CURRICULUM CHANGES IMPLEMENTATION IN KENYA

                    TRINITY COLLEGE: (UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL)
      CURRICULUM CHANGES IMPLEMENTATION IN KENYA:

Problems facing Curriculum changes implementation in Primary Education in Borabu Division :
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the Requirement for the degree of Master of Arts Curriculum and Instruction     b y  Mr Samson Basil Magara
MARCH   2005:

Words: 15,750.

                            Abstract
Implementation of Curriculum changes is a crucial stage in curriculum development. In this stage the proposed changes are put into practice. Implementation involves among others, teachers, education administrators, parents and the government as the major stakeholders. Implementation of curriculum changes has been a thorny issue in curriculum development in Kenya and   many countries in the world. In this study Borabu Division is the focus of the research. It is an administrative Division in the rural area in Kenya with 52 primary schools. The main purpose of this research is to find out the problems which are a hindrance to proper implementation of curriculum changes in primary education. The findings from this study will be applied to reflect the  situation in the whole country.    
Read more                                     

In this study, chapter one defines the meaning of implementation in relation to curriculum development, and also a brief history of curriculum changes in Kenya since 1964. Chapter two is a review on what is written about curriculum changes implementation in Kenya after independence and other parts of the world. The methodology used in the collection of data from schools in Borabu division in Kenya is explained in chapter three. The data from the research is presented and comparison is made of the findings from the research data in chapter four. Chapter five is an analysis of the findings from the research and linking them to the literature. And finally chapter six presents the conclusions drawn from the analysis of the data and recommendations are given.

Table of Contents

Chapter                                                                                                                Page

Abstract………………………………………………………………… …… …...i

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………… ……....….iii

Abbreviations and acronyms……………………………………………………....iv

1.Introduction…………………...…………………………………… …...……01

1.0) Background of the study………………………………………………..……01

1.1) The Government’s policy on education……………………..….………….…03

1.2) Kenya’s education system……………………………………………  ....…06 .
1.3) A review of the curriculum changes made since 1963……………  ..……....07

1.4) Statement of the problem… ……………………….…………….………......19

1.5) The purpose of this study…………………..……….………………...…...…19

1.6) Significance of the study…………………………………………………..…19

1.7) Conclusion…………………………………………………………….……..20

2. Review of the literature……………………...…….………………….……...21

2.0) Introduction……………………………………………………………….....21

2.1) Factors affecting curriculum changes implementation ...……....…………....22

2.2) Characteristic of  change ……………..……………….……………………..27

2.3) Local factors………………………………………………….…...……….....30

2.4) External  factors .……………………..………….…….……….………..…..33

2.5) Conclusion………………………………………………………………...…34

3. Methodology……………………………………………………………...….36

3.0) Introduction………………………………………………………………....36

3.1) Research questions……………………………..….……………………....…37

3.2) Research method explained………………………………………………..…38

3.3) Participants and sampling……………...…………………....…………….…..41

3.4) Design of Research instruments……………………..………………………42

3.5) Reliability and validity achieved…………………………………………....….45

3.6) Conclusion …………………………………………………………………..46

 4. Findings…………...………..…………………………………………...…..48

4.0) Introduction……………………………………………………………..…..48

4.1) Parents…………....………………………………………………………….48

4.2) Teachers……………………………………………..…………………....….55

4.3) The D.E.O Borabu Division………………………………………..……..…62

4.4) Summary of the findings…………………………………………………..…66

4.5) Conclusion………………………………………………………………..…73

5. Analysis……………….…………………………………………………..….74

5.0) Introduction……………………………………………………………..…..74

5.1) Teachers…………………………...…………………………………...……74

5.2) Curriculum changes……………..……………………….…………….….…76

5.3) Learning Resources and facilities……..……………….………………….….77

5.4) Finance ……………………………………………………………………..78

5.5) Education Management …………..……………….……………….………..79

5.6) Conclusion…………………..…………………….……………………….  82

6. Conclusion……………………………………………………………..…….84

6.1) Overview of the findings…………...…………………………………......….84

6.2) Recommendations……………...……………………………………………85

Bibliography………………………….……………………………………...….91

Appendixes………………………………………….………………………..….i

A.  Head Teachers’ questionnaire  …………………………..…………………..…i

B.   Parents’ questionnaire…………………………………………………...……vi

C.  Division Education Officer’s questionnaire ……………………….………….xii

D. The Kenya education Report 1976 Recommendations and correspondence.....xvii

Acknowledgments

May I take this opportunity to thank all those people who assisted me in this project. First I thank the   D.E.O Borabu Division who allowed me to conduct my research in his Division. Also I thank him for assisting and participating in the research by answering the questionnaire without any hesitation.

I also take the opportunity to thank the Zonal Inspector of schools Mekenene zone Mr Gari Moriasi    who assisted in distributing the questionnaires to the respondents   and collecting them up. I also thank   Mr Nyakundi Angwenyi the Head teacher Mokomoni  Secondary School in Nyamira District for the role he played in organizing the dispatch of the questionnaires to the respondents.

Special thanks go to my wife Mrs Bathsheba Nyaboke who was the main research assistant. She received the questionnaires and organised for their dispatch to the respondents. She  financed the exercise, received the completed questionnaires and mailed them to me for analysis and interpretation. I also take this opportunity to thank my supervisor Dr Oliver Rice for his advice when I handed in my proposal for this study, without which could have made this project impossible.

I also thank Miss Maria David for her help in typing part of this thesis. Lastly, my sincere thanks go to Mr Kepha Omweri (Reading   University) who agreed to read my rough draft and for his advice.

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

8.4.4       Kenya’s education system and it stands for 8 year of primary education  followed by 4 years of secondary education and finally 4 years of University education.

Borabu      A name of one of the administrative divisions in Nyamira District.

D.E.O    Divisional Education officer: An officer in charge of education in an       administrative  division

E.A.C.E    East African Certificate of Education 

Forms        Classes or year groups

K.C.P.E   Kenya Certificate of Primary Examination: an examination done at the   end of the eight years of primary education

K.C.S.E     Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education

Majimbo     A kenyanised term  meaning regions

Nyamira     A name of one of the administrative Districts in Kenya

Nyanza       Name of one of the provinces in Kenya

P.C.              Provincial Commissioner  -A provincial administrator

P.T.A.           Parents and Teachers Association

Standard 1   The first year in primary education

U.P.E           Universal Primary Education

                              CHAPTER 1

                                  INTRODUCTION

1.0          Background of the study

Borabu Division is one of the administrative Divisions in Nyamira District in Nyanza Province of Kenya. This Division is inhabited by people from Abagusii tribe. They settled here when white settlers moved away in 1963 after Kenya attained her independence from Britain. The inhabitants of Borabu are subsistence farmers .They grow tea and pyrethrum as cash crops; maize, beans potatoes and bananas as food crops. They also rear dairy cows for milk production for both domestic use and selling.

 Borabu Division has 52 primary schools which are aided by the government. The government has initiated many curriculum changes since independence with the sole aim of making the curriculum relevant to the needs of society. Albert Kelly noted that, technological change, especially on the scale we have witnessed in recent years, must have very serious consequences for the planning of the curriculum, for it results in major changes in the kinds of knowledge that society wants its children to be given. [1]

Despite the effort being put in by the government on the implementation of these changes, the standard of education has been seen falling. This has prompted the education stake holders to point accusing fingers at each other. It is a clear indication that there is something wrong with curriculum implementation in Borabu. Michael Fullan points out that implementation is critical for the simple reason that it is the means of accomplishing desired objectives.[2]

It is therefore important at this point to understand what the terms curriculum and implementation means throughout this study.

Curriculum

Different scholars have defined the word curriculum using different approaches. LeRoy Ford   has equated it with a person running or a race course. He asserts that it exists only where there is a curriculum plan. He has defined curriculum in terms of life experience. He states that Curriculum is all life’s experience resulting from a curriculum plan directed toward achieving objectives. [3]  

James L. Ratcliff has given a working definition. It states that Curriculum refers to both the process and substances of an educational program. It comprises the purpose, design, conduct, and evolution of educational experiences.[4]

In Collier’s Encyclopaedia, curriculum has been defined as a group of courses offered by an educational institution or by a department of such an institution which must be mastered by a student in order to obtain a certificate or a degree or a diploma, interchangeably as the course of study.[5]

In choosing a suitable definition for curriculum, Albert V. Kelly states that the most useful kind of definition we can adopt is one which is loose enough to embrace all the learning that goes on in school and all dimensions of the educational process.[6]

Implementation

Many writers have also defined the term ‘implement’. Collins English Dictionary defines the term ‘implement’ as ‘To carry out; put into action; perform’.[7]

Michael Fullan states that the implementation of educational change involves change in practice.[8] He also states that Implementation consists of the process of putting into practice an idea, program or set of activities and structures new to the people attempting or expected to change …The change may be extremely imposed or voluntarily sought; explicitly defined in detail in advance or developed and adapted incrementally through use; designed to be used uniformly or deliberately planned so that users can make modifications according to their perceptions of the needs of the situation. [9]

 From the above meanings of curriculum and implementation, curriculum changes is in itself meaningless without putting the changes into practice, that is, the implementation of the changes made. So implementation is a very important aspect of curriculum development. In Kenya, Primary education curriculum changes have been initiated through the many reviews that have been commissioned by the government since independence in 1963.

1.1 The   Government’s policy on education

After independence in 1963, the Kenya government formulated an official national education policy. Before independence, education was moulded within racial lines. We had African education, European education and Asian education. Each race had its own syllabus. This separation into racial groups was extended to social life.

The first Kenya Education Report observed that nearly all the significant activities of the modern world were beyond the march of African. In a white man country, education for responsibility was largely irrelevant to African education. The door leading into the modern world was indeed not quite closed, but it was only a jar and very few Africans ever passed through it.[10]

The Government reviewed the existing education system so that it can take full acknowledgement of the National and social goals of educational policy. The aim was to change the existing mood of education, endow it with a new relevance and modify the curriculum in accordance with the needs of Kenya.

Rosalind W. Mutua observed that post independence Kenya has been engaged in the task of the national reconstruction in its various aspects and dimensions. An independent Kenya must reflect the ideals, values and a culture that is not only truly and distinctly African but also uniquely Kenyan.[11]

The Government policy on education was first brought up for debate in 1964 during the compilation of the first education report. This Report states that if we may summarise briefly what we have said about the goals of education in Kenya, we note the following;

a. Education is a function of the Kenya nation, it must foster a sense of nationhood and promote national unity.

b. Education in Kenya must serve the people of Kenya and the needs of Kenya without discrimination.

c. Our public schools are an instrument of the secular state in which no religion is privileged but they must respect the religious convictions of all people.

d. The schools of Kenya must respect the cultural, traditions of the people of Kenya, both as expressed in social institutions and relationships.

e. An excessively competitive spirit in our schools is compatible with our traditional beliefs and must be restrained. Every young person coming from school must be made to realize that he has a valuable part to play in the national life.

f. Education must be regarded and used as an instrument for the conscious change of attitudes and relationships preparing children for those changes of outlook required by modern methods of productive organisation. At the same time, education must foster respect for human personality.

g. A most urgent objective of education is to serve the needs of national development.

h. Education must promote social equality and remove divisions of race, tribe and religion. It must pay special attention to training in social obligation and responsibility.

 i. An outcome of our educational provision at all levels must be adaptability to change.[12]

 Karioki, M concludes that from the policies outlined above, it is clear that the educational objectives are in line ‘with’ the national philosophy of political equality, national unity, human dignity, freedom of religion and conscience, social justice, ignorance and disease and gives equal opportunities for all races in Kenya. The objectives and policies endeavour to provide and promote equitable distribution of national income and preservation and promotion of cultural heritage. [13] 

The national education policy matters are also stated in subsequent national documents. These are; The Education Act 1968 revised in 1970; The Gachathi Report of 1976, a report of the national committee on educational objectives and policies; The Mackay Report of 1981, report of the presidential working part on the second university; The Kamunge Report of 1988, Report of presidential working party on education and manpower training for the next decade and beyond; and The Koech Report of 1999, Report on education system of Kenya

Karioki M. also notes that the educational policy has been clearly stipulated since independence in various national documents and policy papers.[14]  

1.2 Kenya’s education system

There have been a number of essential changes in the structure of Kenya system of education since independence. In 1966 the Kenya education system was changed from eight years (standards) of primary education to seven years. Secondary education composed of six years (forms): four years of lower and two years of upper secondary. University undergraduate degree took three years.

This system was altered a gain in 1985 to an 8-4-4 system, meaning eight years of primary [beginning at 5 or 6 years of age], four years of secondary and four years of University education. The elementary (primary) education curriculum consists of six subject matter fields. Each of these fields has a curriculum of its own extending through the first eight grades. There are private and public schools. There are single sex schools and mixed ones. Also there are day and boarding schools.  Kenya has a centralised education system. The curriculum is controlled by the state.

Lewis Brownstein observed that in the realm of administration the government has since 1964 assumed full control of the education system usurping the authority originally granted to the provinces under the majimbo constitution of 1963.Ultimate authority rests with the minister of education who has the power to delegate authority over primary and secondary education to the local councils. He has in each Province, District and Municipality, education officers who are responsible to him.[15] 

The state is the major financier of education. It pays, trains and employs teachers. It develops teaching materials (science equipment, textbooks and printing).In Kenya, education is not compulsory. The government provides or assists in the provision of schools. Primary education became free of charge from January 2003. This is according to the general policies and priorities of Kenyan government on education. According to Republic of Kenya National development Plans , one of the governments guiding philosophies for education is the concern that every Kenyan has the inalienable right, no matter his or her socio-economic status, to basic education[16]

1.3 A review of the curriculum changes made since 1963

Most of the curriculum changes proposals in Kenya are contained in recommendations by the Education Commissions set up and financed by the Government. Since 1963, Kenya has had five major education reviews carried out in 1964 , 1976, 1981, 1988 and 1999. Their recommendations affected the primary school curriculum .They are :

a. The Kenya Education Report of 1964

The commission which prepared this report was chaired by Professor Ominde and its sometimes referred to as The Ominde Report. This education report forms the base for the subsequent reviews of education in Kenya The  report made the following major recommendations on the curriculum:

The Kenya primary school curriculum was changed. The syllabus in use was first published in 1962 under the title ‘syllabus for African and Intermediate schools’.  The syllabus had outstanding virtues which were gladly acknowledged but it was criticised for its piece meal approach.  This  Education Report observed that  first it tends to obscure the basic issue, whether the primary curriculum as a whole is adjusted to the needs of Kenya and particularly to the needs of that large majority of pupils who at the present time will receive no further formal education. Secondly, it is apt to encourage an isolation of the constituent subjects from one another which is contrary to the best modern educational practice particularly in the lower parts of the school.[17]

In the primary school subjects, science and mathematics were given prominence while Agriculture was abandoned as a separate subject. The report recommended that History and Geography syllabus be reformed. No emphasis was given to Arts and crafts, needle work and domestic science. It noted the rudimentary state of music where it left the issue of teachers to Teachers Training colleges. The report recommended the use of English language as the medium of instruction from primary one. Also other languages like the vernaculars could be used. It emphasised the importance of Kiswahili language. It recommended it to be made a compulsory subject in primary schools and on lack of teachers, it suggested that they should be made available by use of crash training programmes during school holidays. The Report also recommended the provision of  free primary education according to the promises the government gave in its election manifesto of 1963.

Daniel N. Sifuna observed that the commission endorsed a valid educational policy objective, the provision of free primary education. This contributed to economic progress by providing a reservoir of candidates for secondary and higher education and by fulfilling the minimum basic education requirement for participation in the modern sector of the economy; it was not so important in this respect as secondary, commercial, technical and higher education.[18]

The Report also noted that rapid changes in the syllabus are apt to confuse teachers and therefore recommended that  active steps be taken to carry teachers along. There was also a restructuring of the education system from the eight years of primary education to seven. Daniel Sifuna noted that an important development in primary education was the abolition of the old four year primary and intermediate courses in favour of a seven year course.[19]

In implementation the Government adopted most of the  recommendation given in the Report. Rosalind Mutua noted that the commission was faced with an enormous task and although many of its recommendations have gradually been implemented, others have been adopted as national policy in long term plans still others have been overtaken by social and political developments.[20] 

As a result of the implementation of the recommendations the following change was noted:

i. There was a sharp rise of enrolment in schools which led to more untrained teachers being employed. It  led to more schools to be constructed and more learning resources to be provided. Rosalind Mutua observed that educational developments after independence tend to indicate that all sectors of the Kenya society were preparing to play a part in the establishment of an education to meet Kenyan needs. The government in curriculum reconstruction and qualitative expansion and the people in quantitative expansion. All this needed  reconstruction in the educational administrative structure, its aims, policies and motives: for the colonial one had with independence become disfunctional .[21] 

ii. The free primary education was implemented as from 1971 which caused an enormous strain on the existing  facilities and learning resources. Daniel Sifuna   observed that for  almost all Districts there was a radical change during the 1973-1974 period and thereafter the situation reverted to what it had been before. Either all eligible school age children were in school or those who joined soon dropped out. Enrolments were not registering their full cohorts of school age children even by 1977. It is likely that the same number of children who joined school in 1974 dropped out soon after; thus, the situation regarding access and continuation in school reverted to what it had been before the government decree.[22]

Kenya education Report of 1976 observed that the tremendous expansion of education has often been achieved at the cost of quality and relevance of education, In particular, the quality of teachers has been a growing concern in recent years. In primary schools one third of the teachers are untrained.[23]

iii. There was growing concern about quality of teaching in schools.

The 1976 Education Report states that there was also growing concern a bout the deteriorating quality of teaching of new primary mathematics and science and the consequent poor performance by the pupil.[24]

iv. There was a high number of unemployed primary school graduates.

 The Kenya Education Report of 1976 also observed that at independence there were severe shortages of skilled manpower. These were largely met by the early 1970s through  a major expansion of education…The committee notes that this expansion in education was not matched by a similar expansion in income earning opportunities. As a result there has been an over-production of school-leaver in relation to available jobs.[25]   

v.. The government expenditure on education increased.

vi. The education expansion did not reach all parts of the country. The nomadic ethnic groups did not get enough as compared to other regions. The 1976 education observed that yet the fundamental purpose of national development is to effect social improvement to the lives of the people in the country as a whole. [26]

vii. When the government announced free primary education in 1971 there were  no measures in place to cater for the lost incomes to schools which were mainly used for the provision of learning facilities. Daniel Sifuna observed that this explains the numerous  problems that have faced the operation of the free education programme which has been  rendered ineffective for a number of reasons. At the time of abolition of school fee, no counter measures were  announced about how to replace this lost revenue. Consequently, primary schools in almost all districts were flooded by many more pupils than usual. Eventually the situation reverted to square one when school committees decided to raise  a new school levy under the disguise of      a building fund ostensibly aimed at putting up new facilities to cater for the increased enrolment.[27]

b. The Kenya Education Report 1976

In 1976 the Government set up another commission to carry out an  evaluation of the present education system, define a new set of educational goals for the second decade of independence and formulate a specific programme of action for achieving these goals. The following is a summary of  the recommendations of The Kenya Education Report  of 1976 as regards to the many problems of primary education Curriculum:

·        To teach the following bodies of knowledge under languages, mathematics, science, cultural studies and pre-vocational studies in the upper primary (primary 4 to primary 7) classes.

·        To lay stress on the development of comprehension skills in the language syllabuses and on the ability to convey information and ideas in speech and in written prose.

·        To introduce  Kiswahili as a compulsory subject in primary 3 (or when English medium instruction begins) to take over from the vernacular medium instruction to avoid making pupils of primary school age learn two new languages at the same time.

·         To teach Kiswahili as a compulsory subject and to include it  in the certificate of Primary education examination or its successor.

·        To focus the factual knowledge included in the primary school science curriculum on topics which are relevant to the everyday lives of the pupils, avoiding specialized technical terms and highly abstract facts which are not relevant.

·         To support the teaching of agricultural sciences including the  economics of production to demonstrate to the pupils that agriculture can be profitable. Introduce the subject in primary 6 and 7 and Junior secondary I and II.

·        To extend the removal of fees to the full seven years of primary education that is the remaining years 5-7.

·        To reduce the present trends of high primary school dropout rates in order to achieve and maintain universal primary education in all parts of the country. Control non-fee costs.

·        To develop a nine-year basic education in the following order: Firstly achieve universal seven-year primary education; secondly raise the quality of primary education by providing trained teachers and suitable instructional materials and thirdly lengthen the duration of universal basic education from seven to nine years.[28]

Apart from the above recommendations, the commission also gave other recommendations to assist the curriculum changes delivery ( see appendix D).

Implementation of the recommendations

Most of the recommendation in the 1976 education report were implemented except the nine year basic education proposal. Implementation started by the establishment of a new ministry of  Basic education. As preparations were being made  to accommodate the nine year basic education, the Government pronounced  a new system of education, the 8.4.4 school system in 1981. The pronouncement was prompted by the proposal made by The report of the presidential working party on the second university in Kenya 1981.

Daniel Sifuna noted that the new  school structure, fully operational in 1989, offered an eight-year segment of primary education, four years of secondary education and another four at university. Forms v and vi were abolished.[29] 

c. The education Report (1981)

The government set up the commission when it realised that there were  so many primary  school graduates who were unemployed for they could not continue with higher education. At the same time they did not have any other skills which could help them get employment.

Daniel Sifuna observed that the working party on the second university whose terms of reference were to examine the feasibility of setting up a second university, addressed itself to the need to restructure the whole school system. It appreciated the national committee on educational objectives and policies reasoning that primary school leavers should acquire some basic education in addition to numeracy and literacy skills. It was considered necessary that the primary school segment should take longer to achieve such objectives. The working party therefore recommended that in order to streamline the education system of the country as a whole, the primary education system should be extended from seven to eight years. The eight year primary education was to be restructured to offer numeracy and literacy skills in the first six years and a basic education with practical orientation in the last two years. [30]

The preparation for the implementation of 8.4.4 system of education needed more classes, workshops and learning resources. Thus the government was not able to provide all these which led to the involvement of parents. Some parents found it hard to raise money because of their low incomes. Daniel Sifuna observed that the stiff requirement for specific a mounts of donations from parents did not take into account different incomes. Hence some parents had considerable difficulty in finding the required amounts of money. The construction of classrooms was only one of the basic facilities and not many schools were able to go further to provide additional facilities such as workshops and tools.[31]

The 8.4.4 system of education gave emphasis on  Technical and vocational training.

 Daniel Sifuna points out that the 8.4.4 with its emphasis on technical and vocational education will ensure that the students graduating at every level have some scientific and practical knowledge that can be utilised for self-employment, salaried employment or further training.[32] This system turned out to be costly both to the government and the parents. The government introduced cost sharing in offering primary education. The parents to provide learning facilities and resources while the government employs and pays teachers salaries. This worked against the provision of free education started in 1971.

Daniel Sifuna observed that the government acted on the recommendation of the working party which pointed out the prohibitive expenditure of the National committee on educational objectives and policies but produced its own recommendation of years of primary school without examining the costs or mentioning the priorities recommended by the national committee. The cost of the new programme is likely to militate against its success.[33]

d. The Kenya education report (1988)

This report recommended the cost sharing in financing education. The government to pay, train and employ teachers while the parents provide the learning facilities and resources. It embraced the 8.4.4 system of education.

e. The Kenya education report (1999)

This was to look at the possibility of reviewing the 8.4.4 education system because other stake holders, mostly parents were complaining because it was expensive. This system is the one in place today with some slight changes which have been made since its introduction. The examinable subjects in standard eight were reduced from eight to five by amalgamation.

In January 2003 the Government re-introduced Free Primary Education. The East African Standard reported that following the recommendations of the Kamunge report (Republic of Kenya 1988) and the session paper No 6 on Education and Training for the next decade and beyond, the government of Kenya formally embraced cost-sharing in education as a policy through which it would meet teachers salaries and education administration and fund some limited school facilities. Parents were to meet the costs of tuition, textbooks, activity fund and examination fees. But that is now history.[34]

The situation is the same as it was when it was first introduced in 1971.The government pays teachers salaries but little is being done about the physical facilities. There is a high enrolment in schools but learning facilities have been overstretched to the limit and the learning resources are not enough.

1.4 Statement of the problem

The Government is faced with an enormous task of providing education to its citizens. It is embarrassing when most of its educational innovations do not achieve the intended objectives because of poor implementation. The other stake holders raise objections. They question the strategies of curriculum changes implementation put in place. This is being taken seriously because educational standards have been on the decline. The other education stake holders ask whether the current curriculum   changes and the strategies for their implementation are appropriate for their objectives are not being met.

1.5 The purpose of this study

  a) The purpose of this study is to investigate the question: What are the problems facing curriculum changes implementation in primary education in Borabu Division?

b) And to recommend measures which might be taken to overcome these problems.

                   

1.6 Significance of the study

A synthesis of the aims and objectives of the curriculum changes  that have been made in Kenya and the changes of the education system since independence in 1963, the implementations made and their outcomes  provides a better understanding of the problems facing curriculum changes implementation in primary education.  

The findings of this study will provide convincing evidence of the important role played by different  factors, individuals and stakeholders in the implementation of curriculum changes in schools. And this highlights the importance of the different factors in curriculum changes implementation.

1.7 Conclusion

Curriculum changes implementation involves change in practice. It is the process of putting into practice an idea, program or set of activities and structures new to the people expected to change. Implementation is a very important aspect of curriculum  development.

Kenya’s education policies are contained in government documents which are; The education reports  of 1964,1976,1981,19881 and 1999.The policies are  also contained in the education Act of 1968. Kenya’s education system comprises of 8 years in Primary, 4 years in Secondary and 4 years in University, in short 8.4.4. As from January  2003, the government is offering free primary education. Since 1964, there have been curriculum changes which have been implemented by the government. Some  succeeded  while others failed. This has made the educational standards in Borabu to fall. This study aims to find out the problems which are the cause of poor curriculum implementation in Borabu Division.

                                     

                                

                                     CHAPTER 2

                                  REVIEW OF  LITERATURE

2.0 Introduction

Many scholars have taken interest in and written a lot about the implementation of curriculum changes in institutions of learning a round the world. Bob Moon notes that education is seen as influencing and reflecting the values of society and the kind of society that is hoped will develop in the future.[35] On curriculum change, Jerry G. Gaff and Associates observed that  the curriculum is forever dynamic, expanding with changes in society, knowledge and student population. Yet orchestrated and mindful restructuring of the curriculum is a tender and vulnerable affair prone to derailment, diminution and abandonment.[36]

On calls for change, Jean Rudduck observed that they  have come at us from all sides, some plain and practical, others urgent and impassioned. The need for change has been expressed in terms of the economy and many groups have said that we need a workforce that has the technological skill to compete in the international market.[37] But in all one has to ask one question; Why is it so difficult to implement curriculum changes in schools?. Michael Fullan pointed out that, the difficulty is that educational change is not a single entity even if we keep the analysis at the simplest

level of an innovation in a classroom. Innovation is multi-dimensional. There are at least three components or dimensions at stake in implementing any new program or policy: (i) the possible use of new or revised materials (direct instructional materials such as curriculum materials or technologies),  (ii. ) the possible use of new teaching approaches (i.e. new teaching strategies or activities), and (iii.) the possible alteration of beliefs (e.g. pedagogical assumptions and theories underlying particular new policies or programs). It is clear that any individual may implement none, one, two or all three dimensions. A teacher would use new curriculum materials or technologies without altering the teaching approach. Or a teacher could use the materials and alter some teaching behaviours without coming to grips with the conceptions or beliefs underlying the change.[38]

2.1 Factors affecting curriculum changes implementation

Curriculum changes implementation is a problem in many countries. Arthur E. Sutherland carried out a research or an investigation of project adoption and implementation in 185 Northern Ireland schools. This was after the Northern Ireland council for Educational Research was approached by the curriculum committee of the department of education for Northern Ireland with a request to examine the extent to which ideas and materials from curriculum projects had been accepted. There were sixteen barriers to innovation during preliminary discussions with project organizers, members of the inspectorate and teachers. He listed them in a table. In summary, they are as follows:

a. Too short a school day

b. Constraints of classroom space, fixed desks, etc

c. Promised books and equipment not being available on time

d. Shortage of money for books, packages and other special equipment.

e. Lack of adequate facilities to prepare materials (e.g. no photocopiers available, no help with typing).

f. Shortage of time to prepare material and lessons.

g. Inability to attend  in-service meetings.

h. Lack of active interest in the project by colleagues.

i. Lack of active support for the project by the principal.

j. No accessible person with first-hand knowledge of the project.

k. Unfamiliarity of the content of anew course.

l. Difficulty in adjusting to new teaching methods.

m. Geographical distance from any other teachers working on the same project or within the same field.

n. A sense of working in isolation.

o. Unfavourable reaction from pupils.

p. Inadequate pupil learning or pupil progress.

The above listed problems in addition to others like teachers leaving work and new teachers joining will very much affect implementation of curriculum changes in schools.[39]

In another case, Thomas H. Dalton carried out a research to portray and analyze the social characteristics and changes in two schools in England focusing his attention to one curriculum development project taking the school as a unit of study. Giving a conclusion on his two schools study, he detailed a number of barriers to success. Among these were:

1.Uncritical acceptance of existing innovations - there was little understanding from the unique community and social context of the school

2. A failure to diagnose the problem properly therefore was an inadequate match between innovations introduced and the real needs to be met.

3. A lack of capacity to resolve the problems of implementation… there was a lack of school strategies to facilitate retraining, developed materials or draw upon outside support.

 4. A failure to appreciate the qualities needed by the senior leadership of the schools.[40]

Referring to another study carried out in United Stated of America named  ‘The Rand Studies’ by Berman and McLaughlin for the United states office of Education,  Seymour Bernard Sarason noted that  it was the most ambitious (even heroic) attempt to assess outcomes of efforts at educational change which took several years to study. According to their finding about the effects of federal programs, He     observed  that the adoption of projects did not insure successful implementation; moreover, they added, successful implementation did not guarantee long-run continuation.[41] From these Rand Studies  Seymour B. Sarason also noted  the following factors affecting implementation and continuation given in  summary form below:

i. Project resources: more expensive projects were generally no more likely than less expensive ones to be effectively implemented, elicit teachers, change, improve student performance or be continued by teachers.

ii. Scope of the project: ambitious and demanding innovations promoted teacher change and teacher continuation of project methods without necessary causing unmanageable implementation problems or diminishing gains in student performance

iii. Implementation strategies: They found that these strategies would spell the difference between success and failure almost independently of the type of innovation or educational method involved, moreover they could determine whether teachers would assimilate and continue using project methods or allow them fall into disuse.

iv. Educational methods: a project’s method determined its implementation, effect and continuation to only a small and limited extent.

v. School organizational climate and leadership: Three elements of a school’s organizational climate powerfully affected the project’s implementation and continuation; the quality of working relationship among teachers, the active support of principals and the effectiveness of project directors.

vi. Characteristics of schools and attributes of teachers: Change was typically harder to obtain and continue at the secondary level. The number of years teaching had negative effects: the longer a teacher had taught the less likely was the project to achieve its goals and the less likely was the project to improve student performance. Furthermore, teachers with many years on the job were less likely to change their own practices and less likely to continue using project methods after the end of federal funding.

vii. District management capacity and support: Districts differ sharply in their capacity to manage change, agent projects and their receptivity toward them.[42]

In general terms the following factors have been singled out by writers and  researchers as being the causes of the poor implementation of curriculum changes. Michael Fullan has listed nine critical factors which have some effect on the implementation process. He has grouped them into three as given in summary below:   

a. Characteristics of change: i. Need ii. clarity  iii. complexity

iv. quality/practicability

b. Local characteristics: i. District ii. community, iii. principals iv. Teachers

c. External factors :  .Government and other agencies.[43]

2.2 Characteristics of change

i. Need for change

In most cases many innovations are attempted without  a careful examination of whether or not they address what are perceived to be priority needs. He adds that people often become clearer about their needs only when they start doing things during implementation itself. Michael Fullan reminds us that by this early implementation stage, people involved must perceive both that the needs being addressed are significant and that they are making at least some progress toward meeting them. Early rewards and some tangible success are critical incentives during implementation.[44]  .

ii. Clarity:

Clarity is a problem in any change implementation. Albert V. Kelly commenting on the role of teachers in curriculum implementation observed that teachers cannot be operated effectively by remote control. If any educational innovation is to be successful, the teachers must understand as well as believe in it. [45] Michael Fullan argues that lack of clarity diffuse goals and unspecified means of implementation represents a major problem at the implementation stage; teachers and others find that the changes is simply not very clear as to what it means in practice. [46]

iii. Complexity

Michael Fullan explains that complexity refers to the difficulty and extent of change required of the individuals responsible for implementation. The actual amount depends on the starting point for any given individual or group but the main idea is that any change can be examined with regard to difficulty skill required and extent of alteration in beliefs, teaching strategies and use of materials[47]. Michael A. Huberman and Mathew B. Miles in their study on implementation of innovations concluded that these innovations posed problems initially to their target users who sized them up as complex, hard to do, unclear, flexible and sometimes too flexible. The classroom fit was seen as only fair; the users felt the new practice would make demands calling for substantial changes in the ways they managed their yearly work.[48]

iv. Quality /practicability

Commenting on quality, Michael Fullan explained that inadequate quality and even the simple unavailability of materials and other resources can result when adoption decisions are made on grounds of political necessity or even on grounds of perceived need without time for development.[49]  

2.3 The local factors

i. The school District

According to Michael Fullan, the previous attempts by the District to carry out implementation of curriculum change plays a big role when it comes to implementation of new initiative. Past failure will have a negative effect on the new initiative. He also points out that since introducing innovations is a way of life in most school systems, districts build up track record at a given point in time, it represents a significant precondition relative to the next new initiative.[50] 

ii. School boards and community

School boards and community have a direct impact on implementation of any curriculum initiatives. If changes initiated are not appealing to them, they can resist by even firing the superintendents. Michael Fullan noted that  the role of communities and school boards is quite variable ranging from apathy to active involvement with the later varying from conflictful to cooperative mode depending on the conditions.[51]  The school boards also have the powers to spent the moneys allocated to them. Albert V. Kelly observes that the way in which the money allocated to a school is spent is a matter for the governing body to determine and the granting of additional money for specific projects is at the discretion of local government, so that, in the ultimate, whether a school can or cannot pursue any particular line of innovation is a decision that rests with those who hold the purse strings.[52]

iii.  Principal

Michael Fullan points out that  the principal is the person most likely to be in            a position to shape the organizational conditions necessary for success such as the development of shared goals, collaborative work structures and climates and procedures for monitoring results.[53] The school head can be a problem also. The East African Standard reported that The Nyanza P.C has urged teachers to shun corrupt deals to ensure school projects are completed. He warned head teachers against colluding with contractors to siphon school funds through unnecessary projects. He said some projects have stalled due to collaboration between head teachers and contractors who overestimate the project value.[54]

iv. Teachers

Kelly observed that what is done in schools depends very much on how the teachers in the schools have been prepared in their initial courses of training, so the kind of course offered in programmes of initial teacher education and in in-service courses will have an important impact on curriculum development .[55] Kelly   also added that there can be no curriculum development without teacher development and the more teachers are to be given responsibility for curriculum development  the more important it becomes that they be given all possible support of this kind.[56] 

Lewis Brownstein points out that apart from the general constraints imposed by conditions in the society other problems of implementation can be anticipated. The first of these will be the training of staff, the development of curricula and the provision of materials.[57] Sutherland observed that new teachers were even more likely than other teachers to feel hampered in their attempts at innovation by inadequate preparation facilities… and by shortage of available money for curriculum development. David J. Whitehead on the role of teachers noted that, curriculum developers have started to realise the crucial role that teachers play in the process of innovation. They are no longer to be considered just as the passive recipients of curriculum packages but rather the focus of curriculum development work contributing to dissemination as much as receiving help because of it .[58]  Also He noted that no project is likely to succeed unless it takes into account possible motives on the part of the teacher in adopting it. Such developments are more likely to take place if they have beneficial effect on the teacher’s status, promotional prospects or earnings.[59]

2.4 External factors

i. Government and other agencies

State education departments and other agencies involved in curriculum development influence the implementation of curriculum changes in schools. But all these forces have not learned how to work together in the implementation process a thing which has not helped much in the process. Michael Fullan points out that, the most straight forward way of stating the problem is to say that local school systems and external authority agencies have not learned how to establish a processual relationship with each other. The relationship is more of the form of episodic events than processes: submission of requests for money, intermittent progress reports  on what is being done, external evaluations, paper work not people work. [60]

 ii. Financial Resources

For any changes to be meaningfully implemented, they must be backed up with relevant and adequate resources. This means that there should be enough financial resources available to be utilized in this implementation process to provide the required resources. Mathew B. Miles asserting the importance of financial resources in implementation  observed that if we think of innovation as requiring extra system effort, it is not surprising to find across many types of systems that innovativeness varies directly with available money though this is not as we have seen an invariant finding.[61] Albert V. Kelly also points out that in particular, financial restrictions will invariably constrain and inhibit professional ambitions for certain kinds of development such as a reduction in the size of class, improved in-service provision or any other contribution to curriculum development. [62]

2.5 Conclusion

This chapter provides a comprehensive reference to the problems affecting curriculum changes implementation. This is per the findings by different researchers. Each study gives factors which it found to be hindering the proper implementation of curriculum changes. Arthur E. Sunderland in his research on a project of adoption and implementation in 185 Northern Ireland schools found out sixteen barriers to innovation. Thomas H. Dalton  carried out a research in England focusing his attention to one curriculum development project. Seymour B. Sarason carried out  ‘The Rand research in the United States of America’.

In all the studies, the following factors have been singled out  in Michael Fullan as the main barriers to curriculum changes implementation. These are; need, clarity, complexity, quantity /practicability, district, community, principals, teachers, government and other agencies.

                                     

                    

                                          CHAPTER 3

                                           METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

In this research, I have  used quantitative approach to investigate the problems facing implementation of curriculum changes in Primary education in Borabu Division in Kenya. The information has been sought directly from those involved in the implementation of curriculum changes. Judith Bell  noted that quantitative researchers collect facts and study the relationship of one set of facts  to another. They use techniques that are likely to produce quantified and if possible, generalizable conclusions.  [63]  

The questionnaire design has been used to aid in collection of data. Paul Hague points out that primarily the role of questionnaire is to draw accurate information from the respondent.[64] 

Data for this study was collected from a representative selection of eighteen schools all from Borabu Division. The findings  have been generalized to reflect what the situation is in the whole Division.

3.1 Research questions

In this study  I  used questions as a basis of my investigation . I used them as a guide to finding out problems contributing to poor curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division. I have used both open- ended and closed-ended questions. These are self-completion and were accompanied by a covering letter in which I explained the purpose of the research. Tim  May  observes that the mail or self-completion questionnaire offers a relatively cheap method of data collection over the personal interview. As its name implies, it is intended for the respondent to fill out themselves. [65] 

The information needed was fairly straightforward and relatively brief. Also needed was standardized data from the identical questions  because the respondents were able to read and understand the questions. I used the questionnaire because it is viable method. Supporting the use of questionnaires, Judith Bell noted that questionnaires are a good way of collecting certain types of information quickly and relatively cheaply as long as you are sufficiently disciplined to abandon questions that are superfluous to the main task. [66]   

The guiding questions I used to investigate the above problem in Borabu Division are as follows:

i. What are the causes of poor curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division? .

ii. Are the parents to blame for the poor implementation of curriculum changes in Borabu Division?

iii. To what extent is the head teacher a contributory factor to poor curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division?

iv. Are the teachers to blame for the poor curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division? 

v. To what extent is the supply of learning resources contributing to the poor implementation of curriculum change in Borabu Division?  

vi. What is the role of the D.E.O in the curriculum changes implementation?

vii. Is the government to blame for the problem facing curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division? .

viii . Is lack of enough financial resources to blame for the poor curriculum

changes implementation in Borabu Division?

3.2 Research method explained

The aim of this survey was to gather information which I could analyze, extract patterns and finally make conclusions. On survey, Judith Bell observes that  in most cases, a survey will aim to obtain information from a representative selection of the population and from that sample will then be able to present the findings as being representative of the population as a whole .[67] In this study I have used quantitative method of study. Quantitative method of study is explained by Lorraine Blaxter  and others as concerned with the collection and analysis of data in numeric form. It tends to emphasize relatively large-scale and representative sets as data and is often falsely in our view presented or perceived as being about the gathering of facts.[68]

Recommending quantitative method, Catherine Dawson states that quantitative research statistics through the use of large-scale survey research, using methods such as questionnaires or structured interviews,…This type of research reaches many more people, but the contact with those people is much quicker.[69] Martyn  Denscombe stating the  advantages of using quantitative data observed that  the use of quantitative data in social research has its attractions. For one thing it carries with it an air of scientific respectability. Because it uses numbers and can present findings in the form of graphs and tables, it conveys a sense of solid objective research. [70]

I have employed survey research technique in gathering the data needed from schools in Borabu Division and also from the education office in the Division. This helped me to obtain data which was easy to analyse and from it I extracted patterns and was able to make comparisons. Lorraine  Blaxter and others states that survey research  in education involves the collection of information from members of a group of students, teachers or other persons associated with the educational process and the analysis of this information to illuminate important educational issues.  [71]

I used the questionnaire method in collecting the data from the respondents because it is viable and it saved me the burden of travelling to Kenya to administer the questions myself. The questions were posted to  my wife who with the help of other two friends made arrangements and distributed them to schools , parents  and the Divisional Education Officer Borabu Division. I used triangulation to cross check the existence of some data. I compared the response from the  D.E.O with information from other sources, that is, schools and parents. The questionnaire technique is appropriate because the information required is straightforward, relatively brief and this  gave me standardised data from identical questions. The idea of crosschecking data is supported by many authors. Judith Bell notes that even so if possible, efforts should be made to crosscheck the findings and in a more extensive study  to use more than one method of data collecting.[72]  

 Also David Hall and others observed that social scientists  have gradually realised the advantage of using a variety of research strategies so that the problems associated with one strategy may be compensated for by the strengths of another. [73] 

3.3 Participants and sampling

The participants in my research were all from Borabu Division in Nyamira District in Kenya. In the research, I used two people from each school. The head teacher  responded on behalf of the teachers and one member of P.T.A. who is a parent  on behalf of the parents of the school. The Division Education Officer responded on behalf of the government. Alan J.B. Anderson  observed that  if statistical methods are to be of use in answering a particular  question, one of the first steps must be specification of the so called universe of discourse, that is to say, the collection of actual or hypothetical items defined by some common characteristics to which the question and answer are to apply. In statistical terms, these items are called units and the aggregate of all the units is termed the population. [74] 

The population of my study comprised of 52 primary  schools  in Borabu Division in   Kenya. David Hall and others stated that the term population is used here in a restricted sense, not of the population of a country, but of all the individuals who fall into the category of interest.[75]  It is out of this population that I drew a sample   of 18 schools for the purpose of this study. Alan J.B. Anderson pointed out that  sampling is the selection of some units of population to represent the whole aggregate and hence we must make certain that the sample members are typical as possible in relation to the objectives of the study.[76]

In total,  thirty seven questionnaires were given out as follows: eighteen to school Head teachers; eighteen to P.T.A. representatives in those schools in Borabu Division and one to the Divisional education officer. I  used simple random sampling. Anne Edwards and Talbot observed that each individual has an equal chance of being selected. A sample is selected at random from a list of the population (the sampling frame).[77] Catherine Dawson also observed that in quantitative research, it is believed that if this sample is chosen carefully using the correct procedure, it is then possible to generalise the results to the whole of the research population.[78]  

 3.4 Design of Research instruments

For a research to be successful, there must be a plan by which specific activities are conducted and coordinated. Arlene Fink and Jacqueline Kesecoff states that the design refers to the way in which the survey environment is controlled or organized. The more control you have, the more credible your results will be.[79]      

In this study, a research design with four components has been used as follows:

i. Working design

At this stage  the overall feasibility of the research is addressed. I specified the research problem and the research questions that the survey was to address. I  also had to specify the goals of the survey. Louis Cohen and others observed that decisions in this field are strategic; they set the general nature of the research and questions that researchers may need to consider .[80]

 ii. Working hypothesis

In this stage of the research process,  I begun testing the initial decisions.

According to Ronald Czaja and Johnny Blair, this stage entails preparing the sampling frame, record keeping forms and survey questions and then testing these items to see how well the process is working .[81]

iii. Data collection

Questionnaires were used in collection of data .Questions were set on areas identified as causes of poor curriculum implementation and were expected to help find out the problems affecting curriculum implementation in Borabu Division. Literature on curriculum implementation was very useful in the questionnaires designing. After revising the questionnaires, I  posted them to my research assistants: These were  two teachers and one Zone inspector of schools (Z.I.S) from Borabu division.     

Ronald Czaja and Johnny Blair noted that during this stage, we need to monitor the results of the sampling and data collection activities and begin coding and data file preparation.[82]  

iv. Data analysis and interpretation

This is the last stage of the research. Here I analysed data from the questionnaires.

Ronald Czaja and Johnny Blair states that the final stage of a survey includes coding and analysing the data and writing a final report or papers describing the survey results. [83]  This  involved the organization of the data collected followed by data reduction from each group of respondents separately. Then I compared the data received from the three different sources. Finally, I compiled the data using tables, percentages and averages.

3.5 Reliability and validity achieved

After receiving data from both sources, that is, from the Divisional Education officer (D.E.O), the head teachers and the PTA representatives, I compared their responses. I analysed the findings and found that most of the responses were similar. Also the respondents were the same people in charge of the implementation of the curriculum in their schools. So they were well placed to know exactly where things were  going wrong. This was therefore proof that  the data collected was reliable. According to Judith Bell, Validity tells us whether an item measures or describes what it supposed to measure or describe.[84]  

Arlene Fink and Jacqueline Kosecoff observed that  a valid survey, produces accurate information. Reliable and valid surveys are obtained by making sure the definitions and models you use to select questions are grounded in theory or experience. No single survey type starts out with better reliability and validity.[85] On reliability, they   explain that,  a ruler is considered to be a reliable instrument if it yields the same results every time it is used to measure the same object assuming the object itself has not changed. A reliable survey will provide a consistent measure of important characteristics despite background fluctuations. It reflects the true score-one that is free from random errors. A ruler is considered to be valid instrument if it provides an accurate measure (free from error) of a person’s height .[86]

The information given by the head teachers and the parents in response to the questionnaire was very important because the questions were seeking answers to what was affecting their schools directly. It was more likely that some did not give true information may be because they  could be the cause of poor implementation of the curriculum changes in their schools. After counter checking and comparing the information collected from the head teachers, parents and the D.E.O, I was able to draw conclusions.

3.5 Conclusion.

In this study, quantitative method was used to collect data from the respondents. The questionnaire design was also used. The participants were from 18 schools out of the 52 in the Division and one Divisional Education officer . There were two participants from each  school the head teacher and one parent representing P.T.A. In total there were 37 respondents.

The questionnaires were sent by post to a research assistant who received them organised and distributed them to the respondents. They were later collected and sent back for analysis and interpretation. The responses from each group were interpreted separately and then compared and analysed together with the responses from the other groups. The information given by the respondents was important because they are directly involved in the implementation of curriculum in their schools. Therefore they are better placed to know what is going wrong in the implementation process.

                          

                        

                         CHAPTER  4

                                            FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

The data for  analysis  was collected from Borabu Division in Kenya. The data was collected from eighteen primary schools  and from the Divisional education officer Borabu Division. The respondents from the schools were the head teachers and one member of Parents Teachers Association who represented the parents.

This chapter has analysed the findings according to their categories, then compared the findings from the three categories and  finally a summary of the findings is given.

4.1 Parents

The response from the parents in this research was 100%.They answered the

questions as follows:

·        12  respondents  answered        25 questions

·        02   respondents   answered       24 questions

·        04  respondents  answered         23 questions

Respondents	04	02	12
No of questions answered	23	24	25
% of the questionnaire	92	96	100

The individual questions were answered as shown in the table below.

question	No who answered	%	Question	No who answered	%
1	18	100	14	17	94.44
2	18	100	15	18	100
3	18	100	16	15	83.33
4	18	100	17	17	94.44
5	18	100	18	17	94.44
6	18	100	19	18	100
7	18	100	20	17	94.44
8	18	100	21	17	94.44
9	18	100	22	16	88.88
10	18	100	23	18	100
11	16	88.89	24	18	100
12	18	100	25	18	100
13	18	100

The parents responded as follows to each question:

a. Sources of funding

1). On Sources of funding they cited: government 100%, communities 16.67%, parents 50% and donors 11.11%.   

2). On the level of funding: Adequate 5.56%, inadequate 50%, moderately adequate   27.78%, and slightly adequate 11.11%.

3). Uses of funds received:  Buying books  94.44% , support staff salaries 61.11, buying learning resources 100% and physical facilities maintenance 83.33%.

b. The   curriculum changes   

4). The number of curriculum changes in the last 20 years:

5.56% of the respondents cited 2 changes, 38.89% cited 3 changes, 11.11% cited 4 changes and 27.78% cited 5 changes.

5). Effects of the changes on the curriculum: reduction of subjects 77.78%,        addition of new subjects 61.11%;  addition of content to different subject areas         18.88%,  reduction of content to different subject areas 38.89%, amalgamation of subjects 77.78%,  Time allocation to subjects (reduction) 16.67%, and Time allocation to subjects (addition) 27.78%.

6). Problems encountered while implementing changes;

·        Teachers not equipped in terms of subject matter 44.44%.

·        Learning resources not enough and available in time 72.22%.

·        Too much subject content for the learners to cover 27.78%.

·        77.78% cited understaffing, and teachers are overworked.

·         No refresher courses for teachers before implementation of changes 38.89%.

·        Many books have been published thus there is a problem of choosing the right book 16.67%.

·        22.22% cited amalgamation of subjects and changing the curriculum now and again.

·        Parents are not supporting school development projects 33.33%.

·        No enough learning facilities 83.33%.

·        Time allocated for subjects not enough for syllabus coverage 66.67% and

·        Tendency to neglect non examinable subjects 50%.

7). 100% of the respondents agreed that there is an on  going curriculum change implementation taking place in their schools at the moment and gave the following effects of free primary education introduced in January 2003 to this changes;

·        Government has managed to provide books and other learning materials 22.22%.

·        There’s lack of learning facilities 83.33%.

·        Over-enrolment and understaffing  88.88% and

·         Helped to buy text books for the new syllabus and other learning materials 55.56%.

c. Teachers

8). On the % of teachers in their schools promoted  in the last five years:  22% of the respondents cited none, 11.11% cited two, 16.67% cited three, 16.67% cited four   and 16.67 % cited more than four.       

9). 16.67% of the respondents cited teachers have enough time to mark pupils work while 83.33% cited they do not have. The 83.33% of the respondents gave the following times when their teachers do marking and preparing lessons for the next day:

·        Prepare and mark them at home, in the morning and evening hours before and after classes was cited by 100% of the respondents and

·        They prepare at home at night, during breaks and games time by 93.33%.

10). On level of staffing: 5.56% cited overstaffed, 38.89 % understaffed, 16.67%     well staffed and 38.89% slightly understaffed.    

11). How their level of staffing affects the curriculum changes implementation in their school:

·        No effective teaching because teachers are overloaded 72.22%.

·          Lowers the standards of education 55.56%.

·        Teachers not able to prepare their professional records properly because of a lot of work 66.67%.

·        Teachers not able to cover the syllabus 50%.

·        No attention is given to slow learners 44.44% and

·        A teacher handles more than 40 pupils in class which makes it hard for the teacher to give individual attention to pupil 66.67%.

d. Initiation of curriculum changes

12). The level at which the curriculum changes initiated: 94.44% cited national, 16.67% provincial, 11.11% District, 5.56% Division and 5.56% Zone.

 13). On the initiation of the curriculum changes: 11.11% cited parents, 16.67%    cited teachers, 16.67% cited politicians, 94.44% cited Government and 5.56% cited students.

 14). The number of stages the initiated curriculum changes information pass through before reaching  schools: 11.11% cited  2 stages, 16.67% cited 3 stages, 22.22% cited 4 stages,  and 50% cited  5  stages.

15). 16.67% of the respondents is satisfied with the methods used in relaying information while 83.33% are not.                                              

16). 83.33% of the respondents in question 15 cited the following reasons: delayed information 73.33%, distorted information 46.67% and non recipient of information 20%.

e. Economic status of parents

17). 83.33% cited that the economic status of parents affect curriculum changes implementation while 16.67% of the respondents cited it does not.

 18). The 83.33% of the respondents to question 17 cited the effects of parent’s economic status to schools as follows:

·        They are not able to provide the basic needs to their children or contribute to the development of the school 86.67%.

·        Some pupils fail to report immediately to school because of school uniform.53.33%.

·        They are not ready to accept changes in curriculum because they know that needs money from them 46.67%.

·        Pupils don’t attend school regularly 33.33%.

·        Lack of enough food for their children  some go to school hungry 26.67% and

·        They cannot supplement the government efforts by providing missing learning resources to their children.93.33%.

f. Inspection of schools

19). On inspection of schools they responded as follows: 

No of inspections	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	10
No of schools	2	4	4	1	3	1	1	1	1

That is an average of 2.11% inspections per school.

g. The school time table

 20). On the time allotted for each subject on the time table, 11.11% of the respondents cited it is enough while 88.88% cited it is not.  The subjects  not well catered for : Maths 62.5%, English 50%, social studies 12%, Kiswahili 50%, GHC 43.75% science 75% and CRE 50%.

h. School funds

21). 11.11% cited there is misappropriation of school funds  while 83.33%  cited there isn’t.

i. Learning facilities

 22). 16.67% cited their schools do have learning facilities while 72.22% cited they do not.

 23). 11.11% respondents’ schools have facilities like computers, photocopiers, type writers while 88.88% do not.

j. School head teacher

 24). 88.88% of the respondents rate their head teacher as efficient, 5.56% as most efficient and 5.56% less efficient.

 25). 27.78% of the respondents cited the reaction of teachers towards a new change of curriculum as welcoming, 11.11% unwelcoming and 66.67% mixed reaction.

4.2 The Head Teachers

The responses received from the head teachers were 100%. They answered the questions as follows:

·        11 participants  answered 25 questions

·        4 participants  answered    24questions

·        2 participants answered     23questions

·        1 participant answered      22 questions

It can be presented in a table as shown below.

Respondents	01	02	04	11
No of questions	22	23	24	25
% of the questionnaire	88	92	96	100

The individual questions  were  answered  by the respondents as shown below.

Question	No who answered	%	question	No who answered	%
1	18	100	14	17	94.44
2	18	100	15	18	100
3	18	100	16	13	72.22
4	18	100	17	18	100
5	18	100	18	17	94.44
6	18	100	19	15	83.33
7	18	100	20	18	100
8	18	100	21	18	100
9	18	100	22	16	88.89
10	18	100	23	18	100
11	18	100	24	17	94.44
12	18	100	25	18	100
13	18	100

The informants cited the following to the questionnaire:

a. Sources of funding

1). On sources of funding: 94.44% cited Government, 16.67 indicated Community, 55.56%, cited Parents and 11.11% cited Donors.  

2). On the level of funding they indicated as follows: adequate 5.56%, inadequate 22.22%, moderately adequate 44.44% and slightly adequate 38.89%.  

3). On the uses funds cited as follows: buying books 88.88%, support staff salaries 88.88%, buying learning resources 83.33% and physical facilities maintenance       66.67%.

b. The curriculum changes made

4). On the number of curriculum changes  made in the past 20 years: 11.11% of the respondents cited 2 changes, 61.11% cited 3, 22.22% cited 4   and  5.56% cited 5.

5). On their effect on the curriculum: reduction of subjects  83.33%, addition of  new subjects 44.44%, addition of content to different subject areas 72.22%,reduction of content to different subject areas 33.33%, amalgamation of subjects 77.78% , Time allocation to subjects  (reduction) 22.22%,  and  Time allocation to subjects (addition) 27.78%.

6). The problems they are encountering while implementing the change(s);

·        88.88% of the respondents cited lack of physical facilities and hard to give home work as books are shared.

·        83.33% cited amalgamation of subjects increased content and changes of textbooks leading to shortages.

·        77.78% cited lack of enough money to buy learning resources, learning materials not available in time leading to poor syllabus coverage, teachers are overloaded with work and Shortage of teachers where the ratio is 1: 80.

·        Pupils’ lose of interest in non examinable subjects 44.44%.

·        33.89% cited poor coverage of syllabus and introduction of new subjects into the curriculum.

·         No in-service given to teachers before introduction of new curriculum 66.67%.

·        No skilled teachers in music, home science and Art& crafts 55.56%.

·        Time allocation for the subjects not enough 94.44%.

·        Learners are subjected to a lot of work 61.11% and.

·        44.44% cited frequent transfers of teachers, takes long to receive money from government delaying the purchase of learning materials and handling two syllabi at the same time.

7). 88.88% confirmed there is an on going curriculum change implementation, while 11.11% cited there isn’t. The following are the effects of free primary education introduced in January 2003 to this change(s):

·        100% of the respondents cited lack of enough learning resources,        inadequate learning facilities and an increase of the number of pupils.

·        93.75% cited understaffing.

·        Poor syllabus coverage, 81.25% and

·        No enough physical facilities 62.5%.

c. Teachers

8). On percentage of teachers promoted in the last five years: None 16.67%, two 11.11%, three 16.67%, four 22.22% and more than four 33.33%.

9). On enough to prepare 11.11% cited yes while 88.88% cited no. The 8.88% who cited No also cited the following times when their teachers do the marking and preparing lessons for the next day:  

·        Lessons are prepared after school and during weekends, 100%.

·        They mark during games time and evening preps, 75%.

·        At night and during the weekends, 87.5% and

·        During morning and evening preps during break time and games, 93.75%.

 10). On the level of staffing in their school: 33.33% cited understaffed, 11.11%cited well staffed, and 50% cited slightly understaffed and 5.56% cited slightly over staffed.

11). On the effects on the curriculum changes implementation in their schools they indicated as follows:

·        Because of understaffing teaching is in effective, 77.78%.

·        Teachers are working under stress and overpopulated classes, 72.22%.

·        Teachers handle more than 40 pupils; no attention is given to individual pupil’s especially slow learners, 66.67%.

·        No good syllabus coverage, 88.88% and

·        No enough time to prepare and teach well, 83.33%.

d. Initiation of curriculum changes

12). The level at which the curriculum changes are initiated: 100% cited national, provincial 16.67%, District 16.67% , school 16.67% community 11.11% Division 11.11%   and Zone 11.11%.

 13). On who influences the curriculum changes they cited: Parents 5.56%, Teachers   11.11%, politicians 33.33% and Government   83.33%.     

14). On the channel of communication to schools they cited as follows: 3 stages 16.67%, 4 stages 16.67% and 5 stages 50%.    

15). 27, 78% respondents cited Yes while 72.22% cited no.

16).Those not satisfied cited the following reasons: delayed information 61.54%,     distorted information 53.85%, and non recipient of information 23.08%.

e. Economic status of parents

17). 94.44% cited economic status of parents affects curriculum implementation while 5.67% cited no.

18). The 94.44% indicated these ways in which it affects the curriculum changes implementation:

·        Shortage of learning resources, 29.41%.

·        Parents cannot supplement the government due to their low incomes 94.12%.

·        Parents unwilling to contribute to the school finances because there is free education, 82.35%.

·        There are many pupils who can’t go to school because of school uniform, 47.06% and

·        Many children are underfed, 47.06%.

f. Inspection of schools

19). In the past five years their schools have been inspected as follows:

No of inspections	0	1	2	3	4	5	6
No of schools	1	3	2	3	3	2	1

This is an average of 1.4 inspections per school.

g. School time table

20). 27.78% of the respondents cited subjected are allotted enough time on the time table while 72.22% cited no. Subjects not well catered for cited were: Maths 76.92%, English92.31%, Kiswahili 61.54%, creative arts 76.92%, social studies 92.31%, GHC 100%, and Music 23.08%.

h. Misappropriation of school funds

21). 5.56% cited misappropriation of funds in schools while 94.44% respondents cited no.

i. Learning facilities

 22). 66.67% cited schools do not have learning facilities like science Laboratory and Art and crafts workshops while 22.22% cited they had one each.

 23).On availability of school facilities 5.56% cited yes while 94.44% cited no.

j. School head teacher

24). On self assessment as administrators; 83.33% cited efficient, 5.56% cited most efficient and 5.56% less efficient.      

 25). On the reaction of their teachers towards a new change of curriculum, 22.22% cited welcoming, 22.22% cited unwelcoming and 55.56% cited mixed reaction.

  

4.3 The D.E.O Borabu Division

   

The response was 100%. There was one informant.

The participant answered all the questions. This was his response per each question:

a. Sources of funding

1). On the sources of funding he cited: Government and Community.    

2). On level of funding he cited: moderately adequate.  

3). On the uses funds he indicted: buying books and learning resources.

b. The curriculum changes made

4). Within a period of 20 years, he cited 5 curriculum changes have taken place.

5). The respondent cited; reduction of subjects and amalgamation of subjects.      

6). The respondent cited the following as the problems schools are encountering in implementing the changes:

·        The children are not very much concern.

·        Lack o f money.

·        Parents are more concern in bringing in more children.

·        Transfers of teacher is too often and

·        Inexperienced officers working at acting capacities e.g. inspectors of schools.

7). The respondent indicated there is an on going curriculum change being implemented. On how the introduction of free primary education is affecting this change: More pupils have come to school, parents are very much relieved.

c. Teachers

8). The respondent cited 2 % of teachers have been promoted to the next professional grade in the last five years in his Division.

 9). On the availability of enough time for teachers to prepare he indicated there wasn’t enough time. They mark pupils work during break hours.

10). On the level of staffing the responded indicated the schools are understaffed.            

11). On the effects of understaffing the response were: Teachers are overloaded since schools are understaffed.

d. Initiation of curriculum changes

12). On the level of any curriculum changes initiation, the respondent cited: National    

13). On who influences the curriculum changes he cited Government.    

14). On the number of stages initiated curriculum changes information pass through before reaching schools in his Division ready for implementation: he cited 4.

 15). The respondent indicated that the method used in communication is not satisfactory.       

16). On the communication methods used, the draw back the respondent cited was delayed information. 

  

e. Economic status of parents

17). The respondent cited that the economic status of parents affects curriculum implementation.                           

18). He cited the following reasons for answer to question 17.

·        Poor time management and  

·        Parents are not concerned about the school.

19). On inspection of school the respondent ‘all were inspected’.     

f. Inspection of schools

20). On time allotted for each subject on the time table the respondent indicated that it is not enough. On which subjects are not well catered for the response was: Some subjects are not well catered for especially as from second break.

h. Misappropriation of school funds

 21). On misappropriation of school funds the respondent indicated that there wasn’t any.

 i. Learning facilities

 22). On learning facilities like science Laboratories and Art and crafts workshops the respondent indicated there was none.

 23). On availability of facilities like computers, photocopiers, type writers in your schools to help in preparing teaching materials the respondent cited the schools didn’t have any. 

        

j. School head teacher

24). On self assessment as an administrator the respondent rated himself as less efficient.

25). On the reaction of teachers towards a new change of curriculum, the respondent cited it was welcoming. 

4.4 Summary of the findings

The response received from the participants was 100%.There were 37 participants who took part in the exercise. The response was as follows:

Respondents	1	6	6	24
No of questions answered	22	23	24	25
% of the questionnaire	88	92	96	100

All the respondents answered over 85% of the questions.

The response to individual questions was as shown the table below:

question	No who answered	%	question	No who answered	%	question	No who answered	%
1	37	100	10	37	100	19	34	91.89
2	37	100	11	35	94.59	20	36	97.3
3	37	100	12	37	100	21	36	97.3
4	37	100	13	37	100	22	33	89.19
5	37	100	14	35	94.59	23	37	100
6	37	100	15	37	100	24	36	97.3
7	37	100	16	29	78.38	25	37	100
8	37	100	17	36	97.3
9	37	100	18	35	94.59

The findings from the three groups of participants were as follows:

a. Sources of funding

1). On sources of funding for their schools they cited: from the Government 97.29%, Parents 19%, the community 18.92% and donors 10.81%.  

 2). The respondents on level funding cited as follows: adequate 5.41%, inadequate 35.14%, moderately adequate 37.84% and slightly adequate 24.32%.

 3). On use of funds they cited: buying books 91.89%, support staff salaries 72.97%, buying learning resources 91.89% and physical facilities maintenance 72.97%.

 b. The curriculum changes made

4). On the number of changes made in the last 20 years they responded as follows:  8.12% indicated 2, 48.65% indicated 3, 16.22% cited 4, 16.22% cited 5.

5). On the change made on the curriculum they cited: by reduction of subjects 81.08%, addition of content to different subject areas 78.38% and  amalgamation of subjects 78.38%, reduction of content to different subject areas 35.14%, time allocation to subjects (reduction)18.92%, and time allocation to subjects (addition) 27.03%.

6). The problems being encountered while implementing the change(s) are;

·           Lack of money 40.54%.

·           2.70% cited transfers of teacher is too often, and inexperienced officers working at acting capacities e.g. inspectors of schools.

·                    21.62% indicate teachers are sometimes not equipped for the changes in terms of subject matter, learning resources not enough and available in time.

·                    Too much for the learners to cover 13.51%.

·                    Most school are understaffed 75.66%.

·                    51.35% cited teachers are not taken for refresher courses before implementation of changes and amalgamation of subjects brought a problem to teachers who were handling them.

·                    Parents have become negative to school development projects 16.22%.

·                    No enough learning facilities 83.78%.

·                    Teachers are overworked 75.66%.

·                    Time allocated for subjects on the time table not enough for syllabus coverage 78.38%.

·                    Tendency to neglect non examinable subjects 50%.

·                    Changes of textbooks leading to shortages 40.54%,

·                    Shortage of teachers where the ratio is 1: 80: 37.84%.

·                    introduction of new subjects into the curriculum like social studies 16.22% and

·                    No skilled teachers in music, home science and Art& crafts 27.03%.

7). 94.59% of the respondents indicated there is an on going curriculum implementation while 5.41% cited no. The introduction of free primary education in January 2003 is affecting these changes because;

·        The government has positively effected the changes as the government has managed to provide books and other learning materials11.43%.

·        There’s lack of learning facilities 88.57%.

·        There’s over-enrolment and understaffing due to free primary education 94.29%.

·        Free primary education helped to buy text books for the new syllabus and other learning materials 28.57%.

·        Enrolment of pupils increased but facilities are inadequate e.g. textbooks, desks, tables, 47.70% and

·        No enough funds for improving the physical facilities 47.71%.

c. Teachers

8). On promotion of teachers in the last five years they responded: none-18.92%, two—13.51%, three- 16.22% four-18.92% more than four-24.32%.

 9). On time for preparation and marking 13.51% cited yes while 86.49% cited No.

Time preparation is done they cited:

·        They prepare and mark them at home, in the morning and evening hours before and after classes 96.88% and

·        They mark and prepare at home at night and during breaks and games time 90.63%.

10). The respondents cited as follows: understaffed 37.84% overstaffed 2.70%, well staffed 13.51%, slightly understaffed 43.24%, and slightly overstaffed 21.62%.         

 11). Understaffing has affected the curriculum changes implementation in these schools because;

·        Teaching is not done effectively because teachers are overloaded, 72.97%.

·        This will lower the standards of education, 27.03%.

·        Teachers will not be able to cover the syllabus, 67.57%.

·        No attention is given to slow learners, 21.62% and

·        Teachers handle more than 40 pupils in class and this makes it hard for the teacher to give individual attention to any pupil who needs it, 64.86%.

d. Initiation of curriculum changes

12). The at which level curriculum changes are initiated they cited:  National level 97.29%, provincial 56.76%, District 13.51% school 8.12% community 5.41% zone 8.12% and Division 8.12%. 

 13). Who influences the curriculum changes, they cited: parents 8.12%, teachers 13.51% politicians 24.32%, government 89.19% students 2.70% are influenced by the government.

 14). On the mode of communication, the respondents cited the number of stages as follows: 3 — 16.22%; 4 — 21.62%; 5 — 48.65%; 2 — 5.41%.

15.)  21.62% cited they are satisfied while 78.38 cited no.

16). They cited the following effects of the method in question 15: 54.05% cited leads to delayed information, 37.84% cited distorted information and 16.22% cited sometime non recipient of information. 

e. Economic status of parents

17). On economic status of parent’s, 89.19% cited yes while 10.81% cited no.

18). The 89.19% who cited yes further cited the effects as follows:

·        Being able to provide the basic needs to their children or contribute to the development of the school, 81.82%.

·        Provide school uniform to their children making them to miss school, 48.48%.

·        Being ready to accept changes in curriculum because they know that this will need money from them, 21.21%.

·        Not possible for some parents to feed their children properly this makes teaching these pupils hard, 36.36%.

·        Being able to  supplement the government efforts by providing missing learning resources to their children, 93.94% and

·        Poor time management 3.03%.

f. Inspection of schools

19). In the past five years the schools have been inspected (mass inspection) at least once.

No of inspections	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	10	-	18
No of respondents	3	7	6	4	3	3	1	1	1	4	1
Total inspections	0	7	12	12	12	15	7	8	10	-	18

The average number of inspections per school for five years is 99/37                                                                                              = 2.68.

The average number of inspection per school per year =2.68/5= 0.54

g. School time table

 20). Time allotted to each subject on the time table: 8.92% cited is enough and   81.08 % cited no.  The subjects cited by the respondents are:  maths 66.67%, English 66.67%, science 40%, social studies 80%, GHC 66.67%, CRE 26.67% and Kiswahili 53.33%.

h. Misappropriation of school funds

21). Misappropriation of funds in these schools; 8.12% indicated there was while 89.19% indicated there wasn’t.

i. Learning facilities

 22). On learning facilities like science Laboratory and Art and crafts workshops, 70.27% cited none at all and 18.92% cited one.   

 23). On learning equipment like computers, photocopiers, type writers to help in preparing teaching materials, 8.12% cited Yes and 91.89% cited No.

j. School head teacher

 24). On rating themselves as administrators 83.78 cited efficient, 5.41% most efficient   and 8.12 % less efficient.      

 25). On the reaction of teachers when confronted with curriculum change the respondents cited; welcoming 24.32%, unwelcoming 16.22% mixed reaction 59.46%.

  

4.5 Conclusion

 Data for analysis was collected from 37 respondents in Borabu Division. The response was 100%. The responses from each of the three groups was first analysed separately. Then the findings from the three was analysed together using percentages, tables and averages .All the respondents answered over 85% of the questionnaire. The respondents cited most of the problems facing curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division. The main source of finance for the schools is the Government which is not providing enough for buying learning resources and putting up learning facilities. This has made teaching hard for teachers   for they can’t even give pupils home work because the textbooks are not enough. Most parents are poor so they cannot be able to contribute to supplement what the government is giving.

The introduction of free primary education has overstretched the learning facilities in schools and it has become hard for the teacher to handle the big numbers in class.  Most schools are understaffed and therefore teachers are overloaded with work. Initiation of curriculum changes is done at the ministry headquarters and does not involve those who do the actual implementation. The curriculum changes are too often which makes the buying of learning resources expensive. There are many subjects being taught and this has made it hard for some to have enough time on the time table.

                      

                      

                                  

                                 

                                           CHAPTER 5

                                           ANALYSIS                                   

5.0 Introduction

There are many problems which hinder the proper implementation of curriculum changes in Borabu Division. The findings from the research ( Head teachers, Parents, D.E.O. ) identified most of the these  problems. In most cases, the three participants  tend to agree on some of the factors leading to poor curriculum changes implementation. The main problems identified by the three groups ( the head teachers, the parents and the D.E.O) are as follows:

5.1  Teachers

i. Shortage of teachers

Shortage of teachers is   factor  which greatly contributes to the poor implementation of curriculum changes in Borabu. 75.66% of the school in Borabu are understaffed. Pupil teacher ratios vary; in some schools there is 40:01 and other parts 80:01 This affects the quality of education. The recommended ratio is 40:01.

Kenya Education Report  of 1999 observed that the commission is aware of the fact that in some areas there are very many pupils against very few schools. While in other schools have got very few pupils. There is therefore, need to improve the quality and efficiency of curriculum implementation. [87]

ii. Competency of teachers

The use of untrained teachers or teachers rushed through training crush programmes results into poor teaching because they are not competent enough to handle the work. 27.03% of the schools do not have teachers who can teach skills of subjects like music, Home science and Arts and Crafts. Daniel Sifuna noted that the ministry also recruited about 12,000 untrained teachers throughout the country who tried to familiarise themselves with the standard seven and eight syllabi. This group has considerably increased the percentage in the  primary school system. This constituted one third of the teaching force before the launching of the new educational system.[88]

 Albert V. Kelly argues that in the first place, what is done in schools depends very much on what the teachers in the schools have been prepared for by their initial courses of training, so that the kind of course offered in programmes of initial teacher education and in in-service courses will have an important impact on curriculum development .[89]

5.2 The curriculum changes

i. Initiation of curriculum changes

Curriculum change are normally initiated by the government this was cited by 97.29% of the respondents. It is very rare that teachers are consulted. They only implement what has been given to them. This leads to resistance and poor implementation. David J. Whitehead  observed that  curriculum developers have started to realise the crucial role that teachers play in the process of innovation. They are no longer to be considered just the passive recipients of curriculum packages, but rather the focus of curriculum development work, contributing to dissemination as much as receiving help because of it .[90]

ii. Overloaded curriculum

 In the 8.4.4 education system, the primary school pupil is supposed to sit for a primary qualifying  examination, K.C.P.E .It used to test eight subjects  but reduced to five which is still too much work for the pupils. 81.08% of the respondents cited the change made led to addition of content to different subject areas. Daniel Sifuna   observed that the quality of education is likely to suffer as a result of loading the curriculum with extra subjects geared towards vocational training. [91]

iii. Clarity

Most teachers don’t  freely accept curriculum changes either because the changes are not clear or because it demands a lot from them. 59.46% receive new curriculum changes with mixed reaction. Michael Fullan argues that,  lack of clarity diffuse goals and unspecified means of implementation represents a major problem at the implementation stage; teachers and others find that the changes is simply not very clear as to what it means in practice.[92]

5.3 Learning Resources and facilities

i. Learning resources

There is a shortage of learning resources like text books. So it is not easy for  the teachers to teach and  give homework to the pupils. Money available in 91.89% of schools is used to buy books, and in 72.97% in staff payment.

The East African Standard  reported that the Director of Education decried the shortage of …  books in both primary and secondary schools in Kenya. [93]

ii. Lack of learning facilities

No laboratories or workshops designed to teach subjects like Home science, music, science and art and crafts. So the teaching of these subjects is hard for the teachers are unable to teach practical with the pupils. The available  funds in 72.97% of the schools is used in physical facilities maintenance. Arthur E. Sutherland observed that new teachers were even more likely than other teachers to feel hampered in their attempts at innovation by inadequate preparation facilities.[94]

5.4 Finance

i. Parents financial status

Most parents are poor so they are unable to buy their children learning resources to supplement  what the government is giving.19% of the schools get finance from parents. Many families cannot afford school uniform for their children and this make them miss to attend school. Lewis Brownstein noted that the present serious obstacle to its success is the present structure of Kenya society and the attitudes and expectations which this structure has engendered in the population at large. The nature of the problem is perhaps best exemplified in the disparity in income levels between the rural and urban areas.[95]

ii. Financial resources

The government is the main source of finance to schools .97.29% rely on the government for their finance. The government does not provide enough money. So Schools do not have enough to buy enough learning resources and improve the learning facilities. They all depend on what the government gives and a few contributions from the parents and the community.

Mathew B. Miles asserting the importance of financial resources in implementation,  observed that if we think of innovation as requiring extra system effort, it is not surprising to find across many types of systems that innovativeness varies directly with available money, though this is not, as we have seen an invariant finding. [96]

The Kenya education report of 1976 noted that  this constraint of finance has continued to be a major factor, especially as a result of the economic problems caused by inflation [97]

5.5 Education management

i. The school head teacher

The head teachers are the agents of curriculum implementation. Therefore  any success in the implementation process depends on the capability of the head teacher. 83.78% of them were rated efficient.. Michael Fullan   points out that the principal is the person most likely to be in apposition to shape the organizational conditions necessary for success ,such as the development of shared goals, collaborative work structures and climates and procedures for monitoring results. [98]

ii. Misappropriation of school funds

 There are some cases of school heads being accused of   misappropriation  of school funds. Head teacher in 8.12%  of the school were cited to have indulged themselves in misappropriation of school funds. This deprives the schools the badly needed funds which are meant for provision of learning resources.

The standard  reported that  Nyanza PC has urged teachers to shun corrupt deals to ensure school projects are completed. He warned head teachers against colluding with contractors to siphon school funds through unnecessary projects. He said some school projects have stalled due to collaboration between head teachers and contractors to overestimate the project value.[99]

iii. Management of education

After independence the education  management was centralized. The education management branches from the ministry headquarters to the provinces. From the provinces it branches to the Districts from where it branches to the Divisions to Zone and finally schools. Administrative decisions goes through all those step either way which leads to delay of information .Inspection is part of this structure. There is no enough  inspection done. The findings show that there are 0.54 inspections per school per year, which too low. The East African Standard  reported that the world Bank is developing a two year project to support government efforts in attaining Universal primary education (UPE)……A team led by the project’s manager, points at weak management and planning capacity as the main causes of poor implementation of education reforms and delivery of education services in Kenya.[100]

iv. The provision of free primary education

This has complicated implementation of curriculum changes because it has come with high pupil number which have overstretched the existing learning and physical facilities. The respondents cited the problems associated to it  as follows: overloaded teachers 72.5%, lowering standards 27.05% non syllabus coverage 67.57% and no time to help slow learners 21.65%.:

The East African Standard reported that  the Rift valley Director of Education …while visiting Langas primary school in Eldoret  municipality said Shortage of teachers and inadequate learning facilities in some schools in Rift Valley is likely to hamper the government’s commitment to free primary education. Despite the high number of pupils seeking places in different school, learning facilities are stretched to the limit and cannot accommodate all applicants.[101]The East African Standard reported that while teachers have welcomed the provision of free primary education for all school age children, public schools have warned of the possibility of compromising standards if the new policy is not implemented in an orderly manner.[102]

5.6  Conclusion.

In this chapter, the analysis of the findings  from the research has been done. It shows that there are a number of factor responsible for the poor curriculum changes implementation in Borabu Division. These are teachers, who should be well trained, enough in each school and should be involved in the initiation of curriculum changes. The other factor being finance from both the government and the parents. This to be used in providing enough learning  facilities and resources. The important factor is the head teacher who is the agent of change in school. His guidance is crucial to success or failure. Competent ones should be appointed. It also important that schools should be inspected regularly. This will help the ministry of education to be aware level of curriculum implementation in schools.

In this analysis the finding have been linked to the current literature on curriculum implementation. This shows that the problems affecting curriculum changes implementation in Borabu are not unique. You can find them in other parts of Kenya or in other countries .

                               

                                    

                                     CHAPTER  6

                                          CONCLUSION

                                                

 6.1 Overview of the findings

The respondents have attributed poor implementation of curriculum changes to several factors among them:

·        Understaffing in schools where the ratio of teacher to pupils is over 1:40.

·        Overworked teachers which leads to poor syllabus coverage.

·        Frequent transfer of teachers which leaves pupils without someone to teach them or takes them  a long time to get used to the new teacher who takes over.

·        Lack of learning resources which makes lesson preparation and delivery hard.

·        Poverty . Poor parents are not able to supplement in buying learning resources for their children.

·        lack of learning facilities in schools.

·        Lack of skilled teachers to handle subjects like music, Arts &crafts and Home science.

·        Teachers are not involved in the initiation of curriculum changes.

·        No enough time for teachers to prepare lessons and mark pupils work.

·        Overloaded curriculum.

·        Lack of enough financial resources for school.

·        Poor school management and

·        Income disparity in parents.

6.2  Recommendations

It is important to note that urgent steps should be taken to ensure that proper implementation of curriculum change is taking place in schools.  Michael Fullan   observes that, the more factors supporting implementation, the more change in practice will be accomplished.[103] Here I have given recommendations on some of the most important  factors that affect curriculum changes implementation. These are:

1.Need

Any change being initiated, attempts should be made by carefully examining whether they address what is perceived as priority needs or not. These needs should also be appreciated by those who will be involved in the implementation of these changes.

2.Clarity

 Any change being initiated should be made clear to everyone who will be involved in its implementation. This will make them be ready for they already know what they expect. Guidelines should not be used literally without the realization that certain teaching strategies and underlying beliefs are essential to implementing the guidelines effectively.

3. Complexity

Avoid making complex changes for this will lead to confusion to those who are charged with its implementation.

4.Quality and practicability of programs

Steps should be taken to ensure that ambitious projects should not sacrifice quality. Michael Fullan observes that ambitious projects are nearly always politically driven. As a result the time line between the initiation decisions and start up is typically too short to attend to matters of quality.[104]

5.Understaffing

The Government   to employ more  teachers to alleviate the problem of staff shortage in schools. This will make it possible for teachers to have time to attend to individual  needs, for example a ratio of 1:30 will be appropriate. This will reduce their work load.

6.Transfer of teachers

The government should have a clear policy on transfer of teachers. Teachers should not be transferred frequently or at anytime in the school term. This affects the pupils learning in the affected schools.

7. Provision of Learning Resources

The Government should provide more money to purchase the badly needed learning resources. For without this, implementation or teaching is not successfully done in schools.

8. Poor management in schools

The school management boards play a big role in the implementation of curriculum changes in schools. In most schools where the board and the teachers are working together implementation of changes is deemed to succeed.

9 . Head teachers

 The school heads are very important in curriculum changes implementation in schools. The schools are the centres of change while the school head teachers are the main agents of change. Therefore it should be the duty of the government to make sure that  appointment made to this position is done properly and those who qualify to be appointed.

10. Inspection of schools

The Government should have competent staff to do inspection of schools. Inspection should be regular in order to find out how the different schools are managed. Inspection should cover all aspect of the school curriculum. The inspection reports should be available to all education stake  holders and copies should be in the staffroom.

11. Skilled teachers

The government to train more teachers to handle practical subjects like music, art & crafts and music.

12. Publication of text books

The government to ensure that before implementing any change, the textbooks and the syllabus are made available in advance so that teachers get enough time to acquaint themselves with content before the actual implementation starts.

13.Teachers work

The government should ensure each teacher has enough time to mark pupils work and prepare the next days lessons during the school time instead of teachers using their private time to do this.

14. Involvement of teachers in initiating changes

It is a good idea that teachers should be involved in initiating any curriculum changes. They should be consulted  so that they feel as partners in curriculum development.

15. In-service courses for teachers

To hold in-service courses for all teachers in the relevant classes before starting implementation of any change to ensure that teachers have enough time to go over the new changes so that they all know what they expect.

16. Income disparity

The government should try to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. This will enable every  parents to contribute equally to the development of education in their areas.

17. Learning facilities

The implementation of Free Primary Education has overstretched the available learning facilities to the limit. The government should ensure that it finds a solution to this problem because the facilities are not enough. It should give more money to provide this facilities. Parents should at least contribute  an affordable sum of money to supplement the government efforts.

18. Political interference

The government should say no to political interference in the learning of schools. Underperforming teachers should be asked to leave the service, or their services should be terminated.

19. Misappropriation of school funds

The government to extend the auditing  of financial accounts to primary schools. Any teacher found guilt of misappropriation of school funds should be sacked and  the government to recover the funds in question from the teacher.

20. Introduction of new programs

The government should avoid the introduction of new programs without proper planning for this interferes with what is being taught and in most cases it ends  up to be poorly implemented.

21. Promotion of teachers.

The percentage of teachers getting promotion per year is too low. This has made many teachers to stagnate on one grade for along time. The government should find a way to increase the percentage for this will boost the morale of the teachers.

                                    BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, J. B. Alan, Interpreting Data. A first course in statistics: Chapman and Hall, 1989

Bell, Judith, Doing your Research Project. Open University, 1999

Blaxter, Lorraine. C. Hughes,   and M. Tight. How to Research. Open University, Buckingham, 1996.

Brownstein, Lewis, Education and Development in Rural Kenya. Study of Primary school graduates .London. Praeger Publishers, 1972.

Cohen, Louis, L. Manion, and K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education. 5^th Edition. London and New York: Rout ledge Falmer, 2000.

Czaja, Ronald and J. Blair, Designing Surveys: A guide to decisions and Procedures. London: Pine Forge Press, 1996.

Dalton, Thomas H., The challenge of Curriculum innovation: A study of ideology and practice. Taylor and Francis, 1988.

Dawson, Catherine, Practical Research Methods: User-friendly guide to mastering research technique and projects. Oxford: How to Books Ltd, 2002

Denscombe, Martyn, The Good research Guide for small scale social Research Projects. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1998.

Edwards, Anne and R. Talbot, The Hard pressed researcher: A research handbook for the caring professions. Longman publishing Group, 1994.

Fink, Arlene and K. Kosecoff, How to conduct surveys: A step by step guide. Sage Publications, 1998.

Ford, LeRoy, A Curriculum Design Manual for Theological Education. Teneresee Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991.

Fullan, Michael, The New Meaning of Educational Change. London: Cassell Educational Limited, 1991.

Gaff, Jerry G., J.G. Ratcliff, and Associates. Handbook of the undergraduate Curriculum. The Jossey-Bass, 1997.

Hague, Paul, Questionnaire Design. London: Kogan Page 1993

Hall, David, I. Hall, and J. Campling, Practical Social Research. Palgrave: Macmillan      1996.

Hampton, David H. and J.Schaffarzick (eds.), Strategies for Curriculum Development. Berkeley, Calif: McCourt       cham, 1975.

Karioki, M. (1995) Kenya in Neville, T. International Encyclopaedia of National systems of Education. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Kelly, Albert V, The Curriculum: Theory   and Practice       .London: Harper& Row, 1982. 

May, Tim, Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process. Buckingham: Open University, 2001.

Miles, Mathew B. (ed.), Innovation in Education. Columbia University, 1964. 

Miles, Mathew B and Michael, A Huberman, Innovation Up close: How school improvement works. New York and London: Plenum Press, 1984.

 Moon Bob, A guide to the National curriculum. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001

Mutua, Rosalind W., Development of education in Kenya. Nairobi: East African Literature Bureau, 1975.

Republic of Kenya, Report of the National Committee on Educational Objectives and policies. Nairobi: Government Printer, 1976.

Republic of Kenya, The Eighth National Development plans for the period 1997 to 2001. Nairobi: Government Printer, 1996. 

Republic of Kenya, Kenya Education Commission Report. Nairobi: Government Printer, 1964.

Republic of Kenya, Report of the commission of Inquiry into the Education system of Kenya. Nairobi: Government printer, 1999.

Republic of Kenya. Report of the presidential Working party on Education and manpower Training for the next Decade and beyond. Nairobi: Government printer, 1988.

Rudduck, Jean, Innovation and change. Milton Keynes Open University Press, 1991.

Sarason, Bernard S, The culture of the school and the problem of change. Allyn and Bacon, 1982.

Sifuna, Daniel N, Development of education in Africa: The Kenya experience. Initiatives, 1990.

Sinclair, J.M. (ed.) Collins English Dictionary. Fourth Edition. Harper Collins Publishers, 1998.

Sutherland, Arthur E, Curriculum Projects in Primary Schools. The Northern Ireland council for Educational Research, 1981.

“Initiatives to make education truly free” The Standard Ltd 11, January 2003. Nairobi, Kenya.

“Shs 4b W B plan for Primary education”, The Standard Ltd (April 19, 2003). Nairobi, Kenya.

“Teachers warn of pitfalls”, The standard Ltd January 11, 2003. Nairobi, Kenya.

“Teachers urged to shun corruption” The standard Ltd, March 29, 2003. Nairobi, Kenya.

“Wangai decries lack of Books, The Standard Ltd, May 10, 2003. Nairobi, Kenya.

“Teachers shortages bites”, The Standard Ltd, May 10, 2003. Nairobi, Kenya.

Whitehead, David J, The dissemination of Educational Innovations in Britain. Hodder and Stoughton, 1980.

                                    APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

                                                                                   TRINITY COLLEGE

                                                                                   2 HOLLY HILL- BELFAST                     

                                                                                    ROAD

                                                                                    NORTHEN IRELAND

                                                                                    BT 66 7UB

SAMSON BASIL MAGARA

Dip.LW, Dip.IR, BA (Agra)

C/o Trinity College

Liverpool University

UNITED KINGDOM

MASTER OF ARTS CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION

As part of the fulfilment of the award of M.A of Curriculum and instruction offered by Trinity College (University of Liverpool) a thesis is a requirement. In order to fulfil these, I request you to answer the following questions. The answers you give will be treated with great confidentiality. These answers will help me to write a thesis on: PROBLEMS FACING CURRICULUM CHANGES IMPLEMENTATION IN PRIMARY EDUCATION IN BORABU DIVISION.

 QUESTIONNAIRE

School Name                    Head Teacher/Deputy Head Teacher (name is optional)

.................................            .....................................................  ..........................................

1. Name the sources of funding for your school. Please indicate by ticking [  ].

(A) Government    [   ] (B) Community   [  ] (C) Parents    [  ] (D) Donors [  ] (E) Students [  ]

(F) Teachers     [   ] (G) County councils   [   ] (H) Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) [  ]

2. How do you assess the level of funding to your school?

(a) Adequate   [   ] (b) inadequate [   ] (c) moderately adequate [   ] (d) slightly adequate

3. Which of the following are some of the uses   funds received by your school is put into? Tick whichever is applicable.

(a) Teachers’ salaries  [   ]   (b) Buying books  [   ]  (c) support staff  salaries  (d ) Buying learning resources  [   ]   (e )buying laboratory equipment  [   ] (f) physical facilities maintenance     [   ]

4. Within a period of 20 years, how many curriculum changes have taken place in your school?

(a )  1     [   ]  ( b)  2  [   ]        (c )  3   [   ]      ( d )    4    [    ]      (e )    5     [   ]

5. Which areas of the curriculum were (have been) affected? Please indicate by ticking appropriate answer(s).

(a ) reduction of subjects       [   ]      (b ) addition of  new subjects  [   ]   (c )addition of content to different subject areas       [   ]     (d ) reduction of content to different subject areas  [   ]  (e ) amalgamation of subjects     [    ]    (f ) Time allocation to subjects  (reduction)     [   ]  (g ) Time allocation to subjects (addition)   [    ]

6. In reference to question 5 above, please in one sentence indicate the problems you encountered in implementing the change(s).

i……………………………………………………………………………………

ii……………………………………………………………………………………

iii…………………………………………………………………………………

iv…………………………………………………………………………………

v……………………………………………………………………………………

7. Is there any on going curriculum change implementation taking place in your school at?

a) Yes         [   ]        b) No          [   ]

If yes, how is the introduction of compulsory education affecting this change(s)? Please give your brief opinion in the space provided below.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. What percentage of teachers has been promoted to the next professional grade in the last five years in your school?

a) None [    ]   b) two [      ] c) three [       ]   d) four    [       ] e) more than four [   ]  

9. Do teachers in your school during the school day have enough time to mark the pupils work and prepare the following days’ lessons?

a)  Yes     [     ]           b)    No    [     ]

If the answer is No, briefly state when they do this work…………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………

10. Which of the following statements correctly describes the level of staffing in your school? Please tick   [   ] whichever is applicable.

a) Overstaffed    [   ]      b) understaffed      [    ]     c) well staffed     [   ] d) slightly understaffed   [   ] e) slightly over staffed   [   ]

11. In reference to your answer to the question above (question 10), please state how this affect the curriculum changes implementation in your school?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. At what level are the curriculum changes initiated in your country? Please tick the appropriate answer(s).  a) National   [   ]    b) Provincial    [    ]    c)   District   [    ]    d) school     [   ] e) community [    ] f) Parents    [    ]

13. At whatever level (Question 12), who influences the curriculum changes? Please tick appropriately.  a) parents    [   ] b) Teachers   [   ]  c)  politicians  [    ]  d) Government  [    ]  e) Donors  [    ]  f) students  [   ].

14. How many stages does initiated curriculum changes information pass through before reaching your school ready for implementation?

a)   1    [   ]     b)   2    [   ]       c)   3    [   ]      d)   4    [    ]       e)   5    [   ]

15. Are you satisfied with the methods used in relaying information a bout curriculum changes to your school? a) Yes     [    ]                         b) No      [   ]

16. If your answer to question 15 above is NO, please tick all that apply.

a) Delayed information   [   ]   b) Distorted information    [   ] c) Non recipient of information [   ] d) Lost information [       ] e) other (please give)…………………..

17. Does the economic status of the parents of your school affect curriculum changes implementation in your school? a) Yes         [   ]                 b) No        [   ]

18. If your answer to question 17 above is yes, please briefly give two ways in which it affects the curriculum changes implementation taking place in your school.

i……………………………………………………………………………………

ii……………………………………………………………………………………

19. How many times in the past five years has your school been inspected (mass inspection).      [      ]

20. Is the time allotted for each subject on the time table enough to cover the syllabus for each class during the year?  a) Yes       [   ]     b)   NO    [   ]

If no, which subjects are not well catered for?

……………………………………………………………………………………

21. Is there any time in your school that the management had to be accused of misappropriation of school funds? a)   Yes      [             ]        b)     No          [          ]

22. Does your school have learning facilities like science Laboratory and Art and crafts workshops? A) Yes         b) No

If so, how many? Tick the one which applies.

A) None at all [     ] b) one   [       ] c)   two [        ] d)   three [  ]    e) four      [       ]

23. Do you have facilities like computers, photocopiers or typewriters in your school to help in preparing teaching materials? a) Yes      [     ]     b)      No       [          ]

24. How do you rate yourself as an administrator?

a) Efficient [     ]    b) most efficient    [        ]     c)   less efficient [       ]  

25. How can you describe the reaction of your teachers towards a new change of curriculum? a) Welcoming    [      ]   b) unwelcoming   [     ]   c) mixed reaction [    ]

                                       END

APPENDIX B

                                                                                  TRINITY COLLEGE

                                                                                   2 HOLLY HILL- BELFAST  

                                                                                    ROAD

                                                                                    NORTHEN IRELAND

                                                                                    BT 66 7UB

SAMSON BASIL MAGARA

Dip. LW, Dip. IR, BA (Agra)

C/o Trinity College

Liverpool University

UNITED KINGDOM

MASTER OF ARTS CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION

As part of the fulfilment of the award of M.A of Curriculum and instruction offered by Trinity College (University of Liverpool) a thesis is a requirement... In order to fulfil these, I request you to answer the following questions. The answers you give will be treated with great confidentiality. These answers will help me to write a thesis on: PROBLEMS FACING CURRICULUM CHANGES IMPLEMENTATION IN PRIMARY EDUCATION IN BORABU DIVISION. 

 QUESTIONNAIRE

School Name                           P.T.A Member (name is optional)

.................................            .....................................................  ..........................................

1. Name the sources of funding for your school. Please indicate by ticking [  ].

(a) Government    [   ] (b) Community   [  ] (c) Parents    [  ] (d) Donors [  ] (e) Students [  ]

(f) Teachers     [   ] (g) County councils   [   ] (h) Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) [  ]

2. How do you assess the level of funding to your school?

(a) Adequate   [   ] (b) inadequate [   ] (c) moderately adequate [   ] (d) slightly adequate

3. Which of the following are some of the uses   funds received by your school is put into? Tick whichever is applicable.

(a) Teachers’ salaries  [   ]   (b) buying books  [   ]  (c) support staff  salaries  (d ) buying learning resources  [   ]   (e )buying laboratory equipment  [   ] (f) physical facilities maintenance     [   ]

4. Within a period of 20 years, how many curriculum changes have taken place that had to be implemented in your school?

(a )  1     [   ]  ( b)  2  [   ]        (c )  3   [   ]      ( d )    4    [    ]      (e )    5     [   ]

5. Which areas of the curriculum were (have been) affected? Please indicate by ticking appropriate answer(s). (a ) reduction of subjects       [   ]      (b ) addition of  new subjects  [   ]   (c )addition of content to different subject areas       [   ]     (d ) reduction of content to different subject areas  [   ]  (e ) amalgamation of subjects     [    ]    (f ) Time allocation to subjects  (reduction)     [   ]  (g ) Time allocation to subjects (addition)   [    ]

6. In reference to question 5 above, please in one sentence each indicate the problems you encountered in implementing the change(s).

i……………………………………………………………………………………

ii……………………………………………………………………………………

iii…………………………………………………………………………………

iv…………………………………………………………………………………

v……………………………………………………………………………………

7. Is there any on going curriculum change implementation taking place in your school at the moment? a) Yes         [   ]        b) No          [   ]

If yes, how is the introduction of free primary education in January 2003 affecting this change(s)?  Please give your brief opinion in the space provided below.

……………………………………………………………………………………

8. What percentage of teachers has been promoted to the next professional grade in the last five years in your school?

a) None [    ]   b) two [      ] c) three [        ]   d) four   [       ] e) more than four [     ]       

9. Do teachers in your school during the school day have enough time to mark the pupils work and prepare the following days’ lessons?    a)  Yes   [     ] b)    No    [     ]

If the answer is No, briefly state when they do this work…………………………………………

10. Which of the following statements correctly describes the level of staffing in your school? Please tick   [   ] whichever is applicable. a) Overstaffed    [   ]      b) understaffed      [    ]     c) well staffed     [   ] d) slightly understaffed   [   ] e) slightly over staffed   [   ]

11. In reference to your answer to the question above (question 10), please state how this affect the curriculum changes implementation in your school?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. At what level are the curriculum changes initiated? Please tick the appropriate answer(s). a) National [   ]   b) Provincial    [    ]    c)   District   [    ]    d) school     [   ]

e) Community [    ] f) zone   [    ] g) division     [      ]

13. At whatever level (Question 12), who influences the curriculum changes? Please tick appropriately. a) parents    [   ] b) Teachers   [   ]  c)  politicians  [    ]  d) Government  [    ]  e) Donors  [    ]  f) students  [   ].

14. How many stages does initiated curriculum changes information pass through before reaching your school ready for implementation?

a)   1    [   ]     b)   2    [   ]       c)   3    [   ]      d)   4    [    ]       e)   5    [   ]

15. Are you satisfied with the methods used in relaying information about curriculum changes to your school? a) Yes     [    ]                                             b) No      [   ]

16. If your answer to question 15 above is NO, please tick all that apply.

a) Delayed information   [   ]   b) Distorted information    [   ] c) Non recipient of information [   ] d) Lost information [    ] e) other (please specify)

……………………………………………………………………………………

17. Does the economic status of parents   affect curriculum changes implementation in your school?  a) Yes         [   ]                 b) No        [   ]

18. If your answer to question 17 above is yes, please briefly give two ways in which it affects the curriculum changes implementation taking place in your school.

i……………………………………………………………………………………

ii……………………………………………………………………………………

19. How many times in the past five years have your schools been inspected (mass inspection)?      [      ]

20. Is the time allotted for each subject on the time table enough to cover the subject’s syllabus for the year?  a) Yes       [    ]     b)   NO    [    ]

If no, which subjects are not well catered for?

……………………………………………………………………………………

21. Is there any time in your school that the management had to be accused of misappropriation of school funds? a)   Yes    [             ]           b)     No          [          ]

22. Does your school have learning facilities like science Laboratory and Art and crafts workshops? A) Yes     b) No

If so, how many? Tick the one which applies. A) None at all [       ]   b) one    [        ]      c)   two      [         ]      d)   three       e) four      [       ]

23. Do you have facilities like computers, photocopiers, type writers in your school to help in preparing teaching materials? a) Yes      [     ]          b)      No           [          ]

24. How do you rate the head teacher of your school as an administrator?

a) efficient [     ]    b) most efficient    [        ]     c)   less efficient [       ]  

25. How can you describe the reaction of teachers your school towards a new change of curriculum? a) Welcoming    [      ]   b) unwelcoming   [     ]   c) mixed reaction

                                       END

APPENDIX C

                                                                                   TRINITY COLLEGE

                                                                                   2 HOLLY HILL- BELFAST

                                                                                    ROAD  

                                                                                    NORTHEN IRELAND

                                                                                    BT 66 7UB

SAMSON BASIL MAGARA

Dip. LW, Dip. IR, BA (Agra)

C/o Trinity College

Liverpool University

UNITED KINGDOM

MASTER OF ARTS CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION

As part of the fulfilment of the award of M.A of Curriculum and instruction offered by Trinity College (University of Liverpool) a thesis is a requirement. In order to fulfil these, I request you to answer the following questions. The answers you give will be treated with great confidentiality. These answers will help me to write a thesis on: PROBLEMS FACING CURRICULUM CHANGES IMPLEMENTATION IN PRIMARY EDUCATION IN BORABU DIVISION.

 QUESTIONNAIRE

School Name                           Divisional Education Officer (name is optional)

.................................            .....................................................  ..........................................

1. Name the sources of funding for   schools in your Division. Please indicate by ticking in the brackets [  ]. (a) Government    [   ] (b) Community   [  ] (c) Parents    [  ] (d) Donors [  ] (e) Students [   ] (f) Teachers     [   ] (g) County councils   [   ] (g) Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) [  ]

2. How do you assess the level of funding to   schools in your Division?

(a) adequate   [   ] (b) inadequate [   ] (c) moderately adequate [   ] (d) slightly adequate

3. Which of the following are some of the uses   funds received by schools in your Division is put into? Tick whichever is applicable.

(a) Teachers’ salaries [   ] (b) buying books [   ] (c) support staff salaries (d) buying learning resources [   ]   (e) buying laboratory equipment [   ] (f) physical facilities maintenance     [   ]

4. Within a period of 20 years, how many curriculum changes have taken place that have to be implemented in your schools?

(a )  1     [   ]  ( b)  2  [   ]        (c )  3   [   ]      ( d )    4    [    ]      (e )    5     [   ]

5. In reference to question 4 above, which areas of the curriculum were (have been) affected? Please indicate by ticking appropriate answer(s).

(a ) reduction of subjects       [   ]      (b ) addition of  new subjects  [   ]   (c )addition of content to different subject areas       [   ]     (d ) reduction of content to different subject areas  [   ]  (e ) amalgamation of subjects     [    ]    (f ) Time allocation to subjects  (reduction)     [   ]  (g ) Time allocation to subjects (addition)   [    ]

6. In reference to question 5 above, please in one sentence each, indicate the problems schools in your Division encountered in implementing the change(s).

i……………………………………………………………………………………

ii……………………………………………………………………………………

iii…………………………………………………………………………………

iv…………………………………………………………………………………

v……………………………………………………………………………………

7. Is there any on going curriculum change implementation taking place in your schools at the moment?    a) Yes         [   ]        b) No          [   ]

If yes, how is the introduction of free primary education affecting this change(s)? Please give your brief opinion in the space provided below. ……………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………

8. What percentage of   teachers has been promoted to the next professional grade in the last five years in your Division? a) None     [    ]   b) two      [      ] c) three     [        ]   d) four     [       ] e) more than four

9. Do teachers in your schools during the school day have enough time to mark the pupils work and prepare the following days’ lessons? a) Yes     [     ]    b)    No    [     ]

If the answer is No, briefly state when they do this work. ……………………………….

10. Which of the following statements correctly describes the level of staffing in   schools in your Division? Please tick   [   ] whichever is applicable.

a) Overstaffed    [   ]      b) understaffed      [    ]     c) well staffed     [   ] d) slightly understaffed   [   ] e) slightly over staffed   [   ]

11. In reference to your answer to the question above (question 10), please state how this affect the curriculum changes implementation in schools your Division?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12. At what level is any curriculum changes initiated? Please tick the appropriate answer(s).a) National   [   ] b) Provincial   [    ]   c) District [    ]   d) school     [   ]

e) Community [    ] f) zone    [    ]   g) Division        [    ]

13. At whatever level (Question 12), who influences the curriculum changes? Please tick appropriately. a) parents    [   ] b) Teachers   [   ]  c)  politicians  [    ]  d) Government  [    ]  e) Donors [    ]  f) students  [   ].

14. How many stages does initiated curriculum changes information pass through before reaching schools in your Division ready for implementation?

a)   1    [   ]     b)   2    [   ]       c)   3    [   ]      d)   4    [    ]       e)   5    [   ]

15. Are you satisfied with the methods used in relaying information about curriculum changes to schools in your Division? a) Yes     [    ]               b) No      [   ]

16. If your answer to question 15 above is NO, please tick all that apply. The present method leads to: a) Delayed information   [   ]   b) Distorted information    [   ] c) Non recipient of information [   ]   d) Lost information   [     ] e) other (please specify) ……………………………….

17. Does the economic status of   parents in schools    affect curriculum changes implementation in your Division? a) Yes          [   ]                 b) No        [   ]

18. If your answer to question 17 above is yes, please briefly give two ways in which it affects the curriculum changes implementation taking place in schools in your Division.

i……………………………………………………………………………………

ii……………………………………………………………………………………

19. How many schools in your Division in the past year have   been inspected (mass inspection) at least once?      [          ]

20. Is the time allotted for each subject on the time table enough to cover the syllabus for the subject during the year?  a) Yes       [   ]     b)   NO    [   ]

If no, which subjects are not well catered for?

21. Is there any time in your schools that the management had to be accused of misappropriation of school funds? a)   Yes       [             ]        b)     No          [          ]

22. Do your schools have learning facilities like science Laboratories and Art and crafts workshops which are in operation? If so, how many? Tick the one which applies. A) None at all      [       ]   b) one     [        ]      c)   two      [         ]      d)   three       e) four      [       ] f) other (specify) -----------------------

23. Do you have facilities like computers, photocopiers, type writers in your school to help in preparing teaching materials? a) Yes          [     ]      b)      No           [          ]

24. How do you rate yourself as an administrator?

a) efficient [     ]  b) most efficient  [        ]    c) less efficient [      ] slightly efficient [   ]    

25. How can you describe the reaction of your teachers towards a new change of curriculum?

a) Welcoming    [      ]   b) unwelcoming   [     ]   c) mixed reaction [    ]

                                       END

 APPENDIX D

 The Kenya education Report 1976 Recommendation

A summary of the recommendations of these report found on page 109 is as follows:

·        To investigate the quality of mathematic teaching at primary teachers’ colleges, especially in the colleges where results in the final qualifying examination are poor.

·        To require an E.A.C.E pass or the future secondary school leaving Certificate in mathematics as a minimum requirement for recruitment to primary teacher training.

·        To hold in-service courses for all teachers in the relevant class before each Revised Kenya Primary Mathematics book is released ensuring that the courses are long enough for teachers to have time to work many of the problems so as to gain confidence in their ability to teach the materials to the pupils.

·        To expand the training of teachers with substantial academic and professional content for the pre-vocational subjects taught in primary in primary 4 to 7 and junior secondary 1 and 2, based respectively on a two- year or three year raining programme for which the necessary manpower and financial requirements should be worked out and provided for.

·        To categorize the primary teacher qualification into four grades according to academic and professional performance during training in the teachers colleges and use these for determining entry points and maxima for each grade in a unified salary scale for all primary school teachers.

·        To promote primary teaches on merit as well as on academic grounds. If a teacher passes an academic examination in the relevant subjects the teacher should apply for inspection in order to verify the quality of his work.

·        To continue recruiting all untrained teachers through the Teachers service commission

·        To reduce and if possible eliminate the present large numbers of untrained teachers

·        To expand primary teacher education facilities and programmes without lowering the quality of teachers.

·        To investigate the possibility of establishing Government educational printing service with a view to lowering the cost of essential educational materials.

·        To carry out an in-depth follow up study of production of educational materials with a view of making them cheaper and available on time

·        To obtain cheaper educational materials from alternative sources.

Correspondence

                                                                                         Samson B. Magara

                                                                                         61 Radstock Road

                                                                                         Reading RG1 3 PS

                                                                                         United Kingdom

JANUARY 07, 2005

THE D.E.O

BORABU DIVISION

PO BOX 4

NYAMIRA

KENYA

Dear Sir;

RE: PERMISSION TO DO RESEARCH IN SCHOOLS IN YOUR       DIVISION

I kindly request you to give permission to carry out research in primary schools in your Division. I am currently studying for a Master of Arts Curriculum and instruction degree program at Trinity College [Liverpool University]. As part of the requirement for fulfilment of the award of the degree, I have to write a thesis. In my proposal which has already been approved, I intend to conduct a research in schools under your jurisdiction in Borabu Division. Therefore I will be very grateful for any help you’ll accord me.

For further inquiry on this matter you can also call me on 0118-3779372 or 07769800175.

Yours truly,

signed

Samson Magara

     MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

                                                             

                                                                                                                         Education Office

                                                                                                                          Borabu Division

                                                                                                                          P.O.BOX 4

                                                                                                                          NYAMIRA 

                                                                                                                          February 15, 2005

Dear Sir,

RE: GRANTED PERMISION TO CARRY ON RESEARCH IN BORABU DIVISION OF NYAMIRA DISTRICT-KENYA

This is to officially grant you permission to carry on Research in Primary Schools in Borabu Division in order to enable you complete your Master of Arts Curriculum and Instruction Degree program

Meanwhile may I take this opportunity to wish you well and success for the period you’ll be in my division.

Yours truly,

SIGNED

YOPESH M.ONDUSO

AREA EDUCATION OFFICER

                                                                                                     

Doe, John B. Conceptual Planning: A Guide to a Better Planet, 3d ed. Reading, MA: SmithJones, 1996.

Smith, Chris. Theory and the Art of Communications Design. State of the University Press, 1997.

Index

A

Aristotle,3

---

1 Albert, V. Kelly, The Curriculum. Theory and Practice (London: Harper and Row, 1982), 18.

[2]  Michael, Fullan, The meaning of Educational Change (London: Cassell Educational, 1991), 66.

[3] LeRoy Ford, A curriculum designs Manual for Theological Education (Teneresee:  Broadman Press, 1991), 35.

[4] Jerry G. Gaff and Associates, Handbook of the Undergraduate Curriculum (Jossey Bass Press, 1997), 12.

[5] .    Collier’s Encyclopaedia,1997 volume 7, p 572

[6] .Albert V. Kelly, The Curriculum, (Harper & Row, 1982), 16.

[7] .Collins English Dictionary, Fourth edition( Collins Publishers, 1998),775

[8] Michael Fullan, The New meaning of educational change (London, Cassell Educational limited, 1991), 37.

[9] Michael Fullan, ibid,65

[10] .Republic of Kenya, Kenya Education Commission Report (Nairobi: Government Printer, 1964), 22.

[11] .Rosalind W. Mutua, Development of Education in Kenya ( Nairobi : East African Literature Bureau,1975),vii

[12] .Republic of Kenya, Education Report,1964,25

[13] .Karioki, M. Kenya In Neville, T. international Encyclopaedia of National systems of Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University press,1995

[14]  Ibid, 497

[15] .Lewis Brownstein, Education and Development in Rural Kenya:. A study of Primary School graduates (London: Praeger Publisher, 1972), 9.

[16] .Republic of Kenya, The eighth Development plans for the period 1997 to 2001 (Nairobi: Government printer, 1996), 133.

[17] .Republic of Kenya, 1964 education Report, 57

[18] .Daniel N. Sifuna, Development of Education in Africa: The Kenyan Experience. (Initiatives, 1990),163

[19] .Ibid, 164.

[20] Rosalind Mutua, Development of education in Kenya 1975, viii

[21] Ibid, x

[22]. Daniel N. Sifuna, Development of Education in Africa,1990,173

[23] .Republic of Kenya, Kenya E education Commission Report (Nairobi: Government printer, 1976),xviii

[24].  Ibid, xi.

[25]. Ibid, 13.

[26]. Ibid, 46.

[27] .Daniel N. Sifuna, Development of Education in Kenya, 1990, 174.

[28] .Republic of Kenya, The 1976 Education Report, p 50-56.

[29] .Daniel N. Sifuna, Development of Education in Kenya, 1990, 178

[30] .Ibid, 178

[31].Ibid, 177-180

[32]. Ibid, 179

[33]. Ibid

[34] . “Initiatives to make education truly free” The East African Standard, 11 January 2003, education section.

[35].Bob Moon, A guide to the national curriculum (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 7.

[36] Jerry G. Gaff and Associates, Handbook of the Undergraduate curriculum (Jossey Bass, 1997), 629.

[37] .Jean Rudduck, Innovation and change: Developing involvement and Understanding (Milton Keynes: Open University press, 1991), 25.

[38] .Michael Fullan, The New meaning of Educational change (London:  Cassell Educational limited, 1991), 25.

[39] .Arthur E. Sutherland, Curriculum Projects in primary schools (The Northern Ireland council for Educational Research, 1981), 102-104.

[40] Thomas H. Dalton, The challenge of Curriculum innovation :A study of ideology and practice( Taylor & Francis 1988),240

[41] Seymour Bernard Sarason, Culture of the school and the problem of change (         Allyn and Bacon, 1982), 74

[42] Ibid, 75

[43]  Michael Fullan, Meaning of Educational change  1991, 68

[44]  Ibid, 69

[45]  Albert V. Kelly, The curriculum,1982, 25

[46] Michael Fullan, The meaning of educational change,1991, 70

[47]  Ibid, 71

[48] Mathew B. Miles & Michael A. Huberman, Innovation Up-close: How school improvement works (New York and London: Plenum Press, 1984,) 272.

[49]   Michael Fullan, The meaning of education change,1991, 72

[50]  Ibid, 73

[51]   Ibid, 76

[52] Albert V. Kelly, The Curriculum.1982, 21

[53] Michael Fullan, Meaning of Educational change, 1991,76

[54] “Teachers urged to shun corruption, The standard, 29 March 2003, education section.

[55] Albert V. Kelly, The Curriculum,1982,22

[56] Ibid, 142

[57] Lewis Brownstein, Education and Development in Rural Kenya,1972, 177

[58] David J. Whitehead, The Disseminations of Educational innovations in Britain (Hodder and Stoughton,1980), 20

[59]  Ibid, 58-59

[60] Michael Fullan, Meaning of educational change 1991, 79.

[61] Mathew B. Miles, Innovation in Education 1964, 646.

[62] Albert V. Kelly, The Curriculum, 1982, 177.

[63] Judith Bell, Doing your research project (Open University Press, 1999), 7.

[64] Paul  Hague  ,Questionnaire Design (London: Kogan page,1993), 11

[65] Tim May, Social Research, Issues, methods and process( Buckingham: Open University 2001),97

[66] Judith Bell, Doing your research project, 1999, 119.

[67] Ibid, 14

[68] Lorraine Blaxter and others, How to research (Buckingham: Open University,1996),60

[69] Catherine Dawson, Practical Research Methods:: User friendly guide to mastering research techniques and projects (Oxford: How to Books ltd, 2002),15

[70] Martyn Denscombe, The good research guide for small scale social Research projects (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1998), 177.

[71] Lorraine Blaxter,  How to research,1996, 70

[72] Judith Bell, Doing your research project 1999, 102

[73] David Hall and others, Practical social research (Palgrave: Macmillan, 1976), 44.

[74] Alan J.B. Anderson, Interpreting Data. A first course in statistics ( Chapman & Hall, 1989),1

[75] David Hall and others, Practical social Research 1996, 106

[76] Alan   J. B. Anderson, Interpreting data 1989, 2

[77]  Anne Edwards and Robin Talbot, The Hard pressed Researcher :A research Handbook for the caring professions (Longman, 1994),34

[78] Catherine Dawson, Practical Research Methods, 2002, 47.

[79] Arlene Fink and Jacqueline Kesecoff, How to conduct surveys: A step by step guide (Sag Publications, 1998), 51.

[80] Louis Cohen and Others, Research Methods in Education ,5^th edition (London & New York: Routledge Falmer,2000),75

[81] Ronald Czaja and Johnny Blair, Designing surveys: A guide to decisions and procedures (London: Pine Forge Press, 1996), 19.

[82]  Ibid, 24

[83] Ibid

[84]  Judith Bell, Doing your research Project, 1999,104.

[85] Arlene Fink and Jacqueline Kesecoff, How to conduct surveys, 1998, 6.

[86] Ibid, 33.

[87] Republic of Kenya, Report of the commission of inquiry into the education system of Kenya (Nairobi: Government Printer, 1999), 284.

[88] Daniel Sifuna, Development of education in Africa, 1990, 1979.

[89] Albert V. Kelly, The Curriculum, 1982, 22...

[90] David J. Whitehead, The dissemination of educational innovations in Britain, 1980, 20.

[91]  Daniel Sifuna, Development of education in Africa, 1990,187.

[92]  Michael Fullan, The new meaning of educational change, 1991, 70.

[93]  “ Wangai decries lack of books”, The standard Ltd ,10 May,2003,National news section

[94]  Arthur E. Sutherland, Curriculum Projects in Primary school, 1981,103.

[95]  Lewis Brownstein, Education and Development in Rural Kenya, 1972,175.

[96]  Mathew B. Miles (Ed), Innovation in Education (Columbia, Teachers college Columbia University 1964), 646.

[97] Republic of Kenya, The 1976 education report,50

[98] Michael Fullan, The new meaning of education change, 1991, 76.

[99]   The standard,29 march2003

[100] “Shs 4b  W B plan for primary education”, The standard, 19 April, 2003, education section.

[101] “Teacher shortage bites”, The standard, 10 may, 2003, education section.

[102] “Teachers warns of pitfalls”, The standard, 11January 2003, education section.

[103] Michael Fullan, The new meaning of educational change,1991,67

[104]  Ibid, 72.