy answers

Sum of Squares

Means of follow-up moves in English, mathematics and science.

ts en m om C

r he ot

sw an

es ob Pr

s sk A

es iv

e at eg

se ai Pr

e on

rm ffi A

Figure 3.

Comparative Education Table 4.

Comparison of follow-up moves in English, maths and science.

ANOVA

None Affirm Praise Negate

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Gives answer Asks other Probes Comments

Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total Between groups Within groups Total

Sum of Squares

Mean Square

Sig.

1747.614 128631.6 130379.2 943.884 11786.437 12730.321 563.065 7975.986 8539.051 15.164 307.376 322.540 34.252 332.682 366.934 90.440 1595.619 1686.058 5.907 710.342 716.248 58.448 1483.170 1541.618

2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 134 136 2 133 135

873.807 959.937

.910

.405

471.942 87.958

5.366

.006

281.533 59.522

4.730

.010

7.582 2.294

3.305

.040

17.126 2.483

6.898

.001

45.220 11.908

3.798

.025

2.953 5.301

.557

.574

29.224 11.152

2.621

.077

The impact of SbTD on whole-class interaction Of the 137 teachers observed, 50 (36%) reported they had been trained as KRTs. In order to investigate the impact of the SbTD training, the whole-class interactive practices and use of group-based activities by KRTs and non-KRTS were compared. First, the use of IRF moves in whole-class teaching by KRTs and non-KRTS was statistically compared to investigate whether there were any differences in patterns of classroom interaction. Table 5 shows the descriptive statistics for each of the two groups. Figure 4 shows the means of the initiation moves for both the KRTs and non-KRTs. An independent-samples t-test was carried out on the data to investigate differences in patterns of classroom interaction between KRTs and non-KRTs. The following differences between KRTs and non-KRTs were found to be significant at p<0.01: teacher check, teacher direct, girl answers, choral answer, no follow-up, praise; the following moves were significant at p<0.05: teacher informs, cued elicitation, pupil question, boy answers, comments. The findings suggest that KRTs generally had a more interactive style in terms of their use of teacher questions, and participation strategies (cued elicitations and teacher checks). KRTs also used more teacher explanation and gave more praise in their feedback, encouraged more pupil questions and individual answers from girls and boys and offered more comments on pupil answers (i.e., rephrasing, building or elaborating upon an answer). They also used more teacher direction which, as discussed in the next section, appeared to be mainly due to the greater use of group/paired work which necessitated the giving of directions in regrouping the class and setting up activities. Figure 4. Means of initiation moves used by KRTs/non-KRTs.

F. Hardman et al.

Table 5.

IRF moves of KRTs and Non-KRTs.

Group Statistics

Teacher informs Teacher question Cued elicitation Teacher check Teacher direct

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Pupil question Boy answers Girl answers Choral answer Pupil demonstration None Affirm Praise Negate Gives answer Asks other Probes Comments

Training

Mean

Std. Deviation

KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT KRT N-KRT

50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87 50 87

29.24 18.05 30.84 25.38 33.02 22.30 7.30 2.83 10.78 7.26 3.08 .76 17.98 12.86 10.22 7.02 53.40 33.94 3.86 2.67 46.56 29.34 15.00 13.24 10.06 5.68 .6200 .8046 1.2200 .8851 3.86 2.92 1.68 1.30 3.54 2.15

22.677 16.137 16.768 15.774 28.322 19.726 10.549 3.909 7.407 6.519 7.477 3.464 14.099 9.421 6.982 6.174 36.246 24.455 5.481 4.164 39.143 22.880 11.227 9.471 9.614 6.244 1.63994 1.48511 2.15984 1.25221 3.517 3.492 1.696 2.561 3.442 3.237

Std. Error Mean 3.207 1.730 2.371 1.691 4.005 2.115 1.492 .419 1.048 .699 1.057 .371 1.994 1.010 .987 .662 5.126 2.622 .775 .446 5.536 2.453 1.588 1.015 1.360 .669 .23192 .15922 .30545 .13425 .497 .374 .240 .275 .487 .347

Use of paired and group-based activities by KRTs and non-KRTs Paired or group work was only recorded when pupils were observed interacting together and exchanging ideas through exploratory talk (Mercer 2000). In some classes, we observed pupils sitting in group formation but being asked to work individually. Such an activity was, therefore, recorded as individual seat work. Overall, 34% of teachers in the sample used paired/group work in their lessons according to our working definition. This represented a significant increase in the amount of paired/group work compared to the 1999 NPB where only 3% of teachers used such activities in their

Comparative Education

Training KRT N-KRT

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Mean

0 Teacher informs

Figure 4.

Teacher question

Cued elicitation

Teacher check

Teacher direct

Pupil question

Means of initiation moves used by KRTs/non-KRTs.

teaching. When the data were analysed for the use by KRTs and non-KRT, it was found that 30 (62%) of KRTs used some form of peer interaction in their lesson compared to 15 (17%) of the non-KRTs. A similar picture emerged with the use of open-ended questions (i.e. questions eliciting a range of responses): KRTs were twice as likely to ask an open question: 11% of the questions asked by KRT teachers were open compared to 5% asked by non-KRTs. The video analysis also showed that a greater range of organisational arrangements was being deployed by teachers to meet different educational goals. In the 1999 NPB, most classrooms (97%) were organised using a traditional classroom layout (i.e. desks organised in rows); this compared to 42% of classrooms in the current study using an alternative classroom layout. For KRTs, 68% of classrooms were arranged in a nontraditional way reflecting the higher use of group work. Textbooks were also far more in evidence compared to the NPB with an average pupil/textbook ratio of 2:1 at Standard 6 and 3:1 at Standard 3. Semi-structured interviews Key resource teacher Interviews with teachers who had been trained as KRTs (n=68) indicated they were very positive about the training they had received and its impact on their classroom practice. As one KRT stated:

F. Hardman et al. When we were in college we learnt so many methods but we had not implemented them. So this one has really helped me because you know this time, I was training as well as teaching. So immediately we are taught a certain method, I would come straight away and apply it in my class and I see it bringing good results.

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Most KRTs agreed that the SbTD programme was providing additional help and support with lesson planning and the production of teaching aids, and promoting a wider repertoire of learning and teaching approaches. The majority of KRTs found the distance learning training materials to be effective. It was reported that the materials were received promptly and that they provided for supported self-study, complemented by tutorials and support groups. All the KRTs stated that interacting with other teachers was very useful in the learning process. As one KRT stated, ‘We met in time, completed tutorials and support groups, modules arrived on time; clarification was done promptly. We were able to assess ourselves and see how far we were on track’. Another reported: I think this one should even be used to better the training methods in the college. Because in college we did not have the tutorial groups, we did not have that interaction, we did not have that working in group work so much. There is a lot that we learnt in SbTD which was not learnt in college.

Seventy-four per cent of KRTs found TAC tutors to be effective. Things mentioned included help with TMAs, helpful feedback on classroom observations and being available at any time to give advice. As one KRT reported, ‘In fact I can say he has been very good. He has been coming to visit us, he has helped us to improve our methodology, he has been coming to our classes to see how our work is’. Non-KRTS Interviews with teachers (n=27) who had not undergone KRT training also produced a positive response when asked about the impact of SbTD on learning and teaching. Almost 70% of respondents reported that KRTs had been effective in delivering schoolbased in-service training. However, it was found that KRTs were most likely to pass on their knowledge and provide help to other teachers on an ad hoc basis: 10% mentioned that KRTs sometimes organised meetings/discussions (i.e., in subject panels); 7% of respondents confirmed that KRTs held formal in-service training activities; the same percentage indicated that KRTs held no in-service activities. This finding was confirmed by the KRTs, 42% of whom reported they had carried out informal training by passing on information during break times, lending modules, answering questions and mentoring other teachers. Similarly, 25% of KRTs stated they did not conduct any school-based training, citing problems such as lack of time and resources, understaffing, no spare classrooms, pressure from exam syllabuses, lack of cooperation or support from other teachers, and lack of motivation on their own part due to lack of course recognition. However, 41% of the 27 teachers reported they had been observed by a KRT and all but one reported receiving very useful feedback on how to use teaching aids, how to involve pupils in class, managing group work, and how to be sensitive to gender issues. Head teachers All the 24 head teachers interviewed agreed that SbTD had improved the quality of learning and teaching in their school. It was reported that teaching aids were more

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Comparative Education

widely used and lesson planning was more focused, a perception supported by the findings from the classroom observations. The head teachers were also in agreement that pupil participation and motivation had been enhanced, and that academic standards had risen since the programme began, as evidenced in KCPE scores.1 There was, however, a mixed response from head teachers on the role of KRTs in delivery of school-based training. Around half indicated that they had been effective, the other half disagreed. The main reason given for the lack of success of KRT school-based training was the heavy workload of all teachers, which left little time for non-scheduled activities. Most head teachers found visits from the TAC tutor useful, although there was wide variation in how often TAC tutors met with KRTs. It was generally felt that more follow-up from TAC tutors would be beneficial. There was a positive response to the content of the SbTD training materials, although some head teachers gave the impression that they had not gone through the modules very carefully or at all. A subtext to this was the concern expressed by four respondents that head teachers were not included in the SbTD training beyond receiving copies of the materials, and that they needed training in order to understand new teaching methods and oversee the work of KRTs. Although the majority of head teachers reported they had received PRISM training, 17% of those interviewed had no leadership and management training, raising concerns about the sustainability of such programmes without ongoing training. The delivery method of SbTD was also positively received, with the majority of head teachers finding distance-learning effective. The greatest impediments to school-based in-service education for teachers (INSET) were seen as teacher workload and cost of course fees (this refers to the fee of 1200ksh [Kenyan skillings] paid by teachers for the SbTD course). School management committees Twenty-two focus group interviews were carried out with SMCs (n=81). When asked about how aware they were of the SbTD programme in their schools, 16 out of 22 SMCs claimed they were. In the course of interviews, however, it emerged that at least 13 committees were vague about the INSET of their teachers in terms of explicitly knowing about the SbTD programme and the role of the KRT. When asked about whether they had noted any changes in the school since the school had been involved in the SbTD programme, 10 SMCs said they had noted some changes and the rest were noncommittal. For those that gave an affirmative answer, the following changes were noted: teachers and pupils seemed more serious about their work; there were improvements in children’s learning; more use was made of teaching aids and pupil discipline had improved. When asked specifically about improvements in learning most of the respondents talked in terms of examination performance. The following quotation is typical: ‘School performance in examinations has improved and the parents are happy with the teachers’ work and even some parents from other schools want to transfer their children to our school’. Pupil interviews Out of the 24 schools visited, pupil focus group interviews were carried out in 22 schools (n=102). In total, 47 girls and 55 boys were interviewed, their ages ranging from 11 to 14. It was felt that pupil views would be an important source of data for triangulating and measuring classroom practices. In order to determine whether collaborative

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

F. Hardman et al.

learning, in particular group work, has taken root in primary schools as a result of the SbTD programme, pupils were asked about what they understood group work to be, whether they ever used group work in their classes, how the groups were organised, and what they did in the groups. They were also asked whether group work helped them to learn more effectively and the ways in which it enhanced their learning. An overwhelming majority of pupils (98%) said they knew what group work was and were all able to define accurately what it meant in practice. Pupils defined group work as: working on an exercise together as either two or more pupils; sitting in class to do a task assigned; discussing, revising and reading together; sharing a textbook during a class task; a group of pupils working together; and asking one another about what they didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know. Moreover, all of the pupils interviewed believed group work helped them learn better. They justified this view by arguing that group work boosts confidence, enhances understanding, improves reading and writing skills, and provides opportunities for pupils to share ideas. When asked what subjects the pupils liked the most and why they liked them, the following ranking was elicited: maths, science, English, social science, Kiswahili, citizenship and religious education. When questioned about how often they were asked to work in groups, only 1 of the 22 focus groups reported they had worked in a group the previous year, 3 reported they had worked in a group the previous term, and 12 said they had been taught in groups during the current term. In terms of subjects where group teaching has been used during the term, mathematics led with a frequency of 12, followed by science with 11, English with 7, social studies with 3, and Kiswahili with 3. Subject preference therefore equated with the amount of group work used in the teaching of the subject. In terms of group size, it was reported that they ranged from a group of 2 pupils to as many as 15 pupils, with an average number of 6 to 8 pupils per group. Distribution of gender roles during the group work seemed balanced, with both sexes playing the roles of group leader/chairperson and secretary. Teachers using group work therefore appeared to be more aware of the need for gender equity than was displayed in wholeclass teaching. In terms of working relationships in group work, pupils seemed happy about what they did: they claimed they worked well, and that they enjoyed working in groups. Asked why they enjoyed working in groups, the pupils pointed out that some pupils were shy to ask their teachers questions but when in a group this was different as the pupils assisted each other. Discussion and conclusions Overall, the findings of the current study support the view that school-based training offers the most potential for changing pedagogic practices, particularly in developing countries like Kenya, where many teachers lack training or are underprepared because of the quality of their pre-service training (Carron and Chau 1996; Craig et al. 1998; Anderson 2002; Lewin and Stuart 2003 Verspoor 2003; Lewin 2005; Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Sullivan 2006). Compared to the 1999 NPB, the findings from the current study suggest there have been major developments in pedagogic practices in Kenyan primary schools. The use of group/paired work had increased significantly, and with it the opportunity for pupils to use their mother tongue in exploratory talk to aid understanding. Lesson planning appeared to be more systematic and focused with teachers making greater use of teaching aids from the local environment beyond the traditional chalk board to make the curriculum more relevant to the pupils. A greater range of organisational arrange-

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Comparative Education

ments was also in evidence with many more teachers altering the classroom layout to meet the requirements of different kinds of learning tasks. The most significant differences in classroom practices, however, were demonstrated by the KRTs who had received the most training under the SbTD initiative. Nearly two thirds of the KRTs used a mix of whole-class and group-based teaching, they were far more interactive and gender sensitive, and they appeared to be creating a more positive classroom climate by exhibiting personal enthusiasm in their teaching through the greater use of praise rather than criticism. However, the findings from the observations and interviews suggest that the ‘cascade’ model of school-based training, whereby KRTs work with other colleagues in the school to pass on their training, was having less impact than had been anticipated by the SbTD designers. The main reason given for the lack of effectiveness of the KRT leading school-based training was the heavy workload of all teachers which left little time for systematic input. This suggests the need for all teachers to undergo KRT training and for more official time to be allocated to school-based training. Training days need to be set aside throughout the school year and KRTs need official time to observe, coach and provide feedback to their colleagues. It seems from the interviews that where SbTD was working well, classroom-based support was being provided to teachers to encourage them to reflect upon their beliefs and pedagogic practices. This approach is supported by research into teacher development which suggests teachers need extended opportunities to think through new ideas and to try out new practices, ideally in a context where they get feedback from a more expert practitioner (Costa and Garmston 1994; Joyce et al. 1997; O’Sullivan 2001, 2004; Hopkins 2002; Day and Sachs 2005). It also requires a change in the role of the head teacher that goes beyond the traditional role of administrator to include the leading of pedagogic change (Herriot et al. 2002; Crossley et al. 2005). In their evaluation of PRISM, Crossley and his colleagues found the initiative had transformed school management in terms of school development plans, school management committees and the devolution of decision-making down to the local community level. The practice of having KRTs and head teachers collaborate with other educational professionals, such as inspectors and TAC advisers, to examine what is taking place in classroom and schools, and provide constructive and non-directive feedback, is also supported by research (Dembele 2003; Verspoor 2003). In drawing on international findings to inform the design of in-service training in the developing world, however, research cautions against the assumption that approaches which are effective in one country can be adopted in another because of the cultural differences which shape educational beliefs and practices (Fuller and Clarke 1996; Sifuna 1997; Tabulawa 1997; Anderson 2002). Within the teacher development literature, there is general agreement that changing pedagogic practices is difficult because of the strong cultural and social influences which shape teachers’ assumptions about the purpose of schooling and the nature of the teaching and learning process. Before adopting such practices, the research suggests it is important that the cultural assumptions, values and pedagogical principles which shape such approaches are fully understood so as to judge how far the pedagogy can be accommodated in a different cultural context. By taking the socio-cultural context into account, school-based training can address the issue of transfer and move away from the imposition of a ‘top-down’ educational reform model (O’Sullivan 2001). It can also ensure that the introduction of new pedagogic approaches takes into consideration the realities within which teachers work (Johnson et al. 2000; O’Sullivan 2006).

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

F. Hardman et al.

A common feature of the whole-class discourse structure of all the teachers in the study, as in the 1999 NPB, was the absence of an explicit follow-up, particularly when a teacher elicitation called for a choral response, thereby encouraging the ritualised recalling of information. Because of the high degree of use of choral responses and lack of follow-up to individual answers through teacher probes and comments, pupils were rarely encouraged to contribute and extend their contributions in whole-class lessons by answering questions, contributing points to discussion, and explaining and demonstrating their thinking to the class. Observational coaching and feedback of the kind advocated above would therefore need to focus on ensuring teacher use of the IRF structure in whole-class, group-based and individual interactions takes on a variety of forms and functions leading to different levels of pupil participation and engagement. Teachers therefore need training in how to ask questions in whole-class, groupbased and individual interactions so as to provoke thoughtful answers and to provide feedback to those answers to invite further participation (i.e. asking pupils to expand on their thinking, justify or clarify their opinions, or make connections to their own experiences (Nystrand et al. 1997; Nassaji and Wells 2000; Alexander 2001, AbdKadir and Hardman 2007). Helping teachers to transform classroom talk from the familiar IRF sequence into purposeful and productive dialogue is fundamental to what Tharp and Dalton (2007) see as an alternative ‘universalistic’ pedagogy. Such an approach to pre- and in-service training would emphasise joint teacher-pupil activity and higher-order thinking through a dialogic pedagogy and curriculum which is relevant to the lives and linguistic profile of the communities from which the pupils come. The findings also suggest the need for a relaxing of the official policy of teaching through the medium of English as it seems to be exerting a major influence on the patterns of classroom interaction and presenting communication difficulties for both teachers and pupils, leading to what Chick (1996) calls ‘safe talk’ by teachers because it is less demanding on their English and that of the pupils’, particularly in the chorusing of responses. By resorting to such forms of talk it allows for ‘participation’ without loss of face for both teachers and pupils, whether through language errors or lack of understanding. Recent studies point to the advantages of using African languages as the medium of teaching and learning in addition to the former colonial language (see, for example, Arthur and Martin 2006). Along side the appropriate training of teachers in the use of mother tongue and second language teaching, code switching can play an important role in improving the quality of whole-class and group-based interaction by acknowledging the importance of cultural background and local knowledge in the process of learning and encouraging more active pupil engagement. Such a policy is also central to making the curriculum more relevant by connecting the learning to the pupil’s experience, environment and culture (Dembele 2003). In addition to the effects that a monolingual policy has on classroom discourse, research also suggests that end-of-primary examinations exert a powerful influence on instruction and the patterning of classroom interaction in sub-Saharan primary classrooms by encouraging a transmission pedagogy in which there is a one-way transfer of knowledge (Greaney and Kellaghan 1996; Arthur 2001; Pryor and Lubishi 2002; Akyeampong et al. 2006). In Kenya, the examinations taken at the end of primary 8 not only determine which pupils go on to secondary education, but are also used to rank schools according to pupil performance. Although the pencil-and-paper tests are seen as providing a standardised assessment in order to provide equitable

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Comparative Education

opportunities for entry to secondary school, in practice they are generally seen as promoting teacher-centred routines and rote learning by testing recall or recognition of factual knowledge. As Akyeampong et al. (2006) suggest, it is important that the current normative evaluation is supplemented by other forms of evaluation, such as criteria-based, formative, diagnostic and predictive forms of assessment, and that teachers have a thorough understanding of the various types of assessment procedure. While accommodating indigenous knowledge and belief systems, programmes like SbTD raise the possibility of pedagogic change being achieved within the cultural context in which teachers operate. Such an approach builds on existing systems and structures with reference to the teachers’ own realities, and supports teacher reflection on their own practice, so as to change pedagogical beliefs and classroom practice – such as teacher use of questions and oral feedback. As the current study shows, it is also important that the debate about learning and teaching in the developing world goes beyond the ‘child-centred’ versus ‘teacher-centred’ instruction dichotomy. Scheerens (2000) and Alexander (2001) argue such a dichotomy is unhelpful, as there is a need for both approaches in the learning and teaching process. By focusing on the classroom, school-based training can help teachers develop a repertoire of strategies that they can use selectively to achieve the learning goals for their pupils (Hopkins 2002). Overall, the SPRED Projects were about improving education access, equity and above all the quality of education in Kenya by raising the skills, status and self-esteem of the teacher through the provision of a well-developed system of in-service training integrated and linked to the contemporary challenges facing schools. The findings of this study suggest the successful provision of a well-organised, large-scale decentralised in-service teacher training throughout the country has done much to address these challenges and strengthen the kinds of characteristics that are known to deliver high quality education (EFA 2005). The provision of the SbTD which successfully graduated over a quarter of the nation’s primary teacher force, shows that teachers are motivated to study and undertake professional development. Moreover, the fact that some 10% of the KRT graduates (over 5000 teachers) have now gone on to undertake further university level studies is additional evidence of the development of a professional culture among primary teachers in Kenya (MoEST 2006). This study does not, however, conclude by seeing school-based professional development as the panacea to the problems faced by Kenyan teachers and learners. It acknowledges that the education system is likely to continue to face many constraints and the sustainability for the future of SbTD and IMP provision for primary schools in Kenya depends mainly on the continued availability of adequate funding. The current government seems committed to the provision of free primary education and has allocated substantial budgets to the end of 2010 as part of its Kenya Education Sector Support Programme (KESSP) (MoEST, 2005b). It is, however, important that KESSP continues to decentralise appropriate education functions and decision-making further in pursuit of a quality education for all Kenyan children.

Acknowledgements This study was made possible by the support and contributions from various individuals, groups and institutions. Specifically we would like to thank the Kenyan Ministry of Education, Science and Technology and the UK Department for International Development for their support during the study.

F. Hardman et al.

Notes 1. Analysis by mean scores in KCPE in the sampled schools indicated that there was a signif-

icant improvement in performance between 2001 and 2002 by over 5%. However, the improvement was short-lived as the performance dropped significantly by over 3% in 2003. The poor performance may be accounted for by the introduction of Free Primary Education with greater numbers of unprepared pupils reducing the mean score. A similar trend was recorded nationally in 2003. However, performance in KCPE mean scores started picking again up in 2004.

Notes on contributors Frank Hardman holds the chair in Educational Studies at the University of York, UK. Jan Abd-Kadir is a lecturer in Applied Linguistics at the University of York, UK.

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Catherine Agg is a freelance educational consultant based in Nairobi, Kenya. James Migwi is a freelance educational consultant based in Nairobi, Kenya and was the former director of Quality Assurance in the Kenyan Ministry of Education. Fay Smith is a lecturer in Education at the University of Newcastle, UK.

References Abd-Kadir, J., and F. Hardman. 2007. The discourse of whole-class teaching: A comparative study of Kenyan and Nigerian primary English lessons. Language and Education 21, no. 1: 1–15. Ackers, J., and F. Hardman. 2001. Classroom interaction in Kenyan primary schools. Compare 31, no. 2: 245–261. Ackers, J., J. Migoli, and J. Nzomo. 2001. Identifying and addressing the causes of declining participation rates in Kenyan primary schools. International Journal of Educational Development 21, no. 4: 361–374. Akyeampong, K., J. Pryor, and J.C. Ampiah. 2006. A vision of successful schooling: Ghanaian teachers’ understanding of learning, teaching and assessment. Comparative Education 42, no. 2: 155–176. Alexander, R. 2001. Culture and pedagogy: International comparisons in primary education. Oxford: Blackwell. Anderson, S., ed. 2002. School improvement through teacher development: Case studies of the Aga Khan Foundation projects in East Africa. Netherlands: Swets and Zetlinger. Arthur, J. 2001. Perspectives on educational language policy and its implementation in African classrooms: A comparative study of Botswana and Tanzania. Compare 31, no. 3: 347–362. Arthur, J., and P. Martin. 2006. Accomplishing lessons in postcolonial classrooms: Comparative perspectives from Botswana and Brunei Darussalam. Comparative Education 42, no. 2: 177–202. Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA). 2002. Distance education and open learning in sub-Saharan Africa: A literature survey on policy and practice. Paris: Association for the Development of Education in Africa. Bunyi, G. 1997. Multilingualism and discourse in primary mathematics in Kenya. Culture and Curriculum 10, no. 1: 23–30. Carron, G., and T.N. Chau. 1996. The quality of primary schools in different development contexts. Paris: UNESCO. Cleghorn, A., M. Merrit, and J. Abagi. 1989. Language policy and science instruction in Kenyan primary schools. Comparative Education Review 33, no. 1: 21–39. Chick, J.K. 1996. Safe-talk, collusion in apartheid education. In Society and the language classroom, ed. H. Coleman, 21–39 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press). Costa, A.L., and R.J. Garmston. 1994. Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools. Norwood: Christopher-Gordon.

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

Comparative Education

Craig, H.J., R.J. Kraft, and J. du Plessels. 1998. Teacher development: Making an impact. Washington, DC: World Bank. Crossley, M., A. Herriot., J. Waudo, M. Mwirotsi, K. Holmes, and M. Juma. 2005. Research and evaluation for educational development: Learning from the PRISM experience in Kenya. Oxford: Symposium Books. Day, C., and J. Sachs. 2005. International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers. Buckingham: Open University Press. Dembele, M. 2003. Breaking the mold: Teacher development for pedagogical renewal. In The challenge of learning: Improving the quality of basic education in sub-Sahara Africa, ed. A.M. Verspoor, 139–165. Paris: ADEA. Education for All (EFA). 2005. EFA global monitoring report 2005. Paris: UNESCO. Eraut, M. 1994. Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer Press. Farrell, J.P. 2002. The Aga Khan Foundation experience compared with emerging alternatives to schooling. In School improvement through teacher development: Case studies of the Aga Khan Foundation projects in East Africa, ed. S. Anderson, 247–270. The Netherlands: Swets and Zetlinger. Feiman-Nemser, S. 2001. From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record 103, no 6: 1013–1055. Fuller, B., and P. Clarke. 1996. Raising school effects while ignoring culture? Local conditions and the influence of classroom tools, rules and pedagogy. Review of Educational Research 94, no. 1: 119–57. Greaney, V., and T. Kellaghan, T. 1996. Monitoring the learning outcomes of education systems. Washington, DC: World Bank. Herriot, A., M. Crossley, M. Juma, J. Waudo, M. Mwirotsi, and A. Kamau. 2002. The development and operation of head teacher support groups in Kenya: A mechanism to create pockets of excellence, improve the provision of quality education and target positive changes in the community. International Journal of Educational Development 22, no. 5: 509–526. Hopkins, D. 2002. The Aga Khan School improvement initiative: An international change perspective. In School improvement through teacher development: Case studies of the Aga Khan Foundation projects in East Africa, ed. S.E. Anderson, 271–296. The Netherlands: Swets and Zetlinger Publishers. Johnson, S., M. Hodges, and M. Monk. 2000. Teacher development and change in South Africa: A critique of the appropriateness of transfer of northern/western practice. Compare 30, no. 2: 179–192. Joyce, B., E. Calhoun, and D. Hopkins. 1997. Models for teaching: Tools for learning. Buckingham: Open University Press. Lewin, K. 2005. The pre-service training of teachers – does it meet its objectives and how can it be improved? Paris: UNESCO. Lewin, K.M., and J.S. Stuart. 2003. Researching teacher education: New perspectives on practice, performance and policy. Multi-Site Teacher Education Research Project (MUSTER) synthesis report. London: DFID. Mercer, N. 2000. Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge. Merritt, M., A. Gleg, J.O. Abagi, and G. Bunti, G. 1992. Socializing multilingualism: Determinants of code-switching in Kenyan primary classrooms. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 13, no. 1: 103–121. Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (MoEHRD). 1999. Classroom interaction in Kenyan primary schools: A national primary baseline special study. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST). 2005a. Impact research on the effectiveness of the school-based INSET programmes in Kenya. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. ———. 2005b. Kenya Education Sector Support Programme 2005–2010: Delivering quality education and training to all Kenyans. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology). ———. 2006. Delivering quality and improving access: An impact evaluation of the Instructional Materials and In-service Training Programmes in Kenya. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology).

Downloaded By: [Loera, Armando] At: 21:01 2 June 2010

F. Hardman et al.

Nassaji, H., and G. Wells. 2000. What’s the use of ‘Triadic Dialogue’?: an investigation of teacher-student interaction. Applied Linguistics 21, no. 3: 376–406. Nystrand, M., A. Gamoran, R. Kachur, and C. Prendergast. 1997. Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. O’Sullivan, M.C. 2001. The inset strategies model: An effective inset model for unqualified and underqualified teachers in Namibia. International Journal of Educational Development 21, no. 2: 93–117. ———. 2004. The reconceptualisation of learner-centred approaches: A Namibian case study. International Journal of Educational Development 24, no. 6: 585–603. ———. 2006. Lesson observation and quality in primary education as contextual teaching and learning processes. International Journal of Educational Development 26, no. 2: 246– 26. Pontefract, C., and F. Hardman. 2005. The discourse of classroom interaction in Kenyan primary schools. Comparative Education 42, no. 1: 87–106. Pryor, J., and C. Lubishi. 2002. Reconceptualising educational assessment in South Africa – testing times for teachers. International Journal of Educational Development 22, no. 6: 673–686. Scheerens, J. 2000. Improving school effectiveness: Fundamentals of education planning no. 68. Paris: UNESCO/IIEP. Schon, D. 1983. The reflective practitioner. London: Temple Smith. Sifuna, D. 1997. The quality of primary education in Kenya: Some issues. In Educational dilemmas: Debate and diversity, quality in education, vol. 4, ed. K. Watson, C. Modgil, and S. Modgil, 65–74. London: Cassell. Sinclair, J., and M. Coulthard. 1992. Towards an analysis of discourse. In Advances in spoken discourse analysis, ed. M. Coulthard, 1–35. London: Routledge. Tabulawa, R. 1997. Pedagogical classroom practices and social context: The case of Botswana. International Journal of Educational Development 17, no. 2: 189–204. Tharp, R.G., and S.S. Dalton. 2007. Orthodoxy, cultural compatibility, and universals in education. Comparative Education 43, no. 1: 53–70. UNESCO. 2001. Guidelines for teacher education at a distance. New York: UNESCO. ———. 2004. Improving the quality of primary school through distance education. New York: UNESCO International Research Foundation for Open Learning for the EFA Monitoring Team. UNICEF. 2004. The state of the world’s children. New York: UNICEF. Verspoor, A.M., ed. 2003. The challenge of learning: Improving the quality of basic education in sub-Saharan Africa. Paris: ADEA.