Changes in perceptions of the quality of education

“kuchapwa fimbo zisizo na idadi zinafanya mtoto aogope anaishi kwa hofu darasani”

“Corporal punishment is also a problem in school, he feels that there are too many strokes in punishments and it is difficult to pay attention to the teacher as you are constantly in fear of being hit”

Cost sharing was originally introduced in order to secure funding of education and hence improve its quality and access to it, whilst encouraging accountability and ownership. The review of the situation in 2000 proved that the policy failed to achieve its aims. Education available in 2000 was felt to be poorer in quality than that available in the past, in terms of access, quality, equipment provision and local level accountability.

Respondents argued that teaching standards had deteriorated due to a lack of commitment and increasing demands as a result of poor pay and unfavourable working conditions. The learning environment itself did little to improve standards as buildings were in a state of disrepair, there was little equipment available and a shortage of food. Punishment was often harsh and hindered relationships between students and teachers.

As a result of poor communication between stakeholders, relationships were often strained. The system was felt to be failing due to a lack of support and accountability at school, district, regional and national levels but communities continued to strive to achieve success in the face of such a disabling environment.

The PEDP set out to ameliorate the situation by funding a number of improvements in the quality of education, including the provision adequate numbers of appropriately equipped classrooms, and teaching learning materials, raising teaching standards, improving the curriculum, and the management of education. The ultimate aim has been to improve standards so that more children can demonstrate a higher level of skills and knowledge, as assessed by the Primary School Leaving Examination. The research in 2002 shows that it is too early to make a realistic assessment as to what has been achieved, there is an interesting indication of trends.

The picture with regards to exam results is more complicated than a simple table of results achieved. In Materuni in 1999 8 pupils passed, in 2000, one, and in 2001 12. The headteacher attributes recent good results to the drive to do better after the failures in 2000[1], incentives provided by the annual award to successful schools by the Uru Development Association[2], and increased parental interest in education including follow-up of their children. The absence of teachers on upgrading courses also caused low standards in 2000.

Pass rates for Standard 7 exams at Umati Primary School in Uswaa are presented below for 2000 and 2001 in Table 7.1. A slight increase is demonstrated but as pass rates for 2002 are not yet known it is difficult to predict whether this is a temporary or permanent improvement.

The Head Teacher of Ngumeni Primary School is still concerned that he will lose his job because exam pass rates at Standard 7 are less than satisfactory. The situation has been exacerbated he believes by the increase to 65% in passing all three subjects, maths, language and social studies.

Headteachers also expressed a concern about comparing schools on the basis of passes alone. They feel this gives an unfairly good picture of schools who have a lot of pupils sitting the exam. They feel the issue should be the percentage of passes against the number of pupils presented for examination. Such concerns about equity are compounded by complaints about funding of the examination – for which see section 5.3.2.

In 2000 the quality of teaching was felt to be poorer than in the past. In 2002, perceptions of the quality of education have changed little and teaching standards are still perceived to be less than optimal by parents and the students themselves. Standards are rarely monitored at district level and many schools are not getting sufficient support from their WEC. School inspections and official intervention is rare, either as a support to teacher efforts or to assess the quality of education being provided.

Despite improvements in the school environment discussed below, some students at Umati Primary School continue to be unable to write their name on completion of Standard 1. The situation appears to be little better in Materuni and Ngumeni where evidence showed that some teachers are continuing their failure to commit to their classroom activities. Some students are given text books and told to read themselves with no input or assistance from the teacher whilst some teachers are giving notes to one pupil who is then expected to copy these onto the blackboard for the other students. When left to study alone, many children complain that they do not understand the lessons. One teacher at Materuni School describes the quality of education they are able to provide for students as very low, ‘elimu wanayopata inawasaidia kusoma na kuhesabu hela...wanaishia kukata kuni na kuuza’, (‘The education pupils get is just enough to enable them to read and count money...they end up cutting firewood and selling it’).

A low standard of teaching is not solely the result of low levels of commitment. Two of the three schools in the research area are double shifting in standard one. This effects the amount of contact time for each pupil, and makes additional demands on teachers, for example in marking work. It also effects teachers morale, since they feel overburdened with additional work. Teachers are not receiving the promised salary increments for the additional workloads, and teaching conditions, with the exception of new classrooms, are not getting any better.

There is little in-service training and no improvement in the quality of training that teachers are being offered. In the past year at Materuni Primary School only the Head Teacher has attended a one week capacity building training course at Mandaka Teachers College. The Head and one other teacher have attended a one day workshop at Mbokomu organised by District Based Support to Primary Education (DBSPE)[3] but there has been no provision for all teachers to improve their teaching capacity. Umati Primary School still has 3 UPE teachers and it is believed that this severely impacts on the quality of teaching provided in school. Nevertheless, it has to be noted that absence of teachers on courses was used as an explanation for the drop in exam passes in Materuni in previous years.

Section 4.2.3.2 outlined the broad perception that primary education is inadequate to prepare children for the lives they are likely to be leading after school. As the curriculum is oriented towards academic subjects, students are not given the relevant skills for their future life outside the school environment. Neither vocational classes nor stadi za kazi are relevant or appropriate. There is an urgent need for teachers who have skills in vocational subjects as currently teachers attending Teacher Training Colleges (TTC) are only trained to teach academic subjects.

Some schools are less able to implement practicals. For example, the shamba at Materuni School is at a distance of 2-3 hours from the school, in Chombo With recent directives that activities like elimu ya kujitegemea needing to take place in the contextg of the normal timetable, there is no time to take the children to the field and return them within one scheduled period. Whilst there is a real concern about EK being more about labouring than practical learning (see section 7.3.4), and parents raised concerns about pupil safety on the long walk, Materuni is dependant on EK to make the school feeding programme work, and ‘hungry children do not learn’.

The importance of sports and games is recognised but facilities are still lacking in all three schools. Umati Primary School has grounds available but no equipment whilst both Materuni and Ngumeni schools have the equipment but no space for playing grounds. Ngumeni have been involved in discussions to expand the school compound with community members who state that they are willing to relocate if they are provided with land from the large estate, see also section 3.4.1.

There are still disputes over the exact meaning of tuition. Some focus groups said that it is homework marked and the results included in the final grade for each student at the end of the year. All believe that tuition is a good thing but that it should be provided as part of the normal teaching curriculum rather than an additional and expensive benefit.

As has already been outlined in Section 6.6.1, schools are not providing tuition as the decision was made to abandon tuition as a selective benefit to the rich. Tuition is, however, provided privately by individuals and the church in all three communities. This shows that there is parental recognition of a lack of quality in education, but that it remains affordable only to a minority.

At Umati Primary School teachers have initiated a system of peer tuition. If a child lags behind the others in class they will hand responsibility of that child to a brighter student who helps provide extra classes after school hours.

When a child goes to school the teacher has a role not just in teaching but in disciplining children in addition to the parents. The majority of those interviewed believed that punishment was appropriate as long as it is genuine. However, punishments are sometimes too harsh and rather than increasing the severity of the punishment, people feel that in the most serious cases parents should be called to the school.

Recent examples of types of punishment that continue to be meted out to students in Uswaa are taken from interviews with students at the school further detailed in Appendix 3, Interview 17B, extracts from which are presented below:

‘(Nicolaus) feels that there are too many strokes in punishments and it is difficult to pay attention to the teacher as you are constantly in fear of being hit, ‘kuchapwa fimbo zisizo na idadi zinafanya mtoto aogope anaishi kwa hofu darasani’. He says that not all teachers beat the students and sometimes it is not unwarranted such as when students are not writing in class and disturbing the other children. He also believes they should be beaten if they play truant, bully others without any reason or don’t do as they are told. It is understandable that these things make a teacher angry and he beats them.’

Fadili ... said that it is not right to be punished by holding your ears. This, he believes is the worst kind of punishment, but teachers might also come and hit you on the back. School duties are also given as punishments such as filling the school drum with water and according to Godfrey this is done intentionally to make students miss their classes as it takes a long time. Faidi added that leapfrogging was also a punishment meted out to students and the next day you cannot attend school because your legs are swollen and you can’t walk.’

Students in group interviews at all three schools complained that there was still too much corporal punishment. However, despite these complaints, most of those interviewed believed that education was important both as a tradition, ‘the stick is a tradition but it must not be misused,’(Men’s Group, Ngumeni) and because it is felt to improve discipline, ‘more children who are not disciplined by their parents become jobless’ (Men’s Group, Ngumeni).

Many teachers and parents feel that without corporal punishment, things are worse and many students fail to respect their teachers or their parents. Teachers are Uswaa presented an example of a child who decides not to do their homework as they know they will not be punished or that the punishment will be in the form of only 2 or 3 strokes. Many parents are also reliant on the school to punish their children because they do not want to do it at home as they believe ‘kupiga kelele darasani kumezidi.’ Maintaining discipline in school is never a problem if the teacher is known to be strict and is respected by the students but if the teacher has a reputation for being weak then students will ignore his/her instructions.

Child labour continues to be an issue at school, especially amongst students. Pupils at Umati Primary School felt that division of labour was unfair between boys and girls and that the boys should not have to do work in the kitchen such as cleaning pots as this was the work of girls. However, this exemplifies efforts at Umati to improve levels of equality and ensure that girls are not burdened more than boys with non-academic school activities. Sex differentiation at both Materuni and Ngumeni still remains a problem where girls are given the majority of kitchen tasks, reflecting community values and beliefs in traditional divisions of labour.

In 2000, the problem of child labour in schools through work on school shambas and in cleaning the school compound was an issue that was raised regularly by students and some parents. In 2002, there were fewer complaints but whether this was due to a focus on other issues or because the situation has indeed been improved is not known.

Despite policy rhetoric on the implementation of PEDP schools have witnessed few substantive changes in terms of quality beyond additional infrastructure. Class sizes have remained similar in all three schools; because schools are not being provided with extra facilities they are continuing to enrol standard size classes – for more precise details of numbers see section 8.2. In addition there has been no increase in teacher capacity and in all schools numbers of teachers have either remained the same or been reduced. There is no more equipment available for practical classes and sports and games.

Teacher relationships with students have improved as a result of PEDP changes, especially since teachers are having to do less chasing of pupils for fees. However, research in 2002 raised the issue of bullying as an ongoing problem in some schools, Materuni in particular. It was said that some teachers continue to ignore the bullies especially if the children being bullied come from marginalized households such as those which are female headed.

Capitation Grants were supposed to meet the costs of providing school equipment to increase quality of education in primary schools. They officially intend to cover the costs of textbook provision as well as sufficient exercise books for all students throughout the year. But actual income at school level is not sufficient to cover all the costs and schools are unable to provide either additional textbooks or sufficient exercise books. Schools are generally unaware of what district authorities are supposed to be providing in terms of textbooks on their behalf as part of the capitation grant that is retained at district level. Textbooks that have been provided are generally of poor quality and last for only short periods of time before they fall apart. The Head Teacher of Umati Primary School claimed that a textbook does not last any longer than a year when used regularly by classes. He also detailed the availability and sufficiency of textbooks provided by the district according to selected individual subjects and classes. This is presented in Table 7.2 below.

As a result of the shortfall in funding provision there are rarely sufficient exercise books to provide for every student throughout the year. Quality is constrained by this and also because of reports of preferential distribution of exercise books provided through the capitation grant, distributing them to ‘favourite’ pupils rather than the poorest who are most in need.

Furthermore in 2002, schools are not able to meet the costs of administration to improve quality and transparency to the community. These problems are exacerbated because capitation grants do not arrive on schedule and are generally insufficient when they do. In some cases Head Teachers are subsidising the government from their own pockets in providing for teacher attendance at meetings.

Whilst capitation grants have been designed to improve the quality of teaching in terms of equipment and capacity, development grants have been provided to improve the school environment in providing funding for the provision of desks and classrooms as well as school facilities such as pit latrines. Details of the amounts received are covered in section 5.4. Schools have only been able to make improvements because of the additional financial support they have received from NGOs and private local organisations and individuals. For instance Ngumeni School has been able to construct one new classroom with support from the Branton Tanzania Trust Fund (BTTF).

Uswaa has been able to make vast improvements to their classrooms since 2000 and the children believe they are very fortunate now to be able to study in the new buildings despite the need for an additional 5 classrooms to meet student capacity. Improvements in Uswaa are also largely a result of additional financial support from sources not linked to the development grants. A MP from the area provided 250 iron sheets for the school whilst land rented by the village to KNCU produced a profit and this was also given to the school. Further improvements are planned through DBSPE but the exact nature of their promised support is unclear. However improvements are still insufficient and, for example, at Ngumeni there is still a large shortfall of 70 desks.

Cost sharing was introduced with the expectation that if parents and communities were contributing to the cost of education, they would demand a higher level of accountability over what went on in schools. The fallacy of this was documented in the 2000 report. However, since cost sharing has been abandoned and new policy adopted there has been no significant change in levels of accountability and communities appear to feel no increased sense of ownership than previously. Section 6.6 highlighted the connection between affordability of education and section 9.4 makes additional connections with how to make improvements in education.

A key factor in this is that committees are also not supported and have received no training to enhance their capacity to make appropriate decisions for the school. The school committee of Umati Primary School claimed that they had received only three hours of training at a seminar on how to establish and run the committee and the respective responsibilities of teachers and students. The school committee of Ngumeni state that they are supposed to meet four times a year but that most do not know what their role entails. For example, the chair of academics states that he is willing to commit himself to the work but he admits he has made no follow-up as he doesn’t know what to do.

The Head Teacher of Umati Primary School stated that it was harder to persuade committee members to attend meetings four times a year now than in the past as previously they were paid a sitting fee but they have received no support and there has been less incentive since the cancellation of UPE. Committee members also felt that it was unfair to expect them to commit to their role without any official recognition. Despite their complaints the committee continues to meet about 7 times a year and both the headgirl and headboy of the school are present at meetings as representatives of the student body.

It is early days to be looking for very definite improvements in the quality of education since the start of PEDP. Many older respondents still feel that the quality of teaching and learning is not as high as in the past.There have been some improvements in examination results, but it is hard to attribute these to recent policy or funding changes.

Tuition is not taking place in the sense of teachers taking additional payment for teaching the same pupils after school hours, but teachers are sufficiently motivated to hold additional classes for standards 4 and 7.

Nevertheless, there are certain positive indications. All three schools state that they have reaped some benefits from the capitation grant. In particular, children are less often sent home for non-payment of fees/contributions, which makes for both increased time in school and an improved atmosphere in the classroom. The physical environment has improved with new classroom construction – dramatically so in Uswaa where they are no longer using the classrooms described as being kama mbavu za mbwa (like the ribs of a dog). This has a positive effect on the morale of teachers and pupils alike. However, to get the full advantage of the development grant communities have had to put in their own efforts and sometimes funding from elsewhere. They are frustrated that there is insufficient flexibility in the operation of the development grant to allow them to set priorities, or do their own costings and purchasing of materials.

Overall, classroom practice does not seem to have changed. Teachers are still using the same teaching learning methodologies, though complaints about the use of corporal punishment are not as strong as in 2000. Most teachers have not received inservice training of any kind, and there are still some complaints about late payment of salaries. There is no significant difference in the availability of exercise books or text books. Teachers are using the same curriculum as in 2000, which many see as not sufficient preparation for the life children will lead after they leave school.

[1] Extra classes have been provided at no cost for exam classes.

[2] For additional information see 5.2.1.1