Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
THE INFLUENCE OF STRENGTHENING OF MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE IN
SECONDARY EDUCATION (SMASSE) PROJECT IN THE INSTRUCTION OF
MATHEMATICS IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS OF RANGWE DIVISION, HOMA
BAY COUNTY - KENYA.
BY
RUTH NANJEKHO WAFUBWA
A thesis submitted to the school of post graduate studies, in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Education in Curriculum and
Instruction
Department of Curriculum and Instruction
Kisii University
December 2014
ii
DECLARATION
Declaration by the candidate
This thesis is my original work and has not been presented for examination and/or a degree in
any other university.
Signature…………………………………………………………….. Date…………………
Ruth Nanjekho Wafubwa
Registration No: EM17/00176/11
Declaration by the supervisors
This thesis has been submitted with our approval as university supervisors
1. Signature_________________________ Date ____________
Prof. Dickson S.O. Owiti, PhD
Associate Professor of Mathematics Education
School of Education
Rongo University College
2. Signature____________________________ Date___________
Dr Hilda Omae, phD
Senior lecturer
School of Pure and Applied Sciences
Kisii University
iii
COPYRIGHT
All rights are reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
by mechanical means including photocopying, recording or retrieval without express
permission of the researcher or Kisii University on her behalf.
© 2014
iv
ABSTRACT
There has been a persistent outcry on the poor performance in mathematics in Kenya over the
past years. This prompted the researcher to assess the influence of Strengthening
Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education (SMASSE) project in the instruction of
mathematics in Rangwe division. The study specifically sought to investigate the extent to
which SMASSE‟S ASEI-PDSI (Activity, Student, Experiment and Improvisation-Plan, Do,
See and Improve) approach has influenced the teaching and learning of mathematics. This
study was conducted in Rangwe division of Homa Bay Sub County covering ten public
secondary schools. The target population was 724 form three students. The sample consisted
of 203 form three students, 20 teachers of mathematics, nine HODs, nine principals and one
QASO. A descriptive survey design was adopted for the study. Stratified random sampling
and Purposive sampling techniques were used to obtain respondents. The study was guided
by a conceptual framework which attempts to explain how SMASSE in-service training
influences the use of teaching resources, teaching approaches, students‟ attitude and
performance in mathematics. Data was collected through questionnaires, interviews,
document analysis and observation. The respondents were Principals, Heads of Mathematics
Department (HODs), Mathematics teachers, Quality Assurance and Standards Officer
(QASO) and students. Data collected was coded and entered in the computer for analysis
using the Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 17.0 to generate tables. The
study established that SMASSE project has not improved teachers‟ teaching approaches and
teachers are still using the traditional approaches like chalk and talk. From the study, teachers
of mathematics face a number of challenges in the process of implementing ASEI-PDSI
approach in the classrooms. The study also established that although the introduction of
SMASSE project has influenced students‟ attitude positively, it has however not been
translated to the improved students‟ performance. SMASSE project has therefore not
improved the performance of Rangwe division students in mathematics. The study
recommends that the CEMASTEA team should address the challenges faced by teachers so
that the implementation of the approach can be done in a more effective way.
v
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my dear husband Edwin and our blessed children Elijah and Daniel
for their support throughout my studies.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This thesis could not have been completed without the help of many people. Thus I owe them
debts of gratitude. I am particularly grateful to my supervisors Prof. Dickson.S.O.Owiti and
Dr Hilda Omae for their constant guidance that enabled me sharpen this work. They remained
committed in preparing me. Sincere acknowledgements also to all members of staff in the
faculty of Education and Human Resource Development particularly the lecturers who taught
me. These included Prof B. Ondigi, Dr C. Moochi and Dr Florence Mobegi. Similar gratitude
goes to my classmates Margaret, Mokaya, Irene and Zainab in the department of curriculum
and instruction for their ideas and constructive comments that helped shape this work.
Sincere thanks to Kisii University for availing me the opportunity to study. Finally to the
almighty God for His divine guidance throughout my studies and my family members for
moral and financial support they gave me.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER PAGE………………………………………………………………………………..i
DECLARATION ....................................................................................................................... ii
COPYRIGHT…………………………………………………………………………………iii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..iv
DEDICATION .......................................................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................... vvi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………...x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................. xi
CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Background of the Problem ........................................................................................... 1
1.2. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................... 4
1.3. Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................... 5
1.4. Specific Objectives of the Study .................................................................................... 5
1.5. Research Questions ........................................................................................................ 6
1.6. Significance of the Study ............................................................................................... 6
1.7. The scope of the Study ................................................................................................... 7
1.8. Limitations of the Study................................................................................................. 7
1.9. Assumptions of the Study ................................................................................................... 7
1.10. Operational Definition of key Terms ................................................................................ 8
1.11. Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO ..................................................................................................................... 11
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 11
2.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.2. The Concept of SMASSE project ..................................................................................... 11
2.3. The Need for SMASSE INSET ........................................................................................ 13
2.4. ASEI-PDSI approach in SMASSE-WECSA member countries ...................................... 16
2.5. ASEI-PDSI approach in Kenya ........................................................................................ 16
2.6. Students‟ attitude towards the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics ........................... 18
2.7. The Impact of SMASSE Project ....................................................................................... 19
2.8. Supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach................................................................................ 21
2.9. Challenges faced in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach ................................... 22
2.10. The use of ASEI-PDSI approach in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics .......... 24
CHAPTER THREE ................................................................................................................. 29
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 29
3.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 29
3.2. Research Design................................................................................................................ 29
3.3. The Study Area ................................................................................................................. 29
3.4. The Study Population ........................................................................................................ 30
3.5. The Sample and Sampling Procedures ............................................................................. 30
3.6. Instruments of Data collection .......................................................................................... 32
3.6.1. Mathematics Teachers‟ Questionnaire ........................................................................... 32
3.6.2. Principals‟ Questionnaire ............................................................................................... 32
3.6.3. Students‟ Questionnaire ................................................................................................. 33
3.6.4. An Interview Schedule for Heads of Mathematics Departments ................................... 33
3.6.5. ASEI-PDSI Check list.................................................................................................... 34
3.6.6. Interview Schedule for QASO ....................................................................................... 34
viii
3.7. Data collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 34
3.8. Validity of Research Instruments ...................................................................................... 35
3.9. Reliability of Research Instruments .................................................................................. 35
3.10. Data Analysis Procedures ............................................................................................... 36
CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................... 37
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................................................ 37
4.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 37
4.2. Challenges faced in the Implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach ................................... 37
4.3. Influence of ASEI-PDSI approach on the attitude of Students towards the Teaching and
Learning of Mathematics based on School category. .............................................................. 41
4.4. The Teaching Approaches in Rangwe Secondary Schools. .............................................. 47
4.5. The Influence of SMASSE-INSET on Students‟ Performance in Mathematics .............. 56
4.6. Summary ........................................................................................................................... 59
CHAPTER FIVE ..................................................................................................................... 60
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................ 60
5.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 60
5.2. Summary of the main Findings ......................................................................................... 60
5.2.1. Challenges faced in the Implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach. ............................... 60
5.2.2. ASEI-PDSI approach and Attitude of Students towards Mathematics .......................... 61
5.2.3. The Teaching Approaches in Rangwe Secondary Schools ............................................ 62
5.2.4. SMASSE-INSET and Performance of Students in Mathematics .................................. 63
5.3. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 63
5.4. Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 64
5.5. Suggestions for further Research ...................................................................................... 65
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 66
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................... 73
Appendix A: Mathematics Teachers‟ Questionnaire ............................................................... 73
Appendix B: Principals‟ Questionnaire ................................................................................... 75
Appendix C: Students‟ Questionnaire ..................................................................................... 77
Appendix D: Interview Schedule for Heads of Mathematics Department. ............................. 79
Appendix E: ASEI-PDSI Checklist ......................................................................................... 80
Appendix F: Interview schedule for QASO............................................................................. 83
Appendix J: Letter to the School Principal ............................................................................. 84
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table. 1.1. K.C.S.E Mathematics Performance at National level .............................................. 3
Table 3.1. Stratified sample of the students‟ population ......................................................... 31
Table 4.1. Means of principals self perception on the supervision and practice of ASEI-PDSI
approach based on teaching experience ................................................................................... 38
Table 4.2. Overall mean of students‟ attitude towards mathematics ....................................... 42
Table 4.3. Means of students‟ attitude towards mathematics by school category ................... 43
Table 4.4. One way ANOVA of students‟ attitude towards mathematics as per school
category………………………………………………………………………………………45
Table 4.5. Mathematics teachers‟ overall self perception towards the implementation of
ASEI-PDSI approach ............................................................................................................... 47
Table 4.6. Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson plan .................................................... 49
Table 4.7.Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approachon lesson introduction ......................................... 49
Table 4.8. Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson development ...................................... 50
Table 4.9 Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson conclusion, class management and
instructional materials………………………………………………………………………..51
Table 4.10. The „See‟ aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach……………………………………..52
Table 4.11. The „Improve‟ aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach………………………………..53
Table 4.12. The aspects of lesson delivery of ASEI-PDSI approach………………………..54
Table 4.13. Average scores for phase one and phase two of SMASSE training…………….57
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1. Relationship between the Independent and Dependent variables ........................... 9
Figure 4.1 Mean of different aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach……………………………....55
Figure 4.2 Rangwe division Mathematics KCSE mean scores from 2004-2012 .................... 56
xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ASEI-PDSI -Activity, Student, Experiment and Improvisation- Plan, Do, See and Improve
CEMASTEA - Centre for Mathematics and Science Teacher Education in Africa
GoK -Government of Kenya
HOD’s -Heads of Department
INSET - In-Service Education and Training
JICA - Japan International Cooperation Agency
KCSE - Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education
KESSP -Kenya Education Sector Support Programme
KNEC - Kenya National Examination Council
NACOSTI - National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation
QASO - Quality Assurance and Standards Officer
SMASSE -Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education
SPIAS -SMASSE Project Impact Assessment Survey
WECSA - Western, Eastern, Central and Southern Africa
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Problem
The Kenyan government vision 2030 is in line with the emerging trends of scientific and
technological innovation over the world i.e. the bioscience and biotechnology. These trends
cannot be possible without emphasizing on quality education which should provide answers
to modern demands resulting from social, political, cultural and technological developments
(Mondoh, 2005). In order to achieve these demands, innovation should therefore be
emphasized.
Mathematics is one of the subjects that give an excellent foundation for and usually a pre-
requisite to all areas of science and technological innovations. Students in such areas as
anthropology, sociology and psychology as well as law, business and medicine benefit from a
solid foundation in mathematics in placement of their careers (Maths forum, 2013).
Mathematics is widely used but often in an unseen and unadvertised ways such as: the use of
elementary aspects of mathematics in the everyday use of arithmetic and display of
information by means of graphs (Porter, 1996). The continuous poor performance in
mathematics is however one of the most enduring puzzles for education in Kenya.
Eshiwani (1993) shows the astonishing poor achievement in mathematics and science. Birgen
(2004) also observed that despite the explosion of trained teachers in the recent past, the score
card in mathematics and science subjects had persistently made for depressing reading. The
continuous poor performance in mathematics and science (biology, chemistry and physics)
prompted the government of Kenya to look for solutions to the problem. Among the
strategies for raising quality is appropriate pre-service and in-service training (Republic of
Kenya, 2005). More specifically is the enhancing of quality of teaching, learning and
2
performance, especially in Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE) science and
mathematics. The development of comprehensive in-service training programmes should
therefore be considered an urgent need.
In an attempt to improve the performance in mathematics and science, the government of
Kenya through the Ministry of Education Science and Technology (MOEST) in conjunction
with the Japanese Government came up with Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in
Secondary Education (SMASSE) project in Kenya. This was done through the In-Service
Education and Training (INSET) of teachers. INSET is one of the approaches employed to
up-grade teachers‟ skills and competences throughout the world (Karega, 2008) and is in
agreement with worldwide consensus that improving quality of education depends on
improvement of quality of classroom practices (Kibe, Odhiambo and Ogwel, 2008).
The Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education project was thus born
out of the need to improve the teaching, learning and performance in mathematics and
science subjects. The project was officially launched in Kenya in 1999 on a pilot basis in
nine districts and was later expanded to cover the entire country in 2004 (Ngugi and
Nyakweba, 2005). In Rangwe division, the first phase of INSET was launched in April 2004
and ended in 2007. Phase two of the training begun in 2008 and ended in 2011. The third
phase begun in 2012 and the training is on-going. Each phase of the training consists of four
cycles. Every teacher is expected to undergo four cycles of INSET over a four year period. A
cycle lasts ten working days, conducted once a year at district level. Rangwe division has
gone through two complete phases of the training.
The first cycle emphasizes on attaining a positive attitude change towards mathematics and
science education among the teachers and the students. Cycle two is based on hands on
activities that are designed to address specific areas considered difficult and hence not
3
adequately handled by the teacher. In this cycle, teachers have an opportunity to put into
practice the principles of Activity, Student, Experiment and Improvisation - Plan, Do, See
and improve (ASEI-PDSI) approach. Cycle three centres on actualization of hands-on
activities inside the classroom situation. Cycle four emphasizes on enhancing ASEI-PDSI
approach in the classroom.
The goals of SMASSE project are meant to be achievable through improved performance in
examinations, positive attitude and enhanced students‟ participation during classroom
instruction (SMASSE Project, 2008). However, despite the aforementioned intentions of
SMASSE project, students‟ performance in mathematics is still dismal (Birgen, 2004; Owiti,
2008). According to the Kenya National Examinations report released on February 28th
2008,
the students‟ overall national mean in mathematics was 19.74 percent (Kenya National
Examination Council, 2008). The analysis showed that mathematics was the poorly
performed subject out of the 22 subjects that were offered in the curriculum. The outcry on
the poor performance in mathematics has therefore persisted over the years (table 1.1). In
spite of gradual improvement, the performance is still poor.
Table. 1.1
K.C.S.E Mathematics Performance at National level
YEAR 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
MEAN SCORE (%) 16.24 17.62 12.24 16.26 19.74 20.87 21.13 23.06
Source: Kenya National Examination Council Reports (2004-2011)
The persistent poor performance (below average) in mathematics evidenced in Table1.1
prompted the researcher to carry out a study on influence of SMASSE project in the teaching
and learning of mathematics in secondary schools of Rangwe division, Homa Bay Sub-
County. The researcher investigated the extent to which ASEI-PDSI approach was being
4
implemented in the classroom and the influence it had caused on the teaching and learning of
mathematics. This study was inspired by the need to find a solution to the continued poor
performance in mathematics in secondary education. The study was more concerned with
mathematics subject among other subjects (biology, chemistry and physics) targeted by
SMASSE project since mathematics is the foundation of scientific and technological
knowledge that is vital in socio-economic development of any nation (Republic of Kenya,
2005). Besides, mathematics is the only compulsory subject among the four subjects targeted
by SMASSE (Kenya Institute of Education, 2002).
1.2. Statement of the Problem
The government of Kenya has constantly acknowledged the importance of mathematics in the
society by making it one of the compulsory subjects in both primary and secondary school
levels (Kenya Institute of Technology, 2002). The government has therefore been working to
improve the science and mathematics education in schools in line with the fulfillment of
Kenya‟s vision 2030 of industrialization (Kenya Vision 2030). Since 1999, the Kenyan
government in conjunction with the Japanese government has been extending support in the
in-service training of teachers for science and mathematics in the country. After a successful
implementation of the project in the pilot districts, the project was implemented to cover the
whole country.
In Rangwe division, SMASSE project was started in April 2004 with Asumbi Girls High
School being the INSET centre. Since then, two complete phases of the training have taken
place and the third phase is ongoing. About 75 percent of the practicing teachers of
mathematics in Rangwe division have gone through the SMASSE In-Service Education and
Training (SMASSE INSET). Human and material resources have heavily been invested in the
project. The materials needed to facilitate the project are made available at the SMASSE
5
INSET centre which is easily accessible by mathematics teachers within Rangwe division. It
is therefore expected that the short term goals of SMASSE project which are to lead to the
overall goal within Rangwe division can be achieved. The study was interested in assessing
the influence of SMASSE project to establish whether the objectives of the project were
being achieved in Rangwe division or not. The overall research problem addressed in this
study was to assess the influence of SMASSE project in the teaching and learning of
mathematics in Rangwe division. This was prompted by the low performance in mathematics
at the KCSE level as reflected in Table 1.1 (pg3).
1.3. Purpose of the Study
The Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education project advocates the
use of ASEI-PDSI approach, a learner-centered teaching and learning method whose main
goal is to upgrade the capability of young Kenyans in mathematics and science (Wambui &
Wahome, 2006). As an education innovation, it is necessary to establish its successes and
failures by carrying out a follow-up evaluation (Kusek & Rist, 2004). The purpose of this
study was to assess the influence of SMASSE‟S ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching and
learning of mathematics in secondary schools of Rangwe division. This was done with a view
of providing data and information that should guide policy regarding the implementation of
ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics in public secondary
schools of Rangwe division and elsewhere in Kenya.
1.4. Specific Objectives of the Study
The specific objectives of this study were to:
i. Establish the challenges faced by teachers of mathematics in the implementation of
ASEI-PDSI approach.
6
ii. Establish whether SMASSE INSET had changed the students' attitudes towards
mathematics based on school category.
iii. Assess whether SMASSE INSET had changed the teachers‟ teaching approaches in
Rangwe secondary schools.
iv. Establish whether SMASSE INSET had improved the performance of students in
mathematics.
1.5. Research Questions
The following research questions were used to guide the study:
i. What are some of the challenges that face teachers of mathematics in the
implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach?
ii. How has SMASSE INSET influenced the students‟ attitudes towards mathematics?
iii. To what extent has SMASSE INSET changed the teachers‟ teaching approaches in
Rangwe secondary schools?
iv. To what extent has SMASSE INSET improved the performance of students in
mathematics?
1.6. Significance of the Study
Research has shown that high quality implementation is one of the greatest determinants of
success with school reform (Cooper & Slavin, 1998). Through SMASSE project in Kenya,
the ministry of education science and technology is nurturing young scientists and
technologists for the realization of the country‟s goals. The current study was therefore
necessary to find out whether the goals of SMASSE project are being achieved in Rangwe
division or not. It is hoped that the findings from this study will be of benefit to students,
teachers and curriculum developers. The students‟ performance may improve because
teachers will be able to address the challenges they face in the process of implementing the
7
ASEI-PDSI approach. Curriculum developers will be able to develop a curriculum that can be
easily implemented. The findings from the study may therefore help in addressing the
problem of dismal performance in mathematics and realization of Kenya‟s vision 2030.
1.7. The scope of the Study
The study was conducted in ten public secondary schools of Rangwe division, Homa Bay
Sub-County. The main focus of this study was on the classroom practice of ASEI-PDSI
approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics and the supervision of ASEI-PDSI
approach by principals, heads of mathematics department (HODs) and the Quality Assurance
and Standards Officer (QASO). The study sample consisted of 203 form three students, 20
mathematics teachers, nine HODs and nine principals and one QASO. Data was collected by
the researcher using questionnaires, interview, observation and document analysis techniques.
The study specifically assessed the implementation of SMASSE project on the teaching and
learning of mathematics in secondary schools of Rangwe division.
1.8.Limitations of the Study
The study largely relied on the honesty of the respondents (principals, teachers, QASO and
students) from whom data was collected. In some schools mathematics teachers and students
were uncooperative, thereby consuming more time than anticipated.
1.9. Assumptions of the Study
The following were the assumptions of the study:
All the schools that were selected for the study had qualified teachers who had
attended the SMASSE INSET.
SMASSE project has been implemented in all the public secondary schools in
Rangwe division.
8
1.10. Operational Definition of key Terms
Attitude -the emotional disposition of students towards mathematics.
Conventional approaches to teaching - the traditional teaching methodologies
and approaches that teachers use in teaching mathematics.
Impact -the action of SMASSE project on the teaching and learning of
mathematics.
Instruction- the teaching and learning of mathematics
In service education and training - the training that serving mathematics and
science teachers go through for the purpose of professional development.
Pre-service education and training - training in a teachers‟ college, where a
student teacher is introduced to the knowledge and skills needed to do a
professional job in teaching.
Teaching and Learning: -Change in attitude, participation in class and
performance in Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE).
9
1.11. Conceptual Framework
SMASSE INSET was born out of the need to improve performance in mathematics and
sciences in secondary education (SMASSE project, 2002). According to Kenya Education
Sector Support Programme (KESSP) document (Government of Kenya, 2005b), poor
performance in mathematics and sciences is attributed to weak pedagogies and negative
attitudes of teachers, students and parents towards the subjects. Attitude change and
improvement of teachers‟ pedagogical skills are thus central to the SMASSE project
initiatives (Njuguna, 1999). These are key aspects given that traditionally, mathematics and
science subjects have been perceived to be difficult and boring to students. The conceptual
framework is presented as follows in Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1.
Relationship between the Independent and Dependent variables
Independent variable Extraneous variables Dependent variables
In conceptualizing the study, the researcher attempted to point out how the independent
variable SMASSE INSET interacts with the dependent variables: use of improvised resources
in teaching of mathematics, improved teaching approaches, improved performance in
SMASSE In-
service
Education and
Training: ASEI
- PDSI
approach.
Teaching
experience
of teachers.
Teachers‟
work load.
Class sizes.
Use of improvised
resources in teaching
of mathematics.
Improved teaching
approaches.
Improved
performance in
mathematics.
Change of students‟
attitude towards
mathematics.
.
10
mathematics and change of students‟ attitude towards mathematics as shown in Figure1.1.
The study hypothesized that for high educational output (performance) to be realized, the
SMASSE INSET has to succeed in positively impacting on attitudes of students and
pedagogical skills of mathematics teachers. Teachers need to adopt the constructivist
approach to teaching in order to actively involve the learners. The influence of the extraneous
variables such as class sizes, teaching experience and teachers‟ workload were controlled by
randomization (Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). It was also controlled by sampling teachers
with the requisite qualifications i.e. diploma and university level of pre-service teacher
education. The influence of such extraneous variables was, therefore, assumed in this study.
11
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Introduction
In this chapter, the researcher reviewed literature related to SMASSE project as well as
teaching and learning of mathematics. The review is conceptualized under the objectives of
the study and focuses mainly on ASEI- PDSI approach and its relationship with teaching and
learning of mathematics. The sub-headings are thus: The concept of SMASSE project; the
need for SMASSE INSET; the practice of ASEI-PDSI approach in Africa; students‟ attitude
towards the teaching and Learning of Mathematics; the impact of SMASSE project; the
supervision of mathematics lessons after SMASSE INSET and challenges faced in the
implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach and the use of ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching
and learning of mathematics.
2.2. The Concept of SMASSE project
Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education project is an initiative
that seeks to enhance teachers‟ pedagogical content knowledge and practice in order to
improve students‟ motivation and understanding in mathematics and science (SMASSE
Project, 2008). The project was deemed best suited for most African countries and
developing countries which face severe resource constraint since it focuses on strengthening
education within the existing structures by emphasizing on the need for mobilization and
prudent utilization of local resources. The project seemed to be a perfect solution to Kenya‟s
case since the country has always suffered from inadequate resources in the education sector
(Eshiwani, 1993). The main challenge the project has addressed is the quality of teaching
which needs to be strengthened and made effective (SMASSE project, 2004).
12
The concept that underlies SMASSE project is action research which requires a
complementary conception of theory and practice. The project advocates for a student
centered approach to the teaching and learning of science and mathematics (ASEI-PDSI
approach). This approach has borrowed a lot from what happens in a Japanese class room
where mathematics is on one hand and students on the other. The students engage with the
mathematics and the teacher mediates the relationship between the two (Stigler & Hiebert,
1999). Japanese teaching is distinguished not so much by competence of the teachers but by
the images it provides of what it can look to teach mathematics in a deeper way and teaching
for conceptual understanding. The INSET curriculum borrows a lot from what Japanese
teachers do in terms of lesson study which is a very important aspect of ASEI-PDSI
approach.
In lesson study, groups of teachers meet regularly over a period of two to three weeks to work
on the design, implementation, testing and improvement of one or several research lessons.
The teachers in Japan value lesson study which is lacking in Kenyan education system
(Mintezes, Wadersee & Novak, 1998). Through SMASSE project teachers are encouraged to
embrace the idea of lesson study just like the Japanese teachers so that they can improve their
teaching approaches. Lesson study which is widely practiced in Japan has provided the
teachers with opportunities to improve skills necessary for lesson delivery. Study of
instructional materials is considered as the key to a successful lesson delivery in Japan. The
purpose is for teachers to deepen the understanding of the subject content and improve
instructional skills bearing in mind learner‟s realities and developmental stages (Stigler &
Hiebert, 1999). The reflection on the design of projects within the SMASSE-WECSA
(Western, Eastern, Central and Southern Africa) reveals that the SMASSE project is relevant
and consistent with global trends in education and it is designed to address ownership and
sustainability of teachers‟ professional development (SMASSE Project, 2008).
13
2.3. The Need for SMASSE INSET
Strengthening of Mathematics and Science in Secondary Education INSET is founded on the
premise that a teacher is made in the classroom not in the lecture halls in colleges and
universities (CEMASTEA, 2010). On starting to teach, the teacher puts into practice theories,
teaching methods and student management styles as learnt at pre-service training (PRESET).
However, these have to be continually reviewed in the light of the prevailing conditions,
circumstances on the ground and of new discoveries. The PRESET of teachers is thus seen to
be insufficient to prepare teachers for the greater challenges of everyday teaching, hence the
need for the in-service training of teachers (SMASSE project, 2004).
During INSET, teachers are equipped with the necessary skills to develop teaching and
learning materials, use limited resources efficiently and effectively and utilize materials in
their environment for effective teaching and learning of mathematics and science (Japan
International Cooperation Agency, 2004). In order to upgrade the various aspects of teaching
and learning, the SMASSE team came up with the Activity, Student, Experiment, and
Improvisation (ASEI) as well as Plan, Do, See and Improve (PDSI) approach.
The four basic principles inherent in ASEI which guide SMASSE INSET activities are
clearly articulated in several SMASSE reports like in the SMASSE projects of 2002, 2004
and CEMASTEA 2009. The 1st principle is aimed at shifting from knowledge based approach
to activity oriented teaching where a teacher prepares meaningful learning activities such as
minds on and hearts on that enables students develop knowledge, skills and favourable
attitudes respectively. The 2nd
principle is aimed at shifting from teacher centered teaching to
student focused learning. This principle helps a teacher to plan teaching and learning
activities for each lesson with the particular student in mind. The planning should enable the
student to gain knowledge, skills and attitudes. The 3rd
principle which is a shift from Lecture
14
method approach to Experiment and Research based approach enables students to discover or
reinforce new concepts and ideas. The 4th
principle is a shift from large scale to small scale
experiments and improvisation. Improvisation is the teacher‟s innovativeness in designing
simple experiments or activities to enhance students‟ participation and learning, making use
of the available resources in the environment and using equipment in different ways from the
conventional ones to facilitate teaching and learning (Ogwel, 2011).
ASEI is a pedagogic paradigm shift from the condition before INSET referred to as pre-ASEI
condition to the ASEI condition where good classroom practices result in actual learning.
With the help of ASEI movement, the teacher should focus on strategies which demystify
mathematics and science by relating to students‟ real life experience, provide students with
opportunities to develop key competencies such as problem solving, analysis, synthesis and
application of relevant information and place emphasis on application of knowledge and
learning of cross-curricular skills rather than reproduction of knowledge (Waititu & Orado,
2009). The ASEI movement therefore creates a bridge that enables learners to relate and
integrate practical activities with theoretical knowledge. The movement advocates a shift
from teacher‟s centered approaches to student‟s centered approaches. The ASEI movement
emphasizes teaching the student and not the subject (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). The SMASSE
project demonstrates that challenges facing educational innovations emanate from lack of
effective planning and implementation (Fuller, 1987). There is therefore a need for schools to
pay attention to motivating students to participate in the learning process and develop their
abilities.
To achieve the ASEI condition SMASSE team came up with the Plan, Do, See and Improve
(PDSI) approach to teaching and learning. The teacher carefully plans his/her lesson and
tries out the teaching and learning activities, materials and examples before the lesson. The
15
teacher then carries out the planned lesson (Do) and is encouraged to be innovative in lesson
presentation. In the seeing aspect (See), the teacher evaluates the teaching and learning
process during and after lesson using various techniques and feedback from students. In the
Improve aspect (I), the teacher reflects on the performance, evaluation report and
effectiveness in achieving the lesson objectives (Wambui & Wahome, 2006; Waititu &
Orado, 2009). PDSI is a continuous reflection process, which allows a teacher to improve the
particular lesson, the subsequent lessons, and lesson delivery skills in general. Before the
introduction of SMASSE project, teacher education had been emphasizing on the training
rather than preparation of teachers (Kafu, 1996). Consequently, it continued to produce
traditional school teachers who are conservative and resistant to change. PDSI approach
therefore attempts to make the education curriculum responsive to emerging trends in the
society. Wabwile (2007) notes that significant effort is needed to make teacher education
programme scientific, effective and meaningful.
The goals of SMASSE project are categorized as short term and long term. The achievement
of short term goals is reflected through improved performance in examinations, positive
attitude and enhanced students‟ participation during classroom instruction (SMASSE Project,
2008). The long term goals are achieved when students take careers related to mathematics
and science in institutions of higher learning. This will eventually lead to the realization of
the overall goal of upgrading the capability of young Kenyans. SMASSE in-service training
was a timely intervention for education in the 21st century where mathematics and science
education is greatly emphasized. Mondoh (2005) observes that mathematics provides a means
of communication which is powerful, concise and unambiguous. She also notes that Mathematics
is increasingly being used in Medicine and Biological Sciences, in Geography and Economics,
Business and Management Studies and operation of Industry and Commerce.
16
2.4. ASEI-PDSI approach in SMASSE-WECSA member countries
After a successful implementation of the SMASSE Project in Kenya, the ASEI-PDSI
approach was shared with other countries in Africa through the network of the SMASSE
Western, Eastern, Central, and Southern Africa (WECSA) Association. The Association
which currently consists of 34 member countries was aimed to be a forum for administrators
and professionals of the Ministries of Education in Africa to share experiences and to discuss
issues of mathematics and science education (Gluckman, 2011). Since 2001, administrators
and professionals from the member countries have been holding discussions on issues
relating to mathematics and science education and INSET. The ASEI-PDSI approach which
was developed to address challenges in teaching and learning in Kenya has also been
effective in other African countries which are faced with similar challenges in mathematics
and science education. In those countries that have introduced the ASEI-PDSI approach,
some improvements in lesson delivery have been observed (CEMASTEA, 2010).
For instance, Rwanda joined the SMASE-WECSA between 2001 and 2005 and by 2008, the
SMASSE reports indicate that teachers in Rwanda have embraced the ASEI-PDSI approach
and this has impacted positively on lesson delivery. The concept of ASEI-PDSI approach is
the foundation pillar of the SMASSE Rwanda project. Other countries that have embraced the
approach include Swaziland, Uganda and Malawi. The evaluation reports in these countries
have shown a positive impact on the use of ASEI-PDSI approach (SMASSE Rwanda, 2010).
2.5. ASEI-PDSI approach in Kenya
The ASEI-PDSI approach was developed not from theory-based discussions, but from the
analysis of actual challenges that mathematics and science teachers in Kenya were faced with
(Njuguna, 1999). If the approach is carried out properly, it is expected to be effective in
improving the capabilities of the learners in mathematics and science. The SMASSE Project
17
in Kenya has developed monitoring and evaluation tools for INSET and lesson deliveries.
The aspects evaluated by the tools include: the quality of national INSET, the quality of
district INSET and the quality of lessons conducted by teachers who have participated in
district INSET. By using the monitoring and evaluation tools developed, Kenya has shown
improvements in the quality of lessons delivered by teachers who have used the ASEI-PDSI
approach (CEMASTEA, 2009).
For instance, the Centre for Mathematics and Science Education in Africa (CEMASTEA)
team carried out a situational analysis on secondary schools and among the objectives of the
study was to find out the extent to which ASEI- PDSI approach was being practiced by
mathematics and science teachers at secondary school level in Kenya. The study adopted the
descriptive study design and targeted all the public secondary schools in Kenya. A sample
size of 45 schools distributed equally in five provinces (Eastern, Coast, central, Rift valley
and Nyanza) were used in the study. The study used questionnaires, interview guides and
observation guide to collect the data. The results from the studies showed that, teachers‟
perception of the practice of ASEI- PDSI in the teaching of mathematics and science scores
ranged between 49 to 92 percent with a mean of 72.3 percent. The finding implied that the
teachers had a high self perception of their practice of ASEI- PDSI approach. The results on
the preparation of ASEI lesson plan showed that only 10.7 percent of the teachers indicated
they always prepared a written lesson plan while 72 percent indicated that they sometimes
(rarely or never) prepared a written lesson plan. A study on the extent of student involvement
in the lesson showed that 59.2 percent of teachers always involved students in predicting
outcome. The findings implied that the practice of writing ASEI lesson plan was very low
among teachers and students who were averagely involved in the lesson (CEMASTEA,
2010). This is a clear indication that the goals of SMASSE project have not been achieved at
the national level.
18
2.6. Students’ attitude towards the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics
There are many different notions about the term attitude as used in research. Ma & Kishor
(1997) look at attitude as one of the most potent factors that relates to achievement. The day
to day notion of attitude refers to someone‟s basic liking or disliking of a familiar target
(Hannulla, 2002). This study defines attitude as the emotional disposition toward
mathematics as used by Schenkel (2009).
In Kenya, research has shown that attitude is one of the performance determinants of Kenya
Certificate of Secondary Education (Karue, 2006; Omondi, 2010; Wanjohi, 2011; and
George, James, Justus & Zachariah, 2012). These researchers are in agreement that students‟
positive attitude in mathematics leads to improved performance in examinations. Other
international studies have also noted similar findings. For instance a study carried out by
Shahid (2008) on students‟ attitude towards mathematics in Pakistan revealed that positive
attitude affect students‟ achievement in mathematics positively. He observed that the way
mathematics is represented in the classroom and perceived by students even when teachers
believe they are presenting it in authentic and context dependent way stands to alienate many
students from mathematics.
Studies carried out on the impact of SMASSE project in Kenya on the students attitude
towards the teaching and learning of mathematics revealed that SMASSE Project has had a
positive impact on students attitude. For example a study carried out by Langat (2009) on the
impact of SMASSE-INSET on the teaching and learning of mathematics using a descriptive
survey design with a population consisting of form four students of year 2008 in Bomet
district, revealed that students‟ attitude towards mathematics had greatly improved. From the
study, the positive change of attitude had however not translated to improved performance in
mathematics. Similar results are seen in the studies carried out by Ndiku (2011), Olick (2012)
19
and Libiru (2012). They all agree that SMASSE training has impacted positively on the
students‟ attitude but with no significant impact on their achievement. Situational analysis
reports from the CEMASTEA team have also indicated the positive attitude by students
towards mathematics. For instance a study conducted by the SMASSE project impact survey
(SPIAS) on how teacher participation in the SMASSE INSET affects students‟ attitude and
participation in lessons revealed that the quality of INSET brought about a better students‟
attitude towards mathematics and science subjects ( CEMASTEA, 2010).
Despite the general agreement that SMASSE in-service training has had a positive impact on
students' attitude towards the teaching and learning of mathematics, there is still poor
performance in mathematics as reflected in Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education
examinations (Table 1.1, pg3). This is a clear indication that the goals of SMASSE project
have not been fully attained despite the fact that the project has been in operation for more
than ten years. The researcher is in agreement with studies which have shown that
performance in mathematics depends on the students‟ attitude and wonders why the positive
attitude as observed by the previous studies on SMASSE cannot translate to a marked
improvement in mathematics examinations. The researcher gauged the students‟ attitude
towards mathematics and further assessed whether the attitude was towards the whole area of
mathematics or just in specific areas. In doing so, the aim was to contribute knowledge on
how the ASEI-PDSI approach can be improved on so that the learners‟ positive attitude is
translated to improved performance in mathematics.
2.7. The Impact of SMASSE Project
As a follow up on the impact of SMASSE project, SMASSE Kenya personnel conducted
Monitoring and Evaluation of application and impact of the principles of ASEI movement
and PDSI approach in the classroom in Malawi, Rwanda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The project
20
observed positive impacts in terms of teachers‟ attitudes and classroom teaching and learning.
Teachers who had consistently undergone SMASSE training had shown positive attitudinal
change towards their profession and improved on their lesson delivery. Students also had
improved participation in the lessons (SMASSE Project, 2008). SMASSE is thus evaluated
positively by WECSA member countries. The net impact on teachers showed that teachers
planned better and more consistently; attended to students‟ needs more; were more confident
to carry out practical activities; tried out new methods; faced the challenges arising from lack
of resources as well as the challenge arising from large classes (CEMASTEA, 2010).
The net impact on students showed that, students: were actively involved in the learning
process; showed great interest and responsiveness; attended the lesson more punctually and
regularly; did their assignments more neatly and promptly; carried out discussions beyond
class time; interest and curiosity was aroused and sustained as they related mathematics to the
real life experiences; encouraged teamwork and allowed individual participation of the
students; were provided with opportunities to develop key competencies such as problem
solving, synthesis and application of information (Waititu & Orado, 2009). Midterm and end
term evaluation conducted by JICA and GoK based on Development Assistant Committee
criteria rated SMASSE project highly successful. Technical cooperation with JICA has
expanded with primary mathematics and science teachers INSET launched in January 2009
for a period of five years (CEMASTEA, 2010).
It is clear from the foregoing literature that SMASSE project has impacted positively on the
teaching and learning of mathematics in the member countries. The researcher was therefore
interested in finding out whether the impact is the same in Rangwe division or not. The aim
of the researcher was to establish the impact of SMASSE INSET in the classroom in Rangwe
division
21
2.8. Supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach
According to CEMASTEA (2010), School Principals play crucial roles Within the
SMASSE-INSET System. These roles include: Ensuring mathematics and science teachers
attend SMASSE INSET; sensitizing mathematics and science teachers on the importance of
INSET and ensure they are informed of INSET dates and released promptly to attend;
providing necessary support that teachers may need to implement new methodologies,
approaches and strategies for ASEI lessons; Monitoring and Evaluation of classroom
activities of both District Trainers and teachers who have attended INSET and Managing the
District INSET Centers.
A situational analysis was carried out in 2009 to help CEMASTEA establish the extent of the
practice of ASEI-PDSI approach to teaching and learning. It was also to establish whether
there was a system for effective supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach to teaching of
mathematics and science. Based on the findings of the analysis, recommendations were made
that would guide the practice regarding district INSET and supervision of ASEI-PDSI
approach in the classroom (CEMASTEA, 2009). Following the recommendations of the
situational analysis, CEMASTEA held sensitization workshops for QASOs and principals.
These workshops were meant to strengthen the supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach in the
classroom. Studies have however shown that ASEI-PDSI approach is not being supervised by
both QASOs and school principals. For instance a study carried out by Rotich & Mutisya
(2013) on an evaluation of capacity development programs in Kenya revealed that ASEI-
PDSI approach was not supervised by head teachers. Implementation of change is often the
most difficult part of the change process. Until people use the new idea, no change has
actually taken place (Daft, 2004). Teachers who are curriculum implementers need to be
supported by the heads of the schools and the QASOs. This can be done through supervision
of an innovation and addressing the areas of challenges that teachers face. This study was
22
interested in assessing the supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching and learning
of mathematics by the school principals‟, heads of mathematics department and QASO. The
aim was to assess the extent to which mathematics lessons are supervised and find ways of
strengthening the supervision for effective implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach.
2.9. Challenges faced in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach
The SMASSE teams from different countries which have implemented the ASEI-PDSI
approach carried out an evaluation on the challenges facing the ASEI-PDSI approach and
identified major common problems as follows (SMASSE Project, 2008): There are many
practical activities that do not require learners to think and in many cases, teachers do not
wait for learners to think and to find solutions by themselves. This problem is caused by the
lack of teachers‟ in understanding the importance of learners‟ independent thinking because
many teachers still seem to have a belief that providing learners with correct answers is their
role. There is no bridging between practical activities and scientific concepts and if any, the
bridging is not well structured. Activities in lessons are also sometimes irrelevant to the
lesson objective. This is caused by the insufficient understanding of the ASEI-PDSI
approach. Some teachers seem to have understood that, as long as practical activities and
experiments are included, the lesson is ASEI lesson. Many teachers still do not understand
the importance of bringing out learners‟ ideas. Teachers have a belief about lessons that has
been formed from their own experiences when they were students. If the lessons they
received when they were students was teacher centered it becomes difficult for them to
change their lessons to a learner-centered one. ASEI-PDSI approach is not implemented in
everyday classroom situation. This challenge is very common in many countries because
implementing the ASEI approach requires teachers to spend longer time on preparation until
they get used to it.
23
In addition to the above major challenges, some teachers are yet to appreciate the role of
INSET in continuing professional development. This is reflected in the findings from the
Monitoring and Evaluation report of April 2010 which noted that the overall INSET
attendance was 68.0 percent of the expected participants and that there was wide disparity in
attendance across the district INSET centers. This is probably due to the fact that teaching is
a complex cultural activity that works outside the realm of consciousness (Stigler & Hiebert,
1999). It is therefore difficult to convince teachers to change their conventional way of
teaching. Change takes a long time and this is one of the challenges the project is going
through in the process of introducing a new curriculum for the teaching and learning of
mathematics and science education.
Again there has been lack of support by some principals and field officers due to conflict of
interests. Some principals have put more interest in buildings and other projects at the
expense of buying the necessary facilities for the implementation of the curriculum.
Moreover some principles have no idea of what happens during INSET and this hinders them
from supervising the implementation of the INSET curriculum in their schools (CEMASTEA
2010). According to the SMASSE Project (2008) report, challenges experienced by teachers
in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI practice included time constrains in the preparation of
ASEI lessons hence slow syllabus coverage, inadequate teaching and learning resources; lack
of skills to improve teaching and learning materials; absenteeism in class attendance by
students; poor attitude of the students towards the subjects; heavy workloads; inability of
some students to communicate in English; different learner abilities and large classes among
others.
The study evaluated the challenges faced by mathematics teachers in Rangwe division in the
process of implementing the ASEI-PDSI approach and suggested solutions to the problems.
24
The researcher felt that the challenges could be responsible for the little impact that the
project has had on the process of teaching and learning of mathematics in Kenya. If the
challenges were addressed, SMASSE project would yield more fruits than it has done so far.
2.10. The use of ASEI-PDSI approach in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics
There has been a lot of concern relating to schooling and achievement in mathematics in the
recent past. One of the studies carried out by the Third International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS) on schooling and achievement In Japan, Taiwan, China and United
States gave a shocking revelation. As early as fifth grade, United States students lagged far
behind their counterparts in other countries. On a mathematics test of achievement, the
highest scoring classroom in the United States sample did not perform as well as the lowest-
scoring classroom in the Japanese sample (Stevenson & Stigler, 1992). It is clear from the
TIMSS research that mathematics low achievement is not just a problem to the African
countries but also to the developed countries. The secret behind Japan emerging the best
country in Mathematics achievement is the way the teachers handle mathematics lessons
(Stevenson & Stigler, 1992)
The Japanese lesson is organized in such a way that it provides a shell, or context within
which the teacher engages students in learning the subject. Teachers tend to divide their
lessons into periods of classwork and seatwork (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). Classwork is when
the teacher is working with all the students and usually leading the discussion. Activities
include learning a new concept, reviewing a previously learned concept or procedure, solving
a problem together or sharing solution methods for problems that have been solved. Seatwork
is the time when students work individually or in small groups on assigned tasks. Stigler &
Hiebert (1999) in their study of a Japanese class also noted that students do a lot of
mathematics work during the lesson unlike in United States and Germany where teachers
25
mostly control the lessons. Japanese teachers believe that students learn best by first
struggling to solve mathematics problems, then participating in discussion about how to solve
them and then hearing about the pros and cons of different methods and the relationships
between them.
The baseline survey that was carried out by the SMASSE team in the pilot districts in Kenya
revealed that there were numerous problems in mathematics and science in secondary
education. Among the problems that were identified included inappropriate teaching
methodology and content mastery (Kanja, Iwasaki, Takuya & Atsumi, 2001). The INSET
curriculum was thus developed to strengthen teacher competence by addressing through
carefully selected topics such as areas of concern as attitude, pedagogy, mastery of content
and developing teaching and learning materials. SMASSE targeted teachers first because of
the time they spent with students. Most teachers are content or syllabus driven thinking that
covering the syllabus is the same as teaching. The teacher training curricular do not
adequately address the issues pertinent to secondary school teaching. The theories in the
curricular are often outdated and not applicable in the classroom (CEMASTEA, 2010). This
is why pedagogy is one of the major topics addressed during the in service training. Content
mastery is also addressed because teachers who lack content mastery cannot explain content
satisfactorily and often mislead students unknowingly.
By use of conventional approaches to teaching, teachers have been found to present lessons
that are too much teacher-centered with the teacher as the main and sometimes the only actor
in the classroom as learners remain passive recipient (Wambui & Wahome, 2006) ). Wambui
& Wahome further note that the challenge has been on how to make mathematics more
“alive”, more „real” and more “accessible”. Teacher-centered approach will definitely impact
negatively on the learner‟s attitude because learners will find mathematics boring. Goodland
26
(1984) in his research study titled “A place called school” found that most of the time, most
of the teachers talked to the kids. The learners explained that physical education, fine arts or
industrial arts were their most interesting classes because they actually got to do something.
They were active participants in learning rather than passive recipients of information.
Mayer & Moreno (2003) describe meaningful learning as deep understanding of the material,
which includes attending to salient aspects of the presented material, retaining relevant
information in both visual working memory and auditory working memory, organizing it into
a coherent mental structure, and integrating it with relevant prior knowledge. Mayer (2001)
asserts that multimedia learning combining animation with narration generally improves
performance on retention tests better than when information is presented as either text or
narration alone. Meaningful learning is demonstrated when the learner can apply what is
presented in new situations, and students perform better on problem-solving transfer tests
when they learn with words and pictures.
Mayer, Fennell, Farmer, & Campbell (2004) cite evidence that two important ways to
promote meaningful learning are to design activities that reduce cognitive load, which frees
working memory capacity for deep cognitive processing during learning, and to increase the
learner‟s interest, which encourages the learner to use this freed capacity for deep processing
during learning. Interest can be stimulated simply by presenting the material in a visually
appealing way, accompanied by lively and personable wording or narration. Mayer (2003)
lists five cognitive processes that contribute to meaningful learning from multimedia:
selecting words, selecting images, organizing words, organizing images, and integrating.
The present study attempted to find out whether the use of multimedia learning has any
impact on the teaching and learning of mathematics. When a teacher prepares student
centered activities and experiments (ASEI), the aim is to bring about meaningful learning
27
where the learner is engaged with both minds on and hearts on activities. ASEI movement is
believed to enable learners develop an inquiry mind, develop the skills of making accurate
observations, drawing conclusions and holding discussions to enhance learning and
development of skills (SMASSE Project,2002). This is in line with Mayer‟s third assumption
that humans construct meaningful learning when they attend to relevant incoming
information (Mayer, 1999). The use of ASEI-PDSI approach will improve students‟ retention
of the content and this will lead to improved performance in examination. This is in line with
what Mayer asserts that multimedia learning combining animation with narration generally
improves performance on retention tests better than when information is presented as either
text or narration alone.
Meaningful learning can therefore only take place when the teacher is able to design activities
that increase the learner‟s interest. Interest can be stimulated simply by presenting the
material in a visually appealing way, accompanied by lively and personable wording or
narration. Mayer‟s five cognitive processes that contribute to meaningful learning are
advocated by ASEI-PDSI approach where a teacher selects, plans and organizes meaningful
materials that will bring about meaningful leaning.
ASEI principle is based on the fact that students do not simply copy the science world; rather,
they construct their own meaning of it (Wambui, 2005). They must therefore be provided
with opportunities to construct scientific knowledge through the interaction of their
observations, prior knowledge and mental processes. This principle tries to answer
fundamental questions facing educators in designing schools for the 21st century learners. The
questions asked are on how students can learn to think for themselves, make good decisions,
develop expertise and become lifelong learners in a rapidly changing information
environment and how students can learn, create and find meaning from multiple sources of
28
information (Garrison & Walter, 2000). Just like in the National Science Education Standards
( National Research Council, 2000), it is believed that ASEI movement enables the learners
to develop an inquiry mind, develop the skill of making accurate observations, drawing
conclusions and holding discussions to enhance learning and development of skills (
SMASSE project, 2002).
This study aimed at finding out the extent to which mathematics lessons were student-
centered in Rangwe division. ASEI-PDSI approach is a student-centered approach which
mathematics and science teachers are expected to adopt after going through the SMASSE in-
service training. The study was therefore interested in finding out whether the aspects of
ASEI-PDSI approach inherent in student-centered approach were being practiced in
mathematics classrooms or not.
29
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1. Introduction
This chapter lays out research methodology describing procedures and techniques that were
used in carrying out the study. It deals with the following aspects: research design; the study
area; the study population; sample and sampling procedures; instruments of data collection;
data collection procedures; validity and reliability of research instruments and data analysis
procedures used.
3.2. Research Design
The study used a descriptive survey design which is a process of collecting data in order to
answer questions concerning the current status of the subjects in the study (Orodho, 2005).
Descriptive survey design was employed because it guarantees breadth of observation and
also provide for the accurate descriptive analysis of characteristics of a sample which can be
used to make inferences about population (Kerlinger, 1973). The design can be used when
collecting information about people's attitudes, opinions, habits or any of the variety of
education or social issues (Orodho & Kombo, 2002). The researcher was interested in
finding out the influence of SMASSE project on the teaching and learning of mathematics by
collecting information on the attitudes, opinions and habits of students, teachers of
mathematics, heads of mathematics department (HODs), principals‟ and quality assurance
and standards officers (QASOs).
3.3. The Study Area
The present study was conducted in ten public secondary schools in Rangwe division of
Homa Bay Sub-County in the republic of Kenya. The Sub-County is located between
30
longitude 34° 12‟ and 34°40‟ East and latitudes 0° 28‟ and 0° 40‟ South and at an altitude of
1166 metres above the sea level. Rangwe division is one of the six administrative divisions
within Homa Bay Sub-County. It is the largest division with an area of 267.3 km² (Homa Bay
District Development Plan, 2002-2008). Rangwe division has 10 public secondary schools
and one private school. The division is considered appropriate for studying the influence of
ASEI-PDSI approach because the SMASSE INSET centre is found within the division and
teachers can easily access the centre in case they need SMASSE materials for developing
learner-centered activities.
3.4. The Study Population
Rangwe division consists of 10 public secondary schools. There are seven mixed day schools,
two girls‟ schools and one boys‟ school. The study subjects consisted of 724 form three
students from 10 public secondary schools, 20 mathematics teachers, nine HODs, nine
principals and one QASO. The form three students were considered to be appropriate for the
study because of their longer stay in school and had interacted with mathematics content
more than the form one and two students. Form four students were exempted because they
were preparing for the Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE). Mathematics
teachers and heads of mathematics department were considered as part of the study
population because they were the ones who implemented the ASEI-PDSI approach in the
classrooms after undergoing the SMASSE training. The principals and QASOs were part of
the study population because they supervised the implementation of the ASEI-PDSI
approach.
3.5. The Sample and Sampling Procedures
A sample is a finite part of a statistical population where properties are studied to gain
information about the whole population (Webster, 1985). Sampling is a process of selecting
31
a number of individuals or objects from a population such that the selected group contains
elements representative of the characteristics found in the entire group (Orodho & Kombo,
2002). A sample of 203 students was obtained from the boys‟ school, the girls‟ school and
mixed day schools using stratified random sampling technique. The sample was as shown in
Table 3.1 below.
Table 3.1
Stratified sample of the students’ population
School category Population Sample
Boys‟ school 161 45
Girls‟ school 167 47
Mixed schools 396 111
Total 724 203
The study sample of 203 students was obtained basing on the guidelines given by Gay as
cited in Mugenda & Mugenda (1999) and by Brown (1998). According to Gay (1981), 30
percent or more are required for co relational research; 10-20 percent of the accessible
population for descriptive research and at least 30 percent per group for experimental studies.
However, according to Brown (1998), the sample size depends on the situation and on the
statistics that is involved. They both agree that the rule of thumb is to obtain as big a sample
as possible. This study was therefore guided by the rule of thumb to obtain a sample of 203
students which represented 28% of a total population of 724 form three students (Mugenda &
Mugenda, 1999; Brown, 1998).
Purposive sampling was used to obtain nine principals, nine HODs, 20 mathematics teachers,
nine classrooms for observation and one QASO. Purposive sampling was used because the
study targeted principals who had attended workshops on SMASSE INSET. Purposive
sampling is a form of sampling where the investigator, relies on his or her judgment to select
32
units that are representative or typical of the population (Orodho, 2005). Nine HODs and
twenty mathematics teachers who had attended SMASSE training and teaching form three
class were purposively chosen for the study.
3.6. Instruments of Data collection
Questionnaires, ASEI-PDSI check list and interview schedules were used to collect data.
There were three sets of questionnaires for, teachers, principals‟ and students. There were two
interview schedules one for the heads of mathematics departments and another one for the
quality assurance officer. A number of unstructured questions were prepared to guide the
researcher to get opinions of the respondents. ASEI-PDSI check list was used to assess the
lessons. The instruments are further discussed below:
3.6.1. Mathematics Teachers’ Questionnaire
Mathematics teachers‟ questionnaire was used to determine the teachers‟ self-perception on
the practice of ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Their
perception was measured using 10 items in the teachers‟ questionnaire. Areas that the
questionnaire focused on included the following: preparation of ASEI lesson plans, involving
students in group work, involving students in practical activities and use of locally available
materials. There were 10 statements in the questionnaire. Each statement was rated on a 5-
point Likert-type of scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” with a score of 1 to” Strongly
Agree” with score of 5. The mathematics teachers were required to tick in the box
corresponding to their option. A sample of this questionnaire is attached as Appendix A.
3.6.2. Principals’ Questionnaire
The principals‟ questionnaire was used to obtain information on principals‟ perception on the
supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach on the teaching and learning of mathematics in their
respective schools. The principals were required to rate the various aspects of supervision
33
which included: encouraging teachers to use teaching/learning resources effectively and
checking whether resources were used effectively, encouraging teachers to make lesson plans
and checking the professional tools used by the teachers and observing mathematics teachers‟
lessons. There were 14 statements in the questionnaire; each was rated on a 5-point Likert
type of scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” with a score of 1 to “Strongly Agree” with
score of 5. The principals were required to tick in the box corresponding to their option. A
sample of this questionnaire is attached as Appendix B.
3.6.3. Students’ Questionnaire
A students‟ questionnaire was used to establish students‟ views on the practice of ASEI-PDSI
approach in teaching and learning of mathematics. The areas that the questionnaire focused
on included the following: opinions on what made them enjoy mathematics lesson, the
frequency of the practical activities in their classroom, how they preferred to be taught
mathematics for better understanding, the mathematics activities outside the school and any
other relevant issues. There were ten statements in the questionnaire. Each statement was
rated on a 5-point Likert type of scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” with a score of 1 to
“Strongly Agree” with a score of 5. The students were required to tick in the box
corresponding to their option. A sample of this questionnaire is attached as Appendix C.
3.6.4. An Interview Schedule for Heads of Mathematics Departments
An interview schedule was used to obtain information regarding the perception of heads of
mathematics department on the practice and supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach in the
teaching and learning of mathematics in their schools. The indicators of the practice of ASEI-
PDSI included lesson planning, improved performance indices in mathematics at KCSE,
increased practical activities , more student involvement in the lesson, use of group work and
increased frequency of practicing lesson outside the classroom. The responses from the
34
interview were summarized and presented as emerging themes. A sample of the interview
schedule is attached as Appendix D.
3.6.5. ASEI-PDSI Check list
ASEI-PDSI checklist was used to evaluate the extent of the use of ASEI- PDSI approach in
the classroom. The checklist was prepared by the CEMASTEA team and has been used
during the impact assessment studies of the SMASSE project (SMASSE Project Impact
Assessment Survey, 2005). The aspects were measured on a 5-point scale (0-4), with 0
indicating the aspect is not observed in the lesson and 4 indicating that the aspect is applied to
a great extent. The researcher used The ASEI-PDSI check list (Appendix E) to observe
aspects on students‟ involvement in the activities, experiments, improvisation by use of
locally available resources and how the teacher plans and improves the lesson.
3.6.6. Interview Schedule for QASO
An interview schedule for quality assurance and standards officer (QASO) (Appendix F) was
used to find information regarding the supervision and implementation of ASEI-PDSI
approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics in secondary schools in Rangwe
division. The items in the interview schedule were open-ended and related to the aspects that
the QASOs are supposed to supervise. The responses were analyzed and presented in
emerging themes.
3.7. Data collection Procedures
The researcher sought the research permit from the National Commission for Science,
Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) to carry out research in the identified area of study.
The research took place in the months of October and November 2013 whereby the
researcher visited each school that was targeted for the study. She first of all consulted the
principals and explained to them the purpose of the visit. The principals filled their
35
questionnaires and assisted the researcher to meet the Mathematics heads of department who
later introduced her to the form three mathematics teachers. The researcher explained to them
what the study was all about and how they were going to participate.
The researcher gave the questionnaires to mathematics teachers who had undergone
SMASSE in-service training. The teachers filled the questionnaire and returned them on the
same day. The form three class teachers assisted the researcher in administering the students‟
questionnaire which were filled and returned back on the same day. The researcher also
observed one form three mathematics lesson from each school using the ASEI-PDSI check
list. Face to face interviews with the HODs and QASO were conducted on different dates
using an interview schedule.
3.8. Validity of Research Instruments
Validity is the extent to which research results can be accurately interpreted and generalized
to other populations. It is the extent to which research instruments measure what they are
intended to measure (Oso & Onen, 2005). To establish validity, the instruments prepared by
the researcher were given to two experts in the school of education to evaluate the relevance
of each item in the instruments to the objectives. Suggestions from the experts plus pilot
results were incorporated in revising items for the final study.
3.9. Reliability of Research Instruments
Reliability of an instrument is the consistency in producing a reliable result. It focuses on the
degree to which empirical indicators are consistent across two or more attempts to measure
theoretical concept (Orodho, 2005). It is a measure of the degree to which a research
instrument yields consistent results or data after repeated trials. In a research study, a
reliability coefficient can be computed to indicate how reliable data are. A coefficient of 0.80
or more implies that there is a higher degree of reliability of the data (Mugenda & Mugenda,
36
2003). To test for reliability, a pilot study was carried out in one secondary school from the
neighbouring division using 15 form three students and two mathematics teachers. The test-
retest method was employed within a period of two weeks and a spearman‟s correlation
coefficient of value 0.81 was obtained from items on student‟s questionnaire and 0.86 from
items on teachers‟ questionnaire. A value of 0.81 on student‟s questionnaire and 0.86 on
teacher‟s questionnaire indicates that the data was highly reliable.
3.10. Data Analysis Procedures
The data collected from the questionnaires and ASEI-PDSI check list were analyzed using
both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Frequencies, percentages, means and
standard deviations were employed for the descriptive statistics while one way ANOVA was
employed for inferential statistics. The significance was tested by computing the P- value at
a significance or alpha level of 0.05. Data collected was coded and entered in the computer for
analysis using the Statistical Package for Social Scientists (S.P.S.S) to generate tables. Data from
interviews were analyzed qualitatively in an on-going process as the themes and sub-themes
emerged from data. Inferential statistics was used to draw conclusions and generalizations for
Rangwe division using information taken from the 10 public secondary schools.
37
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Introduction
This chapter presents results, analysis and discussion on the influence of strengthening of
mathematics and science in secondary education project in the instruction of mathematics in
public secondary schools of Rangwe division, Homa Bay Sub County. The analysis and
discussion of the results was based on the objectives of the study.
4.2. Challenges faced in the Implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach
In order to establish the challenges faced by teachers in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI
approach, the study assessed the perceptions of principals‟ based on their gender and teaching
experience. Items from principal‟s questionnaire were analyzed to find out the extent to
which mathematics lessons were supervised. Some items relating to challenges in the
implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach from an interview with the heads of mathematics
department and QASO were also analyzed and the results were presented as follows:
38
Table 4.1
Means of principals self perception on the supervision and practice of ASEI-PDSI
approach based on teaching experience
Statement 11 to 15years
N=5
Above15years
N=4
1. I am aware and well informed of the SMASSE
training
4.7143 5.0000
2. All mathematics teachers in my school have
attended SMASSE training
2.8572 3.5000
3. I encourage teachers to use the teaching and
learning resources effectively
4.2857 5.0000
4. I check whether the resources have been effectively
used
4.1429 4.0000
5. I encourage teachers to make lesson plans 4.0000 4.0000
6. I check professional tools used by teachers 4.4286 4.5000
7. I observe mathematics lessons to ensure the
implementation of ASEI lesson plans
3.2857 2.0000
8. I have noted students developing interest in
Mathematics
3.7143 4.0000
9. ASEI-PDSI approach has contributed towards the
improved performance in mathematics
4.0000 4.0000
10. SMASSE project has been a great step towards
improving performance in mathematics
3.8571 3.5000
11. I have witnessed creativity in students regarding
mathematics since SMASSE training
3.7143 3.5000
12. SMASSE project has encouraged teamwork among
teachers
4.2857 4.0000
13. I have witnessed teachers struggle with the
implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach
1.4286 2.0000
14. I advocate for more-in-service trainings like
SMASSE
4.4286 5.0000
MEAN OF MEANS 3.5310 3.8570
OVERALL MEAN 3.6940
Analysis of principals‟ self perception basing on teaching experience gave a mean of 3.5310
for principals with a teaching experience of between 11-15 years and a mean of 3.8570 for
those with a teaching experience of above 15 years. A higher mean of principals with
teaching experience of above 15 years seems to imply that the longer the period of stay in the
profession the more positive the principals become about the supervision of ASEI-PDSI
approach. An overall mean of 3.6940 implies that principals supervised the teaching and
learning of mathematics. However analysis of specific items in the questionnaire revealed
39
that some aspects needed to be addressed. Item 2 evaluated the rate of mathematics teachers‟
attendance of SMASSE training. The mean of principals with teaching experience of between
11 to 15 years gave a mean of 2.8571 whereas those with 15 and above years gave a mean of
3.500. One of the roles of the school principals is to ensure that mathematics and science
teachers in their schools attend the SMASSE training. The results on this item show that
principals have not fully played the role of ensuring that all mathematics teachers in their
schools attend the training. Item seven assessed whether principals observed mathematics
lessons. Responses from principals with teaching experience of between 11 and 15 gave a
mean of 3.2857 whereas those with a teaching experience of 15 and above gave a mean of
2.000. This implies that observation of mathematics lessons was not effective especially
among principals with a longer teaching experience. Principals should not just encourage
teachers to prepare the ASEI lesson plan but they should also take initiative to observe how
the lesson plans are implemented in the classroom. In item 13, all principals indicated that
they had witnessed teachers struggle with the implementation of the ASEI lessons.
From the analysis above, it is clear that as much as principals have tried to supervise the
implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach, teachers still face challenges in the implementation
of the approach. The supervision of the mathematics lessons by principals has therefore not
helped teachers overcome the challenge of implementing ASEI lessons.
Analysis of the responses from nine HODs was done based on emerging themes which
related to the challenges in preparation of ASEI lesson plans, involving students in learning
activities and utilization of locally available resources. All the nine HODs observed that
mathematics teachers faced challenges regarding the implementation of ASEI-PDSI
approach. Some of the challenges mentioned included the following: time constrains in the
preparation of ASEI lesson plans due to heavy workload, inadequate teaching and learning
40
resources to give teachers clear guidance on activities that were relevant to some topics that
seemed so abstract to students, lack of skills to improvise teaching and learning materials,
negative attitude towards mathematics by some students, large class sizes which hindered
teacher from attending to individual learners and nature of examinations which tested on
factual knowledge rather than scientific concepts hence teachers are inclined to teaching
students based on the way examinations are set rather than teaching students practical
scientific concepts.
When the heads of mathematics departments were asked to suggest solutions to the problems
mentioned, they gave the following suggestions: Some (33%) suggested that a manual on
activities in every topic be developed to reduce the amount of time that teachers spent in
planning and preparing of the activities. A small number (22%) of the HODs suggested that
more SMASSE trainings to be conducted at the school level so that all teachers get an
opportunity to be trained on how to apply ASEI-PDSI approach. All HODs suggested the
Teachers Service Commission to employ more teachers in order to lessen the heavy
workloads. Most HODs (77 %) suggested that monetary value to be attached to SMASSE
training so that many teachers can be motivated to attend the training. All HODs suggested
that teachers need to understand the concept of the ASEI-PDSI approach more deeply so that
they can be able to implement it in the classroom. The approach should therefore be
introduced in the pre-service teacher training colleges. Most HODs (89%) suggested that the
quality assurance officers and principals should understand clearly the aspect of ASEI lessons
for easier supervision.
An interview with the quality assurance officer confirmed some of the challenges that had
already been mentioned by the heads of mathematics departments. The officer noted that
supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach was negatively affected by lack of understanding of the
41
approach and what to be supervised. He further commented that lack of in-depth exposure of
principals to SMASSE-INSET, teachers‟ negative attitude towards internal lesson
observation and inadequate exposure of QASOs toward supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach
were some of the major challenges facing the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach in the
teaching and learning of mathematics.
The QASO further suggested the following as solutions to the challenges: School principals
to be sensitized on the importance of teachers‟ attendance of SMASSE INSET. Sensitization
workshops should be conducted for all principals, deputy principals and mathematics HODs
in which content of ASEI-PDSI approach should be discussed. Mathematics teachers should
initiate classroom based research which includes lesson study and team teaching. This will be
a solution to the negative attitude that teachers have towards lesson supervision.
The study results revealed that teachers face a number of challenges in the implementation of
ASEI-PDSI approach. These challenges are similar with those obtained from the research
carried out by SMASSE project (2008). The current study established that teachers of
mathematics faced varied challenges which affected the implementation of the ASEI-PDSI
approach. The study went further and suggested solutions to the challenges faced by
mathematics teachers. The solutions focused mainly on strengthening the supervision of the
ASEI-PDSI approach and further training of mathematics teachers on student-centered
teaching approaches.
4.3. Influence of ASEI-PDSI approach on the attitude of Students towards the Teaching
and Learning of Mathematics based on School category.
To help obtain answers to the research question two which was; How has SMASSE INSET
influenced students‟ attitude towards mathematics?, data was collected from students to give
a general picture about students‟ attitude towards mathematics after SMASSE INSET. There
42
were 10 items that were testing students‟ attitudes towards mathematics. The items were rated
on a five point Likert scale (1-5) with 1 implying that students strongly disagreed with the
item and 5 implying that they strongly agreed with the item. The results were as shown in
Tables 4.2 and 4.3.
Table 4.2
Overall mean of students’ attitude towards mathematics
Item No Statement N Sum Mean
1. My relation with the mathematics teacher is good 203 862.00 4.2463
2. My mathematics teacher involves us during the lesson hence
making it interesting 203 884.00 4.3547
3. We always do some activities during mathematics lesson using the
locally available materials 203 642.00 3.1626
4. Mathematics discussions are interesting and we do extend beyond
class time 203 674.00 3.3202
5. Mathematics assignments are less stressful 203 649.00 3.1970
6. I intend to take a career related to mathematics in future 203 747.00 3.6798
7. Mathematics is not as difficult as others have been saying 203 775.00 3.8177
8. My scores in mathematics are high as compared to other subjects 203 527.00 2.5961
9. I should have dropped mathematics if it was optional 203 723.00 3.5616
10. I do not understand anything during mathematics lessons 203 825.00 4.0640
MEAN OF MEANS 3.6000
From Table 4.2, it can be seen that the mean attitude of the whole group of students is 3.6000
which is relatively a high value (72%) on the Likert type scale and therefore implying that the
students‟ attitude towards mathematics had improved with the introduction of SMASSE
INSET in the teaching and learning of mathematics. This could be attributed to the positive
change in the attitude of teachers towards mathematics after SMASSE INSET. As much as
the student‟s attitude had improved with the introduction of ASEI-PDSI approach, their
grades in mathematics were still low as compared to other subjects as reflected in their
responses on item 8 in the questionnaire. Item 2 scored the highest mean of 4.3547 and this
showed that students were always involved in the teaching and learning process. Students‟
43
response to item 9 on whether they should have dropped mathematics was strongly disagreed
upon. This implies that students were aware of the role of mathematics though could not
perform well in it still. The question therefore could be with the teachers‟ teaching practices.
When the results were analyzed based on school category, the results were as shown in Table
4.3.
Table 4.3
Means of students’ attitude towards mathematics by school category
Item No Statement
Boy’s boarding
(N=45) Girl’s boarding
(N=47) Mixed school
(N=111)
1. My relation with the mathematics teacher is
good 4.6000 3.9362
4.2342
2. My mathematics teacher involves us during the
lesson hence making it interesting 4.8667
4.4894
4.0901
3. We always do some activities during
mathematics lesson using the locally available
materials
3.8222
3.4681
2.7658
4. Mathematics discussions are interesting and we
do extent beyond class time 4.1333
2.5745
3.3063
5. Mathematics assignments are less stressful 3.9778 2.4043
3.2162
6. I intend to take a career related to mathematics in future
4.1333
3.1064
3.7387
7. Mathematics is not as difficult as others have
been saying 4.2889
3.9149
3.5856
8. My scores in mathematics are high as compared to other subjects
3.1333
2.4043
2.4636
9. I should have dropped mathematics if it was Optional
4.0222
3.4468
3.4182
10. I do not understand anything during
mathematics lessons lessons
4.7333
4.1489
3.9364
MEAN OF MEANS 4.1267
3.3894
3.4756
Table 4.3 shows that the positive attitude towards mathematics is generally high but more in
boys‟ schools than both girls and mixed schools. In item 3 which tested whether students did
activities using locally available materials, the mean of boys‟ school was 3.8222, the mean of
girls‟ schools was 3.4681 and that of mixed school was 2.7658. This shows that students in
44
single sex schools rated the item higher than those in mixed schools. It suggests that students
in mixed schools are disadvantaged when it comes to using locally available materials in the
teaching and learning of mathematics.
Item number 4 which tested on whether mathematics discussions were interesting gave a
mean of boys‟ schools as 4.1333, girls‟ schools as 2.5745 and that of mixed schools as
3.3063. The mean of boys‟ school was high as compared to the mean of girls and mixed
schools. The mean of girls‟ school was the least implying that girls seem not to find
mathematics so interesting when they are on their own. In item number 8 which tested
whether the scores were high as compared to other subjects, the mean of boys‟ schools was
3.1333, that of girls‟ schools was 2.4043 and that of mixed schools was 2.4636. The means
for this item was the lowest of all the 10 items. This suggests that generally, students have
not developed more confidence in their ability to deal with mathematics than in their ability
to deal with other academic subjects. In item number 5 which tested whether mathematics
assignments were less stressful, the mean for boys‟ schools was 3.9778, that of girls‟ schools
was 2.4043 and that of mixed schools was 3.2162. This shows that boy‟ schools had the
highest rating of mathematics assignments being less stressful as compared to girls‟ schools
or mixed day schools. The grand means for boys‟ schools was 4.1267, that of girls‟ school
was 3.3894 and that of mixed schools was 3.4756.
The results of Table 4.3 were subjected to a one way ANOVA to determine whether the
differences in the means for the three categories of schools were statically significant. The
results were as shown in Table 4.4.
45
Table 4.4
One way ANOVA of students’ attitudes towards mathematics as per school category
F Sig
1. My relation with the mathematics teacher is good
5.147 .007
2. My mathematics teacher involves us during the lesson hence making it
interesting
1.080 .341
3. We always do some activities during mathematics lesson using the locally
available materials
10.959 .000
4. Mathematics discussions are interesting and we do extent beyond class time
16.627 .000
5. Mathematics assignments are less stressful
16.912 .000
6. I intend to take a career related to mathematics in future
6.726 .001
7. Mathematics is not as difficult as others have been saying
6.175 .002
8. My scores in mathematics are high as compared to other subjects
4.996 .008
9. I should have dropped mathematics if it was optional
2.551 .081
10. I do not understand anything during mathematics lessons 1.212 .300
The analysis of variance shows that only three items were not significant and the rest were
significant. Items that were not significant included item 1 which tested whether students
were involved during the lesson, item 9 which tested whether students wished to drop
mathematics and item 10 which tested whether students understood anything during
mathematics lessons. The rating of the three items was similar in the three categories of
schools. The rest of the items were significant implying that students had different ratings of
their attitude towards mathematics based on school category. This shows that the differences
in means in the three categories of schools were statistically significant, suggesting that
SMASSE INSET may have helped to improve the attitudes of students towards mathematics
more in boys‟ school than in both mixed and girls‟ schools. It is however clear from table 4.3
that SMASSE INSET has improved the attitude of students in all categories of schools
46
though the change in attitude seems to be in specific areas but not in all areas of mathematics.
For example if girls find mathematics assignments stressful, it implies a negative attitude
even if they have a general liking for mathematics as a subject. Teachers need to improve
more on lesson delivery and relate mathematics calculations to the day today experiences so
that students may see the relevance of the subject.
From the research findings that have been presented, it can be concluded that the introduction
of SMASSE INSET in Rangwe division has impacted positively on students‟ attitude towards
mathematics in all the three categories of schools. These research findings are similar with
the findings obtained by other studies like Langat (2009), Ndiku (2011), Olick (2012) and
Libiru (2012). They all agree that SMASSE INSET has impacted positively on students‟
attitude. This positive attitude could have translated from teachers‟ positive attitude obtained
after attending SMASSE INSET.
In the first cycle of the INSET, the theme of the training was on “attitude change”, with the
objective of creating among the teachers a reason to accept teaching circumstances they find
themselves in, and to do the best in those circumstances. The training handled topics on
pedagogical issues in relation to how they limit quality learning outcomes. Such topics were:
teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes, teaching approaches and methods, instructional design,
adolescent psychology and gender issues, stress and stress management and classroom
communication skills. These topics were then contextualized using some of the subject matter
content which had been identified as challenging to teachers and learners. Studies have
shown that teachers‟ attitude changed with the introduction of SMASSE INSET (SMASSE,
2008). This change of attitude seems to have impacted positively on students‟ attitude.
47
4.4. The Teaching Approaches in Rangwe Secondary Schools.
The study sought to establish whether Strengthening of Mathematics and Science Education
in service training (SMASSE INSET) had changed the teaching approaches in the teaching of
mathematics in Rangwe schools. Teachers‟ questionnaire and ASEI-PDSI check list were
used to rate the various aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach in the lessons. The results from
teacher‟s questionnaire were as presented in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5
Mathematics teachers’ overall self perception towards the implementation of
ASEI-PDSI approach
N Mean
1. I prepare an ASEI lesson plan before i go to class
20 2.70
2. I involve students in group work
20 3.85
3. I involve students in practical activities during the lesson
20 3.35
4. I give room for the students to predict the outcome of the activities done in
class
20 4.00
5. I involve students in making observations during practical lessons
20 4.20
6. I involve students in making observations and explaining the observations to
the whole class
20 4.25
7. I use locally available materials when carrying out a practical lesson in the
class
20 3.30
8. I carry out practical lessons outside the classroom
20 2.45
9. I have witnessed creativity in students regarding mathematics since the
inception of SMASSE training
20 2.85
10. I have faced challenges in implementing the ASEI –PDSI approach
20 3.00
MEAN OF MEANS 3.40
The teachers‟ perceptions on the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach were analyzed
based on the overall self perception. The mean of means of all the items in Table 4.5 was
48
3.40 which is a slightly high mean as measured on a five point Likert-like scale. This
suggests that teachers‟ had a positive perception of the practice of ASEI-PDSI approach but
there were some areas which were still a challenge to them. Item 1 which asked on the
preparation of ASEI lesson plan in the teachers‟ questionnaire was used to evaluate the
frequency of ASEI lesson planning. The analysis gave a mean of 2.70 which implies that
mathematics teachers of Rangwe division rarely prepared the ASEI lesson plan. ASEI lesson
plan is a very important tool in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach and a mean of
2.70 clearly indicates that the practice of writing ASEI lesson plan was low among
mathematics teachers. The score of 2.45 on item 8 which sought opinion on whether teachers
carried out practical lessons outside the classroom seems to imply that mathematics teachers
rarely carried out lessons outside the classrooms.
The mean score of Item 10 which asked whether mathematics teachers faced challenges in
implementing the ASEI-PDSI approach was 3.00 suggesting that teachers of mathematics
sometimes faced challenges when implementing the ASEI-PDSI approach. High scores were
seen in items 4, 5 and 6 with item 6 scoring the highest mean of 4.25. This suggests that
mathematics teachers were able to involve students in predicting the activities during the
lesson, involved students in making observations during practical lessons and explaining the
observations to the class. The mean of item 9 which assessed whether teachers had witnessed
creativity in students was 2.85 suggesting that ASEI-PDSI approach had slightly improved
the creativity of students regarding mathematics.
The results from the lessons observed are presented in Tables 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11 and
in Figure 4.1. The aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach were rated on a five point Likert-like scale
(0-4), with 0 indicating the aspect is not observed in the lesson and 4 indicating that the
aspect is applied to a great extent.
49
Table 4.6
Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson plan
Lesson plan N Mean
P1 The work plan took into account student's background such as learning difficulties 9 .5556
P2 The work plan was appropriate and realistic in the light of the lesson content and
student‟s abilities 9 .7778
P3 Teacher prepared appropriate and adequate materials for student's use MEAN OF MEANS
9 1.1111 .8148
The mean of the three items on lesson plan was 0.8148 which is rated as poor on a 5 point
Likert scale. The item which tested on whether teachers prepared adequate materials for
student‟s use (P3) scored a mean of 1.1111 which is also rated as fair on the Likert scale. The
results clearly indicate that teachers did not consider a lesson plan as an important tool for
lesson preparation. During lesson observations, it was noted that only one teacher had a
prepared ASEI lesson plan. This could have been due to heavy workload that prevented
teachers from preparing a written lesson plan. This was confirmed through the responses
from the interview with the mathematics HOD‟s. Most (78%) of them noted that teachers
lacked enough time to prepare for the lesson plans due to heavy workloads.
Items D1, D2 and D3 were used to assess the introduction of the lesson and the results were
as presented in Table 4.7.
Table 4.7
Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson introduction
Introduction N Mean
D1 Introduction in cooperated previous knowledge/everyday experience and linked
them to the new topic
9 2.2222
D2 Introduction was clear on what the teacher wanted the students to learn 9 2.4444
D3 Introduction was stimulating enough to arouse the interest and curiosity of the
students MEAN OF MEANS
9 2.2222 2.2963
50
The mean of the three items on lesson introduction was 2.2963 which is rated as satisfactory
on the Likert scale. From the nine lessons observed, 44% of the teachers were not able to
arouse the interest and curiosity of the students. This could have been due to the fact that
teachers never took time to prepare for their lessons.
The findings on the aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson development were as
presented in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8
Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach on lesson development
Development N Mean
D4 Lesson encouraged students to express their prior experiences and explain their ideas
related to the content
9 2.3333
D5 Lesson encouraged students to give their own predictions and helped to discuss how
they differed from those held by others and to verify them through experiment/facts
9 1.3333
D6Lesson encouraged students to give their own observations/results in the experiment
and to discuss how they differed from those of others
9 1.0000
D7 Lesson facilitated process skills such as observing, measuring, identifying variables
and planning experiments
9 .6667
D8 Teacher dealt with students' questions, misconceptions and reinforced learning at
each step
9 2.2222
D9 The lesson encouraged active participation of students as much as possible in the
main teaching steps MEAN OF MEANS
9 2.3333
1.6481
The mean of means for all the items in Table 4.8 was 1.6481 which is rated as fair on the
Likert scale. Item D7 which tested on process skills scored the least mean of 0.6667 implying
that the development of skills in the students was poorly done. Students‟ were not involved in
a lot of psychomotor activities that could facilitate process skills such as observing and
identifying variables. Based on observation, the teaching approach that dominated in the
classrooms was question and answer approach and the questions were mostly answered by a
51
few students. In cases where students were not able to answer the questions, teachers quickly
intervened by providing the correct answers to students. There was little room left for
students to give their own predictions in situations where they were involved in activities like
construction of angles. This clearly shows that teachers were still holding onto the traditional
teaching methodologies and approaches and were therefore not ready to adopt the new
teaching approaches. When aspects of ASE-PDSI approach on lesson conclusion, class
management and instructional materials were analyzed, results were as shown in Table 4.9
below.
Table 4.9
Aspects of ASEI-PDSI on lesson conclusion, class management and instructional
materials
The mean obtained for the items was 1.8704 which is rated as fair on the Likert scale. Item
D15 which evaluated the effectiveness of the use of the teaching/learning materials and
media scored the least with a mean of 0.7778 which is rated as poor on a five-point Likert
scale. This implies that the use of teaching/learning materials by mathematics teachers of
Rangwe division is to a very low extent. Items on encouraging students to draw conclusions
Conclusion, Class management and Instructional materials N Mean
D10 Lesson encouraged students to draw conclusions 9 2.4444
D11 Teacher summarized the lesson and gave follow-up activities 9 2.4444
D12 The lesson assisted to view the content in relation to what they come
across in the society
9 1.8889
D13 Teacher checked the accuracy, correctness, depth and appropriateness
of the content through question and answer techniques
9 2.2222
D14 Teacher organized and conducted lesson taking into account the
individual differences in student capability
9 1.4444
D15 Teacher made effective use of the teaching/learning materials and media
MEAN OF MEANS
9 .7778
1.8704
52
and summarizing the lesson by giving follow up activities (D10 and D11) scored the highest
mean of 2.4444 each. This gives an indication that as much as teachers were able to
encourage students to draw conclusions and gave them follow up activities, teaching and
learning materials were not effectively used in the classrooms. SMASSE INSET encourages
teachers to use locally available materials because it advocates for the utilization of locally
available resources within a given environment. The fact that teachers were not utilizing the
locally available resources could either mean that they lacked enough time to prepare for the
materials or they lacked innovative skills and could therefore not figure out how to prepare
those materials to aid their teaching.
When the „See‟ aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach were analyzed, the results were as presented
in Table 4.10.
Table 4.10
The ‘See’ aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach
See aspects N Mean
SI Teacher supervised class work 9 1.6667
S2 Teacher was attentive to the needs of students of low ability and high academic
ability
9 1.5556
S3 Teacher kept eye contact on students to monitor their feelings 9 2.5556
S4 Teacher invited questions from students 9 2.3333
S5 Teacher asked questions to check quality of understanding
MEAN OF MEANS
9 2.2222
2.0667
The mean of 2.0667 was obtained and was rated as satisfactory on the Likert scale. The item
which evaluated the teacher‟s attentiveness to the needs of the students of low ability and
high academic ability (S2) scored the least mean of 1.5556 which is rated as fair on a five-
point Likert scale. Most teachers who were observed lacked the ability to attend to the
individual needs of the students. This was probably due to large class sizes as all classes had
53
a population of more than 50 students. The researcher observed that teachers mostly
concentrated on students who seemed to be out- going because they could easily be noticed
as opposed to quiet students. A mean of 1.6667 on the item which tested on teacher‟
supervision (S1) implies that lessons were not activity focused. Very minimal activities were
seen in the lessons observed. In the „See‟ aspects, the teacher is meant to evaluate the
teaching and learning process during and after lesson using various techniques and feedback
from students. From the analysis of the „See‟ aspects in this study, it shows that a lot needs to
be done in terms of lesson evaluation for ASEI-PDSI approach to be effectively implemented
in Rangwe secondary schools. The „Improve‟ aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach were analyzed
and results presented in Table 4.11.
Table 4.11
The ‘Improve’ aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach
Improve N Mean
Im I Teacher rephrased question or instructional statements as
necessary
9 2.3333
Im2Teacher interjected rightly and called to attention inattentive
students
9 2.6667
Im 3Teacher gave further guidance to students on lesson activities 9 1.8889
Im 4Teacher made appropriate adjustments in the conduct of the
lesson
MEAN OF MEANS
9 1.8889
2.1944
The mean of the items was 2.1944 which is rated as satisfactory on the Liket scale. Item Im2
which tested whether the teacher rephrased question or instructional statements as necessary
scored the highest with a mean of 2.6667. This means that as much as the teachers could not
attend to individual differences, they were able to control the class by ensuring that students
were attentive. A mean of 1.8889 in items Im3 (teacher gave further guidance to students on
lesson activities) and Im4 (teacher made appropriate adjustments in the conduct of the lesson)
implies that teachers rarely gave further guidance to students on lessons activities and rarely
54
made adjustments in the conduct of the lessons. It is through the improve aspects that the
teacher is able to reflect on the performance, evaluation report and effectiveness in achieving
the lesson objectives. When the Improve aspects are rarely seen in the lessons, it is a clear
indication that ASEI-PDSI approach is not being implemented in the classroom situation.
This was the case with Rangwe schools. When the aspects of lesson delivery were analyzed,
the results were as presented in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12
The aspects of lesson delivery of ASEI-PDSI approach
Lesson delivery N Mean
A The lesson was activity focused 9 .6667
S The lesson was student centered 9 1.6667
E The practical work helped to achieve the objectives of the lesson 9 1.1111
I Improvisation was practiced during the lesson
MEAN OF MEANS
9 .6667
1.0278
Analysis of the aspects on lesson delivery gave a mean of 1.0278 which was rated as fair on
the Likert scale. Aspects that were being evaluated included activities in the classrooms and
whether they were student centered or not. The items also evaluated on whether practical
work was done and if it was based on improvisation of locally available materials. The
analysis of these aspects gives a clear picture of what goes on in a mathematics classroom.
The implication is that teachers had not yet adopted the new teaching approach of ASEI-
PDSI as advocated by SMASSE training. A mean of 1.0278 implies that only 20.56% of the
lessons were student-centered. For ASEI-PDSI approach to be fully implemented a lot
therefore needs to be done. Figure 4.1 shows the means of different aspects of ASEI-PDSI
approach. This was done to give a general picture of the summary of the mean of different
aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach.
55
Figure 4.1 Mean of different aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach
KEY:
LP-lesson plan SEE- SEE aspects I- introduction
Im- Improve aspects LD- lesson development LDR- lesson delivery
C-Conclusion, Class management and Instructional materials
From the graph, items on lesson plan (LP) were rated as poor, lesson development (LD) and
lesson delivery (LDR) were rated as fair while the remaining items were rated as satisfactory
on a five-point Likert scale. This clearly shows that the practice of ASEI-PDSI approach was
to a very low extent in secondary schools of Rangwe. The SMASSE training has therefore
not changed the teacher's teaching approaches. The implication from the analysis of the
results in this study is that the introduction of SMASSE training has not changed mathematics
teachers‟ teaching approaches.
0.8148
2.2963
1.6481
1.8704
2.06672.1944
1.0278
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
LP I LD C SEE Im LDR
56
4.5. The Influence of SMASSE-INSET on Students’ Performance in Mathematics
In order to assess the influence of SMASSE project on students‟ performance and to
generate answers to the fourth research question which was, Has SMASSE INSET improved
the teaching approaches in Rangwe secondary schools?, KCSE results from 2004 to 2012
were analyzed and the HOD‟s were interviewed. The analysis of KCSE performance in
mathematics in the nine public secondary schools was done by establishing the trend in
performance using a graph as recorded in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.2 Rangwe division Mathematics KCSE mean scores from 2004-2012
From the graph, it is clearly seen that performance in mathematics has not been consistent.
There have been fluctuations in performance with big deviations. For instance a mean of
40.83 percent in 2008 was followed with a mean of 28.92 percent in 2009 giving a negative
deviation of 11.91 percent. The inconsistence in performance raises questions as to whether
SMASSE INSET has played a role in enhancing student performance in mathematics or not.
The SMASSE INSET was started in Rangwe division in April 2004. The performance of
2004 may not therefore be attributed to the training since the first cycle basically dealt with
39.92
30.0833.08 32.25
40.83
28.92
38.67
33.83 33.52
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
MATHEMATICS KCSE MEAN SCORES
57
attitude change of teachers and by that time form four candidates were focusing on revision
in preparation for the KCSE. The impact of the training was to be reflected in the year 2005.
Surprisingly there was a big negative deviation of 9.84 percent between years 2004 and 2005.
There was an improvement in the year 2006 followed by a slight drop in 2007, the year when
the first phase of the training was completed. A drop in year 2007 was followed by a marked
improvement in the year 2008. The positive deviation in the mean was very impressive and
year 2008 stands out to be the year with the highest mean ever achieved between 2004 and
2012. A drop in year 2009 was followed with a positive deviation of 9.95 percent in the year
2010. This was followed with a negative deviation of 4.84 percent in 2011 and again with a
slight drop in year 2012. From the trend in performance reflected in the graph, it is clear that
the performance of mathematics in Rangwe division has neither been steady nor average.
SMASSE INSET in Rangwe division has so far been conducted in two phases with every
phase taking a period of four years. The first phase begun in 2004 and ended in 2007 and the
second phase begun in 2008 and ended in 2011. Within the two phases of the training, more
than 70 percent of the teachers of mathematics were trained. Those who missed out in the
first phase were trained during the second phase. Average scores for phases one and two of
the SMASSE training were calculated to provide two sets of scores as shown in Table 4.13.
Table 4.13
Average scores for phase one and phase two of SMASSE training
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
phase 1 4 30.08% 39.92% 33.83% 4.2510
phase 2 4 28.92% 40.83% 35.56% 5.3081
Valid N (listwise) 4
58
The mean scores were calculated to find out if there was any improvement after the first
phase of the training which was completed in 2007. The mean for phase one of the training
was 33.83 percent whereas for phase two was 35.56 percent. From the two means, it can be
seen that there was a slight improvement of 1.73 percent in the scores after the first phase of
the training. It is clear from the analysis above that the introduction of SMASSE INSET may
not have improved the students‟ performance in mathematics in Rangwe division. These
research findings are similar with those of other studies like Langat (2009), Ndiku (2011) and
Sifuna & Kaime (2007). They too established that SMASSE INSET had not improved
students‟ performance in mathematics.
To corroborate the aforementioned, an interview with the heads of mathematics departments
revealed that SMASSE INSET had contributed very little if any in improving the
performance of mathematics in the schools. One of the HOD‟s was very categorical and
attributed the improved performance in his school to the motivation of teachers that made
them go an extra mile in teaching students but not due to the introduction of SMASSE
INSET. He said “our mathematics teachers are paid for the extra coaching they give to the
weak students and this has always boosted our performance in mathematics. SMASSE
training has got nothing to do with the mean we go in mathematics.”
The interviews also revealed that teachers tend to concentrate on areas that are commonly set
in the examinations and when the mean of the school improves, it is due to repeated teaching
of examinable areas but not due to the use of ASEI-PDSI approach as advocated by SMASSE
INSET. This is probably due to the nature of education curriculum in Kenya which is
examination oriented with great emphasis laid on passing examination at the expense of
acquisition of skills, values and attitudes. Out of the 9 heads of mathematics departments that
were interviewed, 4 (44%) said that mathematics performance in their schools was improving
59
steadily but they were not ready to associate the improvement to ASEI-PDSI approach. The
performance for the remaining 5 (56%) schools which were all mixed schools was not steady.
The heads of mathematics department from the schools also said that SMASSE INSET had
done very little towards improving the performance in mathematics. There is therefore a need
for mathematics teachers to appreciate and own the ASEI-PDSI approach in order for them to
be able to apply it in the classroom.
4.6 Summary
This chapter analyzed the data on the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach on teaching
approaches, supervision of mathematics lessons and challenges faced by mathematics
teachers‟, students‟ attitude towards mathematics and students‟ performance in mathematics.
Four research questions were used to find out whether there was any influence of MASSE
INSET on teachers‟ teaching approaches, supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach, the students‟
attitudes towards mathematics and students‟ performance in mathematics. It came out clearly
that the introduction of SMASSE INSET has not improved on the teachers‟ teaching
approaches instead teachers are still using conventional methods to teach mathematics. The
analysis shows that ASEI-PDSI approach is not being supervised and teachers have faced
challenges in the process of using ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching of mathematics. It
was noted that students‟ attitudes towards mathematics had improved with the introduction of
SMASSE INSET but the positive attitude has not resulted in the improved performance in
mathematics.
60
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Introduction
This chapter revisits the research objectives and questions outlined in chapter one, discusses
each one of them and draws conclusions. The objectives of this study were to: find out the
challenges faced by mathematics teachers in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach;
establish whether SMASSE INSET had changed the students' attitudes towards mathematics;
assess whether SMASSE INSET had improved the teaching approaches in Rangwe
secondary schools and establish whether SMASSE INSET had improved the performance of
students in mathematics.
5.2. Summary of the main Findings
The Findings of the study were presented in accordance with the research objectives of the
study as follows:
5.2.1. Challenges faced in the Implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach.
The first objective assessed the challenges faced by mathematics teachers in the process of
implementing ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics. The
research question asked was, “What are some of the challenges that face teachers of
mathematics in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach?” Interviews from the HOD‟s
and QASO revealed that teachers faced varied challenges in the implementation of ASE-
PDSI approach. Majority (66.7%) of the HODs noted with a lot of concern that unless the
challenges are addressed, SMASSE training will not bear much fruits as intended. The
challenges that featured most were challenges related to the improvisation of locally available
materials, heavy workload and preparation of ASEI lesson plans. Some (44.4%) confessed
61
that ASEI-PDSI approach was a very good innovation but it was practically impossible to
implement all its aspects under the prevailing circumstances in the schools. They observed
that there is need for an overhaul in the education system to give room for ways and avenues
to implement new innovations.
5.2.2. ASEI-PDSI approach and Attitude of Students towards Mathematics
The second objective investigated the impact of ASEI-PDSI approach on the attitude of
students towards the teaching and learning of mathematics based on school categories. This
involved answering the question “how has SMASSE INSET influenced the students‟
attitudes towards mathematics?” Analysis was made basing on overall perception and school
category. An overall mean of 3.6000 was obtained implying that SMASSE INSET has
influenced students‟ attitudes positively.
Analysis based on school category gave a mean attitude of 3.822 for boys‟ school, 3.4681 for
girls‟ school and 2.758 for mixed school. This gives a clear indication that SMASSE-INSET
has resulted to a more positive attitude for boy‟s school as compared to both girls‟ and mixed
schools. It was concluded that more still need to be done to the attitude of students from
mixed day schools‟. Further analysis using one way ANOVA showed that there was no
significant difference between the means in the three categories of schools. The SMASSE-
INSET has therefore improved on students‟ attitude towards mathematics in all the school
categories though not to a greater extent. Why secondary school students of Rangwe division
cannot perform in mathematics remains a mystery.
As much as the general attitude has improved, much still need to be done because there are
some areas in which students still have a negative attitude. For instance students need to be
encouraged to take careers related to mathematics and to develop creativity in solving
62
mathematical problems. The aim of SMASSE training was to develop the capabilities of
young Kenyans and this can only be practical if more students are encouraged to take careers
related to mathematics. The results from this study also suggests the need for teachers to
develop positive relations with students, to stress classroom activities which involve active
teaching /learning process and to engage students in meaningful activities that will demystify
mathematics as a difficult subject. Teachers from mixed day schools have a greater task with
regards to students‟ attitude more than those from single sex schools.
5.2.3. The Teaching Approaches in Rangwe Secondary Schools
The third objective established whether SMASSE-INSET had changed the teaching
approaches of mathematics in Rangwe secondary schools. The research question answered
was: To what extent has SMASSE INSET changed the teachers‟ teaching approaches in
Rangwe secondary schools? To answer this question, the researcher used the teachers‟
questionnaire and ASEI-PDSI checklist. The summary of the findings were presented in
tables and bar graph. Based on the observed lessons, there was lack of teacher preparedness
in terms of the ASEI-PDSI lesson plans. Only one out of the nine teachers whose lessons
were observed had a written ASEI lesson plan. There was lack of improvisation in most of
the lessons. The aim of introducing ASEI-PDSI approach was to enable teachers use locally
available materials in order to supplement the little from government. The fact that teachers
didn‟t prepare ASEI lessons and rarely used locally available materials is a clear indication
that ASEI-PDSI approach was not being implemented in the classroom in Rangwe division.
There is need for a thorough preparation of teachers regarding the classroom implementation
of ASEI-PDSI approach and the provision of ongoing support from the CEMASTEA team.
There is also need for feedback to the curriculum authors to make the appropriate revisions so
that SMASSE INSET is not seen as an isolated curriculum.
63
5.2.4. SMASSE-INSET and Performance of Students in Mathematics
The question that was answered in regard to SMASSE INSET and performance of students in
mathematics was: how has SMASSE INSET influenced the performance of students in
mathematics? The findings revealed that the introduction of SMASSE INSET has not
resulted to improved performance in mathematics. SMASSE training was started in Rangwe
division in 2004. The first phase of the training ended in 2007. The second phase began in
2008 and ended in 2011. Analysis of the comparison between the performances during phase
one and phase two was done using independent sample t- tests and paired samples correlation
tests. A paired samples correlations test of phase one and phase two gave a strong positive
correlation of 0.848. The p- value from the t-tests was greater than 0.05. This clearly shows
that there is no significant difference between students‟ performance after phase one and
phase two of the training. The aim of SMASSE training was to help teachers address the
dismal performance in mathematics among others. The trend in performance as shown in
Figure 4.2 is however worrying given that the training has been in place for more than ten
years.
5.3. Conclusion
The study found out that ASEI-PDSI approach was not being practiced by most teachers in
mathematics instruction and therefore the teaching approach has not improved as a result of
introduction of SMASSE training. Teachers were still using the conventional ways of
teaching like chalk and talk. The study established that though principals had a positive
perception of their supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach, teachers still faced challenges in the
implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach. The challenges included lesson preparation, use of
locally available materials and attending to students‟ individual differences.
64
The study found out that students‟ attitude towards the teaching and learning of mathematics
had improved with the introduction of SMASSE INSET. The positive attitude however needs
to be enhanced more especially in mixed day schools where the students‟ attitudes seem to be
slightly low as compared to single sex schools. It is worth noting that despite the
improvement in the attitude, the performance in mathematics had not improved even after
two phases of the SMASSE training of teachers.
This study established that ASEI-PDSI approach had not improved the students‟ performance
in mathematics. When the K.C.S.E mean for the first and second phases of SMASSE training
were compared, there was a strong positive correlation and the slight difference in the means
for the two phases was not significant. It is apparent that the goals of SMASSE training are
yet to be achieved and teachers therefore need to develop more effective teaching and
learning methodologies by embracing ASEI-PDSI approach. The positive attitude of students
towards mathematics and principals‟ supervision of ASEI-PDSI approach had very little
effect on performance of students in mathematics.
5.4. Recommendations
Recommendations based on the findings of the study were made along the objectives of the
study. The recommendations were as follows:
i. INSET of teachers should enhance the practice of ASEI-PDSI approach in the
classroom especially on: lesson planning, team teaching and enhanced students‟
involvement during the lesson. This can be done by engaging teachers in lesson
studies where they are encouraged to observe each other‟s lessons.
ii. Heads of mathematics department and teachers of mathematics should be sensitized
on the importance of prior planning that includes sourcing and arranging the materials
before lessons in order to save time.
65
iii. CEMASTEA team should initiate action research, lesson study and team teaching as
tools for self evaluation for the teachers.
iv. CEMASTEA should sensitize QASOs and principals on their role in implementation
of the aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach.
v. Teachers who attend the SMASSE INSET should be motivated by attaching some
value to the training so that more are encouraged to attend the training.
vi. Teachers should be involved in the initial stages of implementing any new innovation
so that they own it rather than imposing it on them.
vii. The findings indicated a weak positive attitude change towards mathematics by
students from mixed schools. There is therefore need for teachers from mixed schools
to keep on encouraging students towards having a positive attitude towards
mathematics.
5.5. Suggestions for further Research
The following were recommendations based on the findings:
1) Similar studies need to be carried out in the whole of Homa Bay County since the
present study was restricted to Rangwe division.
2) This study could also be done on other subjects such as physics, chemistry and
biology.
3) Further research is needed to investigate the attitude of teachers towards the use of
ASEI-PDSI approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics.
66
REFERENCES
Birgen, P. (2004). Teachers Image . Vol 9. Nairobi, Kenya: Oakland Media Services.
Brown, D.J, (1998). Understanding Research In Second Language Learning. NewYork.
Cambridge University Press.
CEMASTEA. (2010). Monitoring and Evaluation report on District INSET. Nairobi:
CEMASTEA.
CEMASTEA. (2009). Report on Secondary Schools Situational Analysis. Nairobi:
CEMASTEA.
Cooper, R., Slavin, R.E., & Madden, N.A. (1998). Success for All: Improving the quality of
implementation of whole-school change through the use of a national reform
network. Education and Urban Society, 30 (3), 385-408.
Draft L.R., (2004) Organizational Theory and Design. 8th
Edition U.S.A. Thomson South-
Western.
Eshiwani, G.S. (1993). Factors influencing performance and learning of mathematics among
Secondary schools in Kenya. Nairobi, Kenya: Bureau of educational
research.
Fuller, B (1987). Raising school quality in developing countries. What investments boost
learning? Rev. Education Res.5
Garrison, R., & Walter, A. (2000). Transactional approach on teaching and learning, A
framework for adult and higher education. Elsevier science ltd.
George, N.R., James., M.M. Justus, N.R. & Zacharia, K.M. (2012). Students and teachers
attitude towards mathematics- Maara district. Chuka University- Kenya:
Unpublished M.ED Thesis,
67
Gluckman, P. (2011). Looking Ahead: Science Education for the Twenty-First Century: A
report from the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor. Auckland: Office of
the Prime Minister‟s Science Advisory Committee.
Government of Kenya. (2005b). Sessional Paper No.1 of 2005 on A Policy Framework on
Education, Training and Research. Nairobi: Government Printer.
Goodland, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: MC Graw Hill.
Hannula, M. (2002). Attitude Towards mathematics: Emotions, Expectations and values.
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic publishers.
Homa Bay Disrict Development Plan. (2002-2008). Government printers, Nairobi.
Japan International cooperation Agency. (2004). The history of Japan‟s initial experience
with technical development cooperation in basic education: A case of
Ghana. Journal of international cooperation in education 8(1).
Kafu, P. A (1996). Future development in education technology. Eldoret: Moi University.
Kanja, C., Iwasaki,H.,Takuya B. & Atsumi, U. (2001). For the reform of mathematics
education in Kenyan secondary schools. A journal of international
development and cooperation, vol 7 no 1 p 67- 75 (200101).
Karega,M. (2008). Increasing Effectiveness of South-South Cooperation: the Case of
SMASSE Kenya and SMASE-WECSA, A paper Presented at the Workshop for
Practitioners of South-South and Triangular Cooperation During the Fifth Annual
United Nations Day for South-South Cooperation on 18 December 2008 at U.N.
Headquarters/New York).
Karue, M. (2006). Factors associated with poor performance in day secondary schools in
Embu district. University of Nairobi: Unpublished PH.D Thesis,.
Kenya National Examination Council. (2008). KCSE Examination candidate performance
Vol 1. Nairobi: Government printer.
68
Kenya National Examination Council. KCSE Examination Reports from 2004-2011:
Nairobi Government printers.
Kenya vision 2030. (2008-2012). Towards a globally competitive and prosperous
nation. Government of the republic of Kenya.
Kenya institute of Education (2002). Mathematics syllabus for Kenya Certificate of
Secondary Education. Nairobi: Kenya Literature Bureau.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundation of Behavioural Research. New York: Subject
publications.
Kibe, Odhiambo & Ogwel (2008), Impact of SMASSE INSET on students' capacity through
improved teaching and learning in the classrooms, a paper presented at the 8th
Regional conference for SMASSE WECSA, Nairobi.
Kusek, Z. J., & Rist, C.R. (2004). Ten steps to Results – Based Monitoring and
Evaluation. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Langat, R.K. (2009). Impact of SMASSE INSET on students‟ attitude and performance in
Mathematics in secondary schools in Bomet district: Moi University.
Unpublished M.ED Thesis,
Liburu, M.L. (2012). The impact of SMASSE project on the teaching and learning of
Mathematics in Tigania West District since 2004. Moi university:
Unpublished M.ED Thesis.
Math Forum (2013). http.//mathforum.org/ retrieved on 13th
January 2014.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multi - media learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). Elements of a science of e-learning. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 29(3), 297-313.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia
learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
69
Mayer, R. E., Fennell, S., Farmer, L., & Campbell, J. (2004). A personalization effect in
Multimedia learning: Students learn better when words are in
conversational style rather than formal style. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 96(2), 389-395.
Mayer, R. E. (1999). Research-based principles for the design of instructional messages: The
case of multimedia explanations. Document Design, 1, 7-20.
Ma,Xin., & Kishor, N . (1997). Assessing the relationship between attitude towards
mathematics and achievement in mathematics: A meta analysis Journal of
Research in mathematics education 28: 26-47.
Mintezes, J., Wandersee, J. & Novak, J. (Eds.) (1998). Teaching science for understanding.
San Diego, Ca: Academic Press.
Mondoh,H.O. (2005). Methods of Teaching Mathematics:A Handbook for TeachersAnd
Students.Egerton University Press, Njoro.
Mugenda, M.O., & Mugenda ,G.A. (1999). Research Methods. Quantitative and Qualitative
Approaches. Nairobi; African Centre for Technology Studies.
Mugenda, M.O., & Mugenda, G.A. (2003). Research methods: Quantitative and Qualitative
Approaches.Nairobi: Acts Press.
National Research Council. (2000). How people learn, Washington DC: The National
academic press.
Ndiku, L. (2011). Mathematics teachers‟ attitude towards the SMASSE-INSET in Nandi
central district, Kenya. Eastern African University. Kenya: Unpublished
M.ED Thesis.
Ngugi & Nyakweba. (2005) Understanding SMASSE PROJECT; a paper presented in
Uasin-Gishu district SMASSE INSET cycle 2.
Njuguna, B. M. (1999). The findings from baseline studies by SMASSE Project, SMASSE
Project bulletin: Unpublished.
70
Ogwel, A. ( 2011). Enhancing Teachers capacity through In-service Education and Training:
A reflection on the projects for Strengthening Mathematics and Science
Education. Kenya: CEMASTEA.
Olick, A. (2012). The impact of SMASSE training programme on the Mathematics
Performance in secondary schools in Bomet district, Kenya:
Unpublished M.ED Thesis.
Omondi, O.K. (2010). Teaching and learning resources and academic performance in
Secondary schools in Bondo district of Kenya. Kampala International
University, Uganda: Unpublished PH.D Thesis.
Oso, W.Y. & Onen, D. (2005). A general Guide to Writing Proposal and Report, a handbook
for beginning researchers. Uganda: Copyright, 2008.
Orodho, A. J., & Kombo D. K. (2002). Research methods. Nairobi: Kenyatta University,
Institute of Open learning.
Orodho, J. A. (2005). Elements of Education and Social Science Research methods
Nairobi. Masola publishers.
Owiti, D.S.O. (2008). Mathematics teaching in secondary schools in Nairobi and Mombasa
Districts: Students‟ perspective. Moi University: Unpublished PhD Thesis.
Porter,T. (1996). Why study mathematics. Retrieved on 13th
January 2014 from
Republic of Kenya, (2005). Sessional Paper No1 of 2005 on a Policy Framework for
Education, Training and Research. Nairobi: Government Printer.
Rotich, K. & Mutisya, S. (2013). Evaluation of capacity development programs in Kenya:
a case of SMASSE INSET for science teachers. International Journal of Social
Sciences and Entrepreneurship, 1 (3), 273-288
Schenkel, B. (2009). The impact of attitude towards mathematics on mathematics
performance. Marietta College, Ohio: Unpublished M.ED Thesis.
71
Shahid, M., & Syedza, S. (2008). Pakistan Economic and social Review Vol 46, No 8
(Summer, 2008) pp78-83.
Sifuna, N., & Kaime, J. (2007): The effect of in-service education and Training (INSET)
Programmes in Mathematics and science on classroom interaction. A case study
of Primary and Secondary Schools in Kenya. African Education Review.
SMASSE project. (2002). Report on the 4th
workshop on effective operations and
management of SMASSE project. Nairobi: SMASSE project.
SMASSE project. (2004). Sixth stake holders workshop on effective management of
SMASSE project. Nairobi: SMASSE project.
SMASSE Project Impact Assessment Survey (2005).
SMASSE project. (2008). Statistical Analysis of SMASSE Impact Assessment
Survey. Nairobi: SMASSE project.
SMASSE RWANDA. (2010). Strengthening Mathematics and Science in Secondary
Education. Rwanda : SMASSE project.
Stevson, H.W., & Stigler, J.W. (1992). The learning gap: why our schools are failing and
what we can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Simon
and Schuster.
Stigler, J., & Hierbert, J. (1999). The teaching Gap. Best Ideas from the World‟s Teachers for
Improving Education in the Classroom. New York: Free press.
Wabwile, J. (2007). Mathematics and Science teachers‟ perception and expectations of
SMASSE In-service Training. A case study of Trans- Nzoia District. Unpublished
M. phil thesis.Nairobi: Moi University
Waititu, M., & Orado , G. (2009). Managing Teachers and instruction of mathematics
and Science: Lessons from SMASSE Experience in capacity
development, Kenya: CEMASTEA.
72
Wambui, N. N. (2005). A study of mathematical achievement using the climbing method in
Kenyan secondary schools. SMASSE project.
Wambui, N.N., & Wahome,N. (2006). SMASSE project. tsubuki journal of educational
study of mathematics. Retrieved from tsukuba.ac.TP/math/symp2006/nui,pdf.
Wanjohi, C. (2011). Perfomance determinants of KCSE Mathematics in Nyamaiya
division. Kampala International University, Uganda: Unpublished M.ED
Thesis.
Webster, S. (1985). Educational Research: Competence for Analysis and Application, 6th
Edition. New Jersey: Macmillan.
73
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Mathematics Teachers’ Questionnaire
The purpose of this questionnaire is to solicit information on the implementation of ASEI-
PDSI approach in the teaching and learning of mathematics in secondary schools. The aim is
to find out teachers‟ self perception on the practice of ASEI–PDSI approach on the teaching
and learning of mathematics. The information you give will be kept confidential and you are
therefore kindly requested to give your genuine opinion.
Section A: Personal details
(1)Please indicate your gender
Male ( )
Female ( )
(2)Qualifications
BED ( )
BA/BSC ( )
PGDE/ DIPLOMA ( )
M.ED / M.PHIL ( )
(3) Teaching Experience
11 to 15 years ( )
Above 15 years ( )
(4) Attendance of SMASSE Training
All the four cycles ( )
Three cycles ( )
Two cycles ( )
One cycle ( )
None ( )
Section B
The statement appearing below relate to the self perception towards the teaching and learning
of mathematics where
74
NA means Not at All
R stands for Rarely
S means Sometimes
O means Often
A means Always
The statements call for one response from among the five alternatives. Please tick inside the
box corresponding to your response.
Statements relating to mathematics teachers’ self perception
towards the teaching and learning of mathematics
NA R S O A
1) I prepare an ASEI lesson plan before I go to class
2) I involve students in group work
3) I involve students in practical activities during the lesson
4) I give room for the students to predict the outcome of the
activities done in class
5) I involve students in making observations during practical
lessons
6) I involve students in making observations and explaining the
observations to the whole class
7) I use locally available materials when carrying out a practical
lesson in the class
8) I carry out practical lessons outside the classroom
9) I have witnessed creativity in students regarding mathematics
since the inception of SMASSE training
10) I have faced challenges in implementing the ASEI lesson plan
75
Appendix B: Principals’ Questionnaire
This section intends to find out the perception of principals on the supervision and practice of
ASEI-PDSI approach in schools, performance of learners in mathematics and their attitude
towards mathematics after SMASSE training. You are kindly requested to give your genuine
opinion and note that any information given will be kept confidential.
SECTION A: Personal details
(1) Please indicate your gender
Male ( )
Female ( )
(2) Qualifications
BED ( )
BA/BSC ( )
PGDE ( )
MSC/ M.ED/ M.PHIL ( )
(3)Teaching Experience
Up to 5 years ( )
6 to 10 years ( )
11 to 15 years ( )
Above 15 years ( )
SECTION B
The statements appearing below relate to ASEI-PDSI approach as a teaching and learning
approach in mathematics
SA means Strongly Agree
A stands for Agree,
U means Undecided,
D means Disagree
SD means Strongly Disagree
76
The statements call for one response from among the five alternatives. Please tick inside the
box corresponding to your response.
Aspects of ASEI-PDSI approach SA A U D SD
1) I am aware and well informed of the SMASSE training
2) All mathematics teachers in my school have attended
SMASSE training
3) I encourage my teachers to use the teaching and learning
resources effectively
4) I check whether the resources have been effectively used
5) I encourage teachers to make lesson plans
6) I check professional tools used by teachers
7) I observe mathematics lessons to ensure the implementation
of the ASEI lesson plans
8) I have noted students developing interest in mathematics
9) ASEI-PDSI approach has contributed towards the improved
performance in mathematics
10) SMASSE project has been a great step towards improving
performance in mathematics
11) I have witnessed creativity in students regarding
mathematics since SMASSE training
12) SMASSE project has encouraged teamwork among teachers
13) I have witnessed teachers struggle with the implementation
of ASEI-PDSI approach
14) I advocate for more in-service trainings like SMASSE.
77
Appendix C: Students’ Questionnaire
Dear student
This is a questionnaire whose aim is to get information about the teaching and learning of
mathematics in secondary schools. As a student who is taking mathematics, the information
you will provide will be very useful in finding ways of improving the teaching of this subject.
This information will strictly be kept confidential.
SECTION A
Gender:
Male ( )
Female ( )
School category
Mixed day school ( )
Boys ' Boarding school ( )
Girls ' Boarding school ( )
Mixed day school ( )
SECTION B
The statement appearing below relate to the attitude towards mathematics where
SA means Strongly Agree
A stands for Agree,
U means Undecided,
D means Disagree
SD means Strongly Disagree
You are required to respond by ticking (√) the numerical value on the score for each item
which best describes your feeling towards mathematics teaching in the classroom and
participation in class. There is no right or wrong answer so you are kindly requested to give
your genuine opinion.
78
The following statements call for one response from among the five alternatives. Please tick
inside the box corresponding to your response.
Item describing students’ attitude towards
mathematics
SA A U D SD
1) My relation with the mathematics teachers is good.
2) My mathematics teacher involves us during the
lesson hence making it interesting.
3) We always do some activities during mathematics
lessons using the locally available materials.
4) Mathematics discussions are interesting and we
do extend beyond class time.
5) Mathematics assignments are less stressful.
6) I intend to take a career related to mathematics in
future.
7) mathematics is not difficult as others have been
saying
8) My scores in mathematics are high as compared
to other subjects.
9) I should have dropped mathematics if it was
optional.
10) I do not understand anything during mathematics
lessons
79
Appendix D: Interview Schedule for Heads of Mathematics Department.
1. What has been accomplished in the school as far as SMASSE training is concerned.
2. How can you rate the attendance of SMASSE by mathematics teachers in your
School?
3. What can you say about the practice of ASEI- PDSI aspects in your school with
regard to:
a) Lesson plan preparation
b) Involving students in learning activities
c) Utilization of locally available resources in carrying out an experiment
4. What role have you played in the implementation of the ASEI- PDSI approach in your
school?
5. Are teachers in the school satisfied with ASEI lesson plan? If not why?
6. What challenges do you face in the implementation of ASEI –PDSI approach?
7. Do you think SMASSE has had any impact on mathematics as one of its target
subjects? If yes how?
8. What role has SMASSE project played in the KCSE mathematics performance in
your school?
9. What general observations can you give in relationship to SMASSE‟S ASEI-PDSI
approach?
80
Appendix E: ASEI-PDSI Checklist
School…………………………………………..No of students……….Date……………
Topic……………………………………………………..……………………
Subtopic…………………………………………………………………………………
(Rating scale: 0-poor; 1-fair; 2-satisfactory; 3-good; 4-very good)
Plan Lesson plan 0 1 2 3 4
P1 The work plan took into account students‟ backgrounds such as: 1. Learning difficulties 2. their needs/interests/misconceptions 3. Experimental skills and previous experience in
relation to the topic
P2 The work plan was appropriate and realistic in the light of the
lesson content and students‟ abilities/skills/interest
P3 Teacher prepared appropriate and adequate materials for students‟ use
Do Introduction
D1 Introduction incorporated: 1. Previous knowledge 2. Everyday experience
D2 Introduction was clear on what the teacher wanted the students to learn
D3 Introduction was stimulating enough to arouse the interest and curiosity of the students
Development
D4 Lesson encouraged students to: 1. Express their prior experiences 2. Explain their ideas related to the content
D5 Lesson encouraged students to: 1. give their own predictions 2. discuss how their predictions differed from those held by
others
3. verify the predictions through experiments or facts
D6 Lesson encouraged students: 1. to give their own observations/results in the experiment 2. discuss how they differed from those of others
D7 Lesson facilitated process skills such as observing, Measuring, identifying variables and Planning experiments
D8 Teacher dealt with students‟: 1. Questions
2. Misconceptions
D9 The lesson encouraged active participation of students as much as possible in the main teaching steps
Conclusion
81
D10 Lesson encouraged students to draw conclusions
D11 Teacher summarized the lesson and gave follow-up activities
D12 The lesson assisted to view the content in relation to what they come across in the society
D13 Teacher checked the: 1. Accuracy 2. Correctness 3. Depth 4. Appropriateness of the content through question and
answer techniques
Class management
D14 Teacher organized and conducted lesson taking into account the
individual differences in student capability
Instructional materials/media
D15 Teacher made effective use of the teaching/learning materials and media
See
S1 Teacher supervised class work
S2 Teacher was attentive to the needs of students( low ability and high academic ability)
S3 Teacher kept eye contact on students to monitor their Feelings
S4 Teacher invited questions from students
S5 Teacher asked questions to check quality of understanding
Improve
Im1 Teacher rephrased question or instructional statements as necessary
Im2 Teacher interjected rightly and called to attention inattentive students
Im3 Teacher gave further guidance to students on lesson Activities
Im4 Teacher made appropriate adjustments in the conduct of the lesson
ASEI Lesson delivery
Activity The lesson was activity-focused:
82
Evidence 1. Practical work was conducted. 2. Appropriate tasks for discussion were given
Student involvement
The lesson was student-centred: Evidence
1. Students were effectively encouraged to give their prior
experiences and explain their ideas related to the content. 2. Students were encouraged to give their own predictions
and helped to discuss how they differed from those held
by others and to verify them through experiments or facts 3. Students were effectively encouraged to give their own
observations/ results in the practical work and to discuss
how they differed from those of others. 4. Students were encouraged to evaluate the lesson
Experiment effectiveness
The practical work helped to achieve the objective(s) of the lesson Evidence:
1. Students were able to solve related problems. 2. Students were able to make deductions from the practical
work. 3. Students were able to verify predictions.
Improvisation
Improvisation was practiced during the lesson: Evidence:
1. Modified small scale experiments were done 2. Utilization of available materials in students‟ immediate
environment 3. Teacher improvised equipment and students were able to
use improvised materials effectively. 4. Students‟ participation was enhanced/ increased.
83
Appendix F: Interview schedule for QASO
1. What role have you played in the implementation of ASEI-PDSI approach in
secondary schools of Rangwe division?
2. How often do you monitor the use of ASEI-PDSI approach in secondary schools of
Rangwe division?
3. What mechanisms do you employ in order to effectively manage the implementation
of ASEI-PDSI approach in secondary schools?
4. What are some of the challenges faced in trying to ensure that ASEI-PDSI approach is
implemented?
5. What is your opinion on teachers‟ readiness to implement the use of ASEI- PDSI
approach in teaching of mathematics?
6. What can you say about the sustainability of the ASEI-PDSI approach in Rangwe
division?
7. How best do you think ASEI-PDSI approach can be implemented in Rangwe
division?
8. What are your general observations concerning the use of ASEI-PDSI approach in
Rangwe division?
84
Appendix J: Letter to the School Principal
RUTH N WAFUBWA
KISII UNIVERSITY
P.O. BOX 408-40200
KISII
DATE
THE PRINCIPAL
___________________________
___________________________
__________________________
Dear sir/ Madam,
RE: REQUEST TO CARRY OUT RESEARCH IN YOUR SCHOOL
I am a student at Kisii University pursuing a masters Degree course in Curriculum and
Instruction in Mathematics Education. As part of my course, I am required to carry out a
research on “The influence of Strengthening of Mathematics and Science (SMASSE)
project in the instruction of mathematics in Rangwe public secondary schools Homa
Bay Sub-County”.
The purpose of this letter is to request you to allow me to collect the required information
from teachers and students in your school. If allowed, I promise to abide by your rules.
Attached are copies of my research abstract, questionnaires and a letter from the university.
Thanking you in advance,
Yours faithfully,
RUTH N WAFUBWA.
