The Level of Implementation of ASEI/PDSI Classroom Practices in Science Subjects: A Case of SMASSE Project, Kenya

Caroline Waruguru Ndirangu, Grace Mutitu Nyagah, Gerald Ngugi Kimani

Abstract


A lot of time, effort and resources are invested to put innovations in education into practice. In far too many cases, these innovations seem to fade away at different stages and for various reasons. Some innovations may be adopted by implementers in ways that undercut the design principle or, they may not provide students with sufficient exposure to the activities that produce learning gains. In 1998, Kenya adopted the Strengthening of Mathematics and Sciences in Secondary Education (SMASSE) in-service training programme, using a constructivist methodology to improve science performance. The emphasis was on Activity focused methods, Student-centred activities, Experimenting and Improvisation (ASEI) through the Plan, Do, See and Improve (PDSI) paradigm. The main objective of the study was to establish if there was a significant difference in the levels of implementation of the ASEI/PDSI classroom practices in the various science subjects, namely Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The survey design was used for a sample of 68 head teachers, 147 science teachers and 16 trainers. The instruments of the study were questionnaires, interviews and lesson observation schedules. The study established that the majority of the teachers (75%) were partial implementers and only (5%) were full implementers. The Fisher Exact Test result for the level of implementation among the science subjects was: Biology and Chemistry p-value 0.002 < 0.05, Biology and Physics p-value 0.33 > 0.05, and Chemistry and Physics p-value 0.01 < 0.05. The conclusion was that the level of implementation of the ASEI/PDSI classroom practices was partial, partly due to the heavy teaching load.  It was therefore recommended that the government employ more teachers to facilitate adequate preparation for ASEI lessons and apply learner-centred approaches that the innovation recommends.


Keywords


Implementation, In-service training. Sciences, innovation, learner –centred methodologies

Full Text:

PDF

References


ADEA, (2005). Reaching out, reaching all: sustaining effective policy and practice for education in Africa and promising educational responses to HIV/AIDS: Paris: ADEA.

ADEA. (2001). The Challenge of learning: Improving the quality of Basic education in Sub-Saharan Africa: Paris: ADEA

Baugh, J.M. (1994). Internet use in the rural school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown.

Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B.J., Krjack, J., Maxx, R.W., Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systematic reform: scaling up technology- embedded project- based science in urban schools, Educational Psychologist, 35 (3), 149-164.

Britton, E., Paine, L., Pimm, D., & Raizen, S. (2003). Comprehensive teacher induction: systems for early career learning. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kuklwer Academic Publishers.

Brown, J. & Adams, A. (2001). Constructivist teaching strategies. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.

Clark, J., Scarino, A., & Brownell, J. (1994). Improving quality of learning environments: on procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schaube & Glaser (Eds), Innovations in Learning: New Environments for Education pp 289-325.

Dirksen, D.J. (2002). An evaluation of the laptop initiative for Albertson College. Caldwell,ID: Albertson College.

Falkenberg, K.L. (2002). An exploration of elementary sciences teachers’ expertise creativity skills and motivation in relation to the use of an innovation and the delivery of high quality science instruction. Emory University, Retrieved June 20th 2005, from ProQuest Digital Dissertations Database.Fast Track Initiative Capacity Development Task Team, (2008). Teacher learning. guidelines for capacity development in the education sector. Washington DC: Education for All Fast Track Initiative.

Ginsburg, M. (2010). Improving educational quality through active-learning pedagogies: A comparison of five case studies. Educational Research 1(3), 62-74

Government of Kenya, (2007). Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) implementation strategy 2005-2014. Nairobi: Government Press

Grossman, P. (2005). Research on pedagogical approaches in teacher education: Washington DC

Hall, G. & Hord, S. (2006). Implementing change: patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon

Hall, G.E , Hord, S.M, Rutherford.W.L & Huling, L. (2006). Taking charge of change. Austin: SEDL

Hall, G.E , Wallace, R.D Jr. & Dosset, W.A (1973) A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Austin: Research and Development Centre for Teacher Education. The University of Texas.

Hall, G.E, Dirksen, D.J, George, A.A (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: levels of use. Austin: SEDL

Hopkins, D. (2001) School improvement for real. London and New York: Routledge Falmer.

Klein, K.J., & Ralls, R.S. (1995). The organizational dynamics of computerized technology implementation: A review of the empirical literature. In L.R. Gomez-Mejia & M.W. Lawless (Eds.), Implementation management of high technology (pp. 31–79).Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

KNEC, (2006). Kenya National Examination Council Newsletters, KNEC: Nairobi.

Kothari, C.R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques (2nd Ed.) New Delhi: New Age International Publishers.

Krasner, D. V. (1999). The Delivery of pro-social skills curricula of learning disabled and emotionally disturbed children and adolescents in a public school setting. NY: New York University. Retrived June 20, 2005 from ProQuest Digital Dissertations Database. (Publication No. 9955727)

Lipsey, M.W., Condray, D.S. (2000). Evaluation methods for social intervention. Annual Review of Loucks – Horsley, S. (1996). Professional Development for Science Education: An Immediate Challenge, In Bybee (Ed.), National Standards & Science Curriculum. Dubuque: Kendall.

Loucks, S.F & Melle, M. (1980). Implementation of a district-wide science curriculum: The effects of a three year effort. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Research Association, Boston, MA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 204181).Psychology. 51,345-375.

Marcias, A. J. P. (1995). Innovation in teaching and learning fellowships at San Jose University: An Evaluation of implementation. North Arizona University. Retrieved June 20, 2005, from Pro Quest Digital Dissertations Database. (Publication No. AAT 95411621)

MOEST, (2005). Sessional Paper No. 1 of 2005 on a policy framework for education, training and research. Nairobi: Government Printers.

Mugenda, A.B. (2008). Social science research. Nairobi: Applied Research & Training Services Press.

Mulkeen, A. (2010). Teachers in Anglo-phone Africa: issues in teacher supply training and management. Washington: World Bank.

Ndirangu, C. W. (2006). An evaluation of SMASSE in-service project in Biology in Kajiado district, Kenya. Masters in Education Project: Published. VDM. Germany.

Ndoye, M. (2005). Scaling up and sustaining promising experiences in Africa: Lessons form here and elsewhere. Paper in ADEA in ADEA Biennial Meeting Reaching Out, Reaching all: Paris: ADEA.

Newhouse, C. P. (2001). Applying the concerns-based adoption model to research on computers in classrooms. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 33(5).Retrieved,September,17,2004.

Paine, L.W. (1990). “The teacher as virtuoso: A Chinese model for teaching†Teachers College Record 92, 49-81.

Rivet, A. (2006). Using transformative research to explore congruencies between science reform and urban schools. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences pp. 578-584. Mahwan, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

SMASSE (2006). CEMASTEA strategic plan. SMASSE: Unpublished

SMASSE (2006). Principals’ workshop report. SMASSE: Nairobi: Unpublished.

SMASSE, (1999). The Baseline Studies. Nairobi. SMASSE Unpublished.

SMASSE, (2008). Handbook on management of district SMASSE programmes. Nairobi; JICA: Unpublished.

Sprinthall, N., Reinman, A. & Theis-Sprinthall, L. (1996). Teacher professional development. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education report, FY 2006 & FY 2007 Washington, DC: Education Development Center: Decentralized Basic Education Project.

UNESCO-IIEP (2004). Competent teachers for African classrooms: Looking Ahead IIEP Newsletter 22(1), 3-4.

USAID (2005). Education strategy: Improving lives through learning. Washington, DC.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use:

Vespoor, A. (1992) Planning of education: Where do we go? International Journal of Education Development 12(3), 233-244.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493