i TITLE PAGE EVALUATION OF THE NATIONAL TEACHERS’ INSTITUTE POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA IN EDUCATION BY DISTANCE LEARNING SYSTEM IN SOUTH EAST NIGERIA BY OKOYE ALEXANDER CHUKWUEMEKA PG/PH.D/13/67285 THESIS PRESENTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE AWARD OF PH.D IN MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA SUPERVISOR: B. C. MADU (PH.D) FEBRUARY, 2015
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
i
TITLE PAGE
EVALUATION OF THE NATIONAL TEACHERS’ INSTITUTE POST GRADUATE
DIPLOMA IN EDUCATION BY DISTANCE LEARNING SYSTEM IN SOUTH EAST
NIGERIA
BY
OKOYE ALEXANDER CHUKWUEMEKA
PG/PH.D/13/67285
THESIS PRESENTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE AWARD OF PH.D IN
MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION
DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA
SUPERVISOR: B. C. MADU (PH.D)
FEBRUARY, 2015
ii
APPROVAL PAGE
THIS THESIS HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR THE FACULTY OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA
BY ..................................... ....................................... B. C. MADU (PH.D) INTERNAL EXERMINER SUPERVISOR
..................................... ....................................... EXTERNAL EXERMINER PROF. Z. C. NJOKU HEAD OF DEPARTMENT
................................................... PROF. UJU UMO
DEAN, FACULTY OF EDUCATION
iii
CERTIFICATION
Chukwuemeka Alexander Okoye, a postgraduate student with registration number
PG/M.ED/13/67285 has satisfactorily completed the requirement for the Award of Ph.D in
Measurement and Evaluation. The work embodied in this project is original and has not been
submitted in part or full for any other degree in this University or any other University. We
therefore accept it as conforming to the required standard.
............................................................................. C. A. Okoye B. C. MADU (Ph.D) Student Supervisor
iv
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my Mum who did not live long but brought so much sunshine
v
Acknowledgement
The researcher thanks the almighty God for His unwavering love, grace and manifold
blessings in the course of this programme. The realization of this project was painstakingly made
possible by my admirable supervisor, B. C. Madu (Ph.D) who played a fatherly role with
uncommon concern. May the Lord keep him and his family in good health of mind and body.
The researcher is also delighted to express his sincere appreciation to his beloved family,
the Obodo and Anieke families for their support in the course of this programme. The researcher
extends his deepest appreciation to Prof. B. G. Nworgu, Prof. D. N. Eze, Prof. U. Umo, Prof. S.
A. Ezeudu, Dr C. R. Nwagbo and Dr. E. K. N. Nwagu for their support when it mattered the
most. The researcher special thanks also go to his senior colleagues and amiable friends Dr John
Joseph Agah, Dr Elechi Aja, Dr, P. Nwosu, Dr Chekwube Eze, Ugwuanyi Christain and Francis
Ikeh for their special devotion and academic support. While not forgetting motivation and
support from roommates in 004, 403 and 429 Odili PG Hall.
Okoye, Alexander Chukwuemeka
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Background of the Study 1 Statement of the Problem 15 Purpose of the Study 16 Significance of the Study 16 Scope of the Study 19 Research Questions 19 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW Conceptual Framework 20 Distance Learning System 21 Evaluation 27 Evaluation Models 40 Triangulation 53 Analytic Induction 56 Overview of Teacher Education in Nigeria 58
The National Teachers' Institute (NTI) 65 Quality Assurance Mechanisms in the NTI 71 The NTI PGDE Programme 72 Importance of Evaluating the NTI PGDE by DLS 81 Theoretical Framework 84 Keegan’s Theory of Distance Learning 84
Stufflebean’s Context, Input, Process and Product (CIPP) Model 85 Relevant Empirical Studies 89 Studies on NTI Programmes 89 Studies on Distance Education 96 Studies on Teacher Education 99 Studies that Adopted CIPP Evaluative Model 103 Evaluated Programmes 109 Summary of Literature Review 114
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD Design for the Study 117 Area of the Study 118 Population of the Study 118 Sample and Sampling Technique 119 Instrument for Data Collection 120 Validation of the Instrument 124 Reliability of the Instrument 124 Procedure for Data Collection 125 Method of Data Analysis 126
vii
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS Research Question One 128 Research Question Two 131 Research Question Three 137 Research Question Four 140 Summary of Major Findings 145
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARY Discussion of Findings 146 Context Evaluation:Extent to which the National Teachers
Institute Post Graduate Diploma in Education by distance learning
system programme objective has been achieved in South East Nigeria 146
Achievement of Objectives of the NTI PGDE by DLS 146
Focus Group Discussions 150
Interviews with Center Managers and Centre Desk Officers 154
Employers Interviews 158
Challenges of the NTI PGDE Programme 160
Availability of input facilities for the implementation of National
Teachers Institute Post Graduate Diploma in Education by distance
learning system programme in South East Nigeria 161
Input Facilities Utilized in Implementing NTI PGDE by DLS 161
Facilitators’ Qualifications 163
Observations on Facilitators’ Effectiveness 164
Curriculum Assessment 165
Facilitators’ Assessment of the NTI PGDE programmes 167
Implementation process of the National Teachers Institute Post Graduate
Diploma in Education by distance learning system in South East Nigeria 168
Implementation Process 168 Teaching/Learning Process in the NTI PGDE Programme 171
viii Adopted Evaluation Techniques 173
Oversight Function 174
Outcomes of the National Teachers Institute Post Graduate Diploma
in Education by distance learning system in South East Nigeria 176
Alumni Assessment 176
Teachers’ Effectiveness 177
Conclusion of the Findings of the Study 185
Educational Implication of the Findings of the Study 180 Recommendations 180 Limitations of the Study 184 Suggestion for Further Studies 184 Summary of the Study 185 REFERENCES 187 List of Figures
Fig. 1: Context of Formative and Summative Evaluation 32
Fig. 2: Pros and Cons of Evaluation Instruments 38
Fig. 3: Donald Kirkpatrick’s 4 levels 42
Fig. 4: The Four Types of Evaluation in the CIPP Model 52
Fig. 5: Stufflebeam’s CIPP Model 52
Fig 6: Enrolment of Students in the NTI PGDE by DLS (2005-2010) 76
Fig. 7: NTI PGDE by DLS Courses 80
ix List of Tables
Table 1: Mean ratings and standard deviations on the extent NTI has achieved the objectives of her PGDE programme in South East through distance learning system 128 Table 2: Mean ratings and standard deviations on the challenges in implementing NTI PGDE programmes by DLS in the South East 130 Table 3: Checklist showing the adequacy of input facilities for implementation of NTI PGDE programme by distance learning system 131 Table 4: Checklist showing the adequacy of human resources for implementing NTI PGDE programme by distance learning system curriculum 132 Table 5: Observational Checklist on Facilitators’ Effectiveness 133 Table 6: Mean ratings and standard deviations of students assessment of curriculum textbooks used in the programme 134 Table 7: Mean ratings and standard deviations of course facilitators assessment of the NTI PGDE programme by DLS 135 Table 8: Mean ratings and standard deviations of students on the activities of facilitators 137 Table 9: Mean ratings and standard deviations of Alumni on techniques adopted in evaluating students’ achievement 138 Table 10: Mean ratings and standard deviations of supervisory role of NOUN 139 Table 11: self-evaluation of NTI PGDE graduates on imbibed skills/competencies/abilities 140 Table 12: Effectiveness of NTI PGDE graduates 141
x
Abstract The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the National Teachers Institute’s Postgraduate Diploma in Education by Distance Learning System in South East Nigeria. Literature related to the study was reviewed. Evaluative research design was adopted in order to appraise all efforts of the Institute in the implementation and realization of the programme’s objectives. Context, Input, Process, Product evaluation Model guided inquiries into components of the programme that would yield data to warranted value judgment and decision making for the programme’s improvement. The population of this study comprised all the students and facilitators in the 14 accredited study centers of NTI PGDE by DLS in South East zone. Included in the population are all the 14 Centre Desk Officers (CDO) and 14 Centre Managers (CM), all the graduates and employers of NTI PGDE produced teachers in the study area.The population was extended to the National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) affiliate staff that has oversight function on the designated centers. Multi-stage sampling was used to select 206 respondents for the study. Various instruments were adapted, developed and validated for the purpose of data collection for this study. These include structured and unstructured questionnaires, focus group protocol, interview schedules, checklists and observational scales. Data were arranged according to research questions, triangulated and analyzed with analytic induction. Among others, the major findings of the study were that: the objectives of the NTI PGDE by distance learning system has to a great extent been met in the South East Nigeria; With respect to input evaluation, it was found that the programme is adequately staffed but most vital educational services and facilities are inadequate at the study centers; the implementation process of the NTI PGDE by distance learning has been responsive to the objectives of the programme which has helped teachersimprove in classroom practices, skills, competencies but are rated low on flexibility and vitality: the institute has to a low extentcontributed to producing effective teaching manpower in South East, Nigeria through distance learning system.Based on these findings, the conclusion is that the institute has over the years contributed moderately in producing effective teaching manpower in South East Nigeria through distance learning system. Hence, the major educational implication of the findings of the study is that there is still need for improvement in the programme delivery to meet the demands of quality teachers in secondary education. The main recommendation is that the institute should re-stratgize and reinforce efforts to equip study centers with basic educational service and facilities like laboratories, libraries and counseling to provide students with hands-on experience.
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Nigerian education has undergone innovations premeditated to meeting the educational
needs of the nation. These innovations were aimed at improving teaching and learning and to
effectively implement modern educational policies. Since independence in 1960, such novelties
as the conveyance of National Curriculum Conference, seminars of experts in 1973 and the
subsequent articulation of a National Policy on Education generated a variety of programmes in
which teacher quality was seen as central in achieving any educational goals (Ejembi, 2011
andSuleiman, 2004). Teacher quality and development of sound teacher education programmes
have always been taken as a matter of national importance. This is because teachers are seen to
be in the frontline of any educational programme (Akinsolu, 2010). Relative to this delicate
nature of teachers’ significance in teaching and learning and in meeting the requirements of
National Policy on Education (NPE), efforts are aimed at producing efficient teachers to
adequately address the challenges of shortage of qualified teachers in secondary education
(Osong, 2014).
Solutions to the challenge of meeting the requirement of NPE are varied, multi-faceted,
and certainly may not be addressed only, or even chiefly through teacher quality. But, teacher
education programmes and practices are critical to the success of any educational improvement
strategy (Iyunade, 2011). According to Perraton (2000), quality of teaching and learning largely
depends on teachers and one might therefore seek another indicator of quality by looking at the
programmes that produces the teaching force. Similarly, Suleiman (2004) opine that whatever
input is made into an educational system in respect of management, resources, facilities and
array of instructional materials will produce little result and more concerns if the teachers are
2 unskilled, poorly trained or even un-professional. Such concerns in teacher education preparation
in secondary education borders on the area of competency, quality assurance, and instructional
strategies (Onukwube, 2014); accountability and evaluation procedure (Asodike& Ebong, 2012),
and content area specialization and teacher retention (Samuel & Okodoko, 2012). In an attempt
to address such concerns in secondary education, the National Teachers Institute (NTI) in 2005
started the Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) through Distance Learning System
(DLS) (Olakulehin & Ojo, 2008).
The National Teachers Institute was established in 1976. Its mandate was originally to
upgrade the skills and training of the under-qualified and unqualified teachers within the school
system. Following the launching of the Universal Primary Education (UPE) programme in 1977,
its programmes expanded to accommodate vital educational needs (Suleiman, 2004). For
instance, the need to introduce the PGDE programme by NTI was informed by the directive of
the Federal Government that all persons that would teach in the nation’s educational institutions
must be qualified teachers who have undergone some training or the other in the principles and
practice of education and its ancillary fields (NTI, 2015). According to Salawu, Adeoye, Ojo and
Olakulehin (2010), if such policy statement is strictly followed without certain adjustment in
teacher education programme, it will certainly throw many serving teachers out of the teaching
profession thereby creating acute shortage of teachers in schools and increase the rate of
unemployment in the country. Holders of Bachelor’s Degree or Higher National Diploma from
cognate disciplines were thus required and encouraged to enroll for such programmes as the NTI
PGDE programme through distance learningsystem in order to strengthen their expertise in the
principles and practice of the teaching profession.
Distance learning refers to a mode of study where a learner may complete all or part of an
educational programme in a geographical location apart from the institution hosting the
3 programme. According to Muyinda (2012),distance education styles a set of teaching and
learning strategies that can be used to overcome spatial and temporal separation between
educators and learners. This strategy can be integrated into any educational programme and used
in any combination with any other teaching and learning strategies in the provision of quality
education (Ebirim &Okenwa, 2014).The final award given in DLS is equivalent in standard and
content to an award programme completed on traditional campus programme.
The NTI PGDE by DLS is an 18-month training programme in pedagogy and practice for
serving teachers and graduates without teaching qualification. This programme was affiliated to
Usman Dan Fodio University, Sokoto and now to the National Open University of Nigeria
(NOUN). The Postgraduate Diploma in Education of the NTI is a conversion course which is
designed to equip those who did not have prior teacher training with the skills, knowledge and
ability to become effective teachers or educational practitioners (NTI, 2014). According to the
Director General and Chief Executive of the National Teachers Institute, the Institute’s
contribution over the years has been to ensure continuous supply of qualified teachers, retention
and upgrading of their professional competencies (Sharehu, 2011). As at 2012, the NTI has
graduated 9,948 PGDE teachers through the DLS (Asodike&Ebong, 2012). The rationale for the
programme is to provide on-the-job training for teachers and would be teachers thereby
eliminating the inherent problems caused by them having to leave the schools or place of work
for training. The NTI PGDE by Distant Learning System is therefore designed to serve as one of
the most cost-effective strategies for in-service training in transforming non-professional
graduate teachers into full professional educators (Umerah, 2014).
The Postgraduate Diploma in Education of the NTI is also designed for non-education
graduates that are either currently teaching or intend to take up teaching appointment in later life.
Its contents cover not only the techniques and methodologies of teaching, but also cover special
4 professional areas like Educational planning / Administration, Guidance and Counseling, Early
Childhood Education, School Supervision and inspection. The PGDE of the NTI through DLS
requires participants to undertake courses in the core fields of educational practice. The courses
offered include: the Foundations of education- historical, philosophical, psychological and
sociological; Educational management; Curriculum organization and development; Instructional
design and development; Vocational, career and guidance counseling; Comparative education;
Special teaching methods for individual subjects; Tests, Measurement and Evaluation;
Educational research methods; Statistical and data analysis; Psychology of learning;
Developmental psychology; Teaching practice; and Project Work (Dissertation) (NTI, 2015). In
implementing the curriculum of these courses, the teaching materials are in the form of specially
prepared self-instructional materials, all structured and properly sequenced to make reading
orderly and systematic (Umerah, 2014).
For the purpose of improving the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process in the
delivery system of the programme, text materials are supplemented with face-to-face weekend
contact sessions which features lectures, practicals, tutorials to answer students’ questions and
get feedback. These contact sessions are designed for weekends (Fridays & Saturday) and
vacation periods. Furthermore, recorded audio/video and Compact Disc (CD) are made available
as support materials. With respect to students’ evaluation, the major form of assessments is
through Continuous Assessment (which is generated from seminars, tests and assignment),
examination, teaching practice supervision and projects (NTI, 2015). The institute also has
Frequency Modulating (FM) radio for educational broadcasting and pilot testing instructional
Radio Programmes (Osong, 2014).
Students in the NTI PGDE programme in South East Nigeria at a distance tend to possess
common characteristics. Common characteristics in the sense that many of them are mature
5 students, they work in educational institutions or related fields, many of them have social
responsibilities, such as family, religious and other engagements which are competing for their
time and attention. However, the training of teachers through distance learning reaches out to a
heterogeneous and geographically dispersed student. This has invariably brought concerns
regarding the provision and utilization of vital support services, learning resources, and
effectiveness of instruction, as well as the quality of the programme (Etuk, Akpanumoh, Etudor
& Ngerebara, 2008 and Osong, 2014). This according to Parviz and Mania (2009) is because in
distance education, the student course experience should additionally be impacted by efficient
delivery methods, as well as by effective instructional strategies aimed at creating social
interaction in a mediated context. Consequently, a distance course is hopefully equivalent to
traditional campus programme in terms of performance, but it is not experienced in the same way
as a traditional classroom instructional method (Kromrey, 2014). The effective development and
implementation of the NTI PGDE programme in the South East through DLS therefore requires
carefully planned and executed evaluation routines. This is because for a distance learning
programme to succeed, certain objectives explicit to the given context need to be specified and
stakeholders’ need ought to be identified, and programme delivery is supposed to be in line with
those sets of objectives. There is little doubt therefore that the challenges this presents to
(2002) indicated that, among other shortcomings, learners who participate in broadcast lessons
without talkback capabilities feel like second-class citizens, having little rapport with the rest of
the group. Technical problems may also interrupt the instruction and may create confusion and
frustration for the instructor and students. Because of inexperience, instructors may not feel
comfortable teaching in this type of setting, and students may also be reluctant to assume greater
responsibility for their own learning. Effective distance learning system therefore requires
extensive preparation, as well as adapting traditional teaching strategies to a new learning
environment.
27
However, to curb these challenges and in pursuant of the goals of distance learning as
stipulated in the National Policy on Education (NPE) , the practice adopted by NTI is a hybrid or
blended course. This is because students require a physical on-site presence or use of the above-
mentioned facilities including taking of examinations. The four fold objectives of NTI as
enunciated by Yusuf and Falade (2005, p 25) are: to identify and clarify professional requirement
of teachers; to design and mount programmes which achieve the objectives of teacher education;
to operate and maintain a nationwide programme which must work harmoniously with exiting
and similar programmes and; to incorporate strategy for change and innovations within it
conceptual and operational framework. According to Adejimi (2008), the rationale for selecting
this distance-learning approach by NTI programme providers in order to achieve these objectives
may not be far from the following: Overcoming problems posed by education in remote areas;
Delivery of education to a large body of students without the constraints of space; Catering for
widely scattered student bodies; Flexibility as an educational method; Training teachers without
taking them off their jobs and; Cost effectiveness. Jimoh (2013) thus opine that such distance
learning service of the NTI remains the primary mechanism for the information-driven age, a
tool that has bridged the gap between developed and developing communities.
Evaluation
Educational programmes are planned and delivered in different contexts. For each
programme, certain objectives specific to the given context and stakeholders are identified, and
programme delivery is supposed to be in line with those sets of objectives. Educational decision-
makers and stakeholders would often want to ensure that programmes are accomplishing their
intended objectives and purposes.To ensure effectiveness of educational programmes and its
success in meeting the set objectives, it must be evaluated regularly(Parviz & Mania, 2009).
28 Evaluation is a term that is used to represent judgments of many kinds. Evaluation is the
systematic collection and analysis of all relevant information necessary to promote the
improvement of a programme, and assess its effectiveness and efficiency, as well as the
participants' attitudes within the context of the particular institutions involved. According to
Zinovieff (2008), evaluation is an instrument that predominates in the national and international
public sectors as a means to ensure substantive (rather than financial) accountability of the
investments made, and as a basis for learning to improve the relevance and quality of future
actions. Welch (2006) defines evaluation as an applied inquiry process for collecting and
synthesizing evidence that culminates in conclusions about the state of affairs, value, merit,
worth, significance, or quality of a programme, product, person, policy, proposal, or plan.
Evaluation allows stakeholders to think about what has been learned, what one might do
differently next time and how one can build on the most successful areas of the
programme.Educational programme evaluation is therefore the systematic collection and analysis
of information related to the design, implementation, and outcomes of educational programmes,
for the purpose of monitoring and improving the quality and effectiveness of the programme. As
is clear in this definitions, programme evaluation is about understanding the programme through
a routine, systematic, deliberate gathering of information to uncover and/or identify what
contributes to the success of the programme and what actions need to be taken in order to
address the findings of the evaluation process (Durning & Hemmer 2010). In other words,
programme evaluation tries to identify the sources of variation in educational programme
outcomes both from within and outside the programme, while determining whether these sources
of variation or even the outcome itself are desirable or undesirable.
A robust programme evaluation process supports accountability while allowing educators
to gain useful knowledge about their programme and sustain on-going programme development
29 (Goldie 2006). Evaluation models have always supported such a range of needs. Newer
evaluation models support learning about the dynamic processes within the programmes,
allowing an additional focus on programme improvement (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield 2007).
Such evaluation model is used as guide in various professional contexts on a daily basis
in order to make decisions for complex matters that require individuals or methods of practice to
be certified, secured or improved. With regard to the educational context, many of the terms,
concepts, and theories of educational evaluation originated from business models, and have been
adapted to education, especially in light of an increased emphasis on outcomes (Stavropoulou &
Stroubouki, 2014). Evaluation in education is thus used to analyze the effectiveness and direction
of an educational activity and involves making a judgment about progress and impact. It means
that evaluation in education puts that data in use and thus gives it value. Mahmood andAzhar
(2013) observed that in third world countries, it is common practice that monitoring systems are
weak, corruption, lack of commitment and competency are common in workers. Rough and
outdated data are provided to management. Hence, evaluation is regularly needed to assess the
monitoring mechanism. Effective programme evaluation is therefore a carefully planned and
systematic approach to documenting the nature and results of programme implementation.
In consequence, a variety of evaluation approaches have been developed throughout the
relatively short but plentiful life of evaluation. Nevertheless, evaluation in education has received
both criticism and approval from the scientific community. Many authors expressed their
scepticism about the application of evaluation in education, and have discussed the difficulties of
implementing evaluation theory in practice (Roxburgh, 2008). From the early years of
evaluation, programme evaluation was considered as a problematic issue for several reasons
(Coryn, Noakes, Westine & Schroter, 2011). The impracticality of evaluation instruments, the
lack of stakeholders’ involvement in the evaluation process, the low response rate and poor
30 commitment of faculty staff are some of the issues that have thrown doubt on the practicality of
programme evaluation. As a result, in the past, programme evaluation was characterized as a
time-consuming, monotonous procedure, with doubtful results and struggling processes (Ogrinc
& Batalden, 2009). Others considered evaluation as a necessary but complex component of
programme design, development and implementation (Foley, 2008). Traditionally, the
complexity of evaluation was highlighted and, for this reason, evaluation was the least
understood and the most neglected element of programme design and development
(Stavropoulou & Stroubouki, 2014). In the same context, programme evaluation was considered
as an important element of programme development, despite being neglected due to its complex
nature and the increased problems for policy makers and programme planners (Roxburgh, 2008).
Different views were however presented in the past by various authors who revealed the
constructive nature of evaluation and claimed that evaluation is a vital component of programme
development. Researchers for example, who expressed concerns about the practicality of
educational evaluation, also emphasized that evaluation is an important element of programme
development and implementation. Most stressed that evaluation is one of the most significant
facets of curriculum development, even if it is carried out solely for the purpose of providing the
faculty with a sense of security. In addition, Scriven and Stufflebeam in their separate works
associate the notion of quality with evaluation and consider evaluation as a prerequisite for
developing and sustaining high–quality educational programmes. Hence, evaluators underscore
that programme quality and programme evaluation need to be strongly emphasized in higher
education, despite the fact that evaluators and educators often conveyed criticism and divergent
opinions (Stavropoulou & Stroubouki, 2014). Despite, the opposing views on the utilization and
usefulness of programme evaluation, there is a general agreement among authors of the earlier
and later times that evaluation is an essential part of the educational process.
31
This is because within the specific context of education, evaluation helps to ensure the
accountability of the various educational programmes in meeting their goals. Conclusions made
in evaluations encompass both an empirical aspect (that something is the case) and a normative
aspect (judgment about the value of something). According to Fournier (2005), it is the
valuefeature that distinguishes evaluation from other types of inquiry, such as basic science
research, clinical epidemiology, investigative journalism, or public polling. The primary purpose
is to help stakeholders make a judgment and/or decision on what is being evaluated –
Generalizability to other settings not necessarily important.What all evaluations exercise have in
common is the notion of judging merit. That is, someone is examining and weighing something
against an explicit or implicit yardstick. The yardsticks can vary widely, and include criteria such
as aesthetics, effectiveness, economics, and justice or equity issues. According to Frye and
Hemmer (2012), information necessary for programme evaluation is typically gathered through
measurement processes. Choices of specific evaluation design, evaluation instrument,
measurement tools, strategies, or assessments for programme evaluation processes are therefore
guided by many factors, including the specific evaluation questions that define the desired
understanding of the programme’s success or shortcomings (Patton 2011).
Formative and Summative Evaluation
Evaluation theories have their root in social inquiry and the desire for accountability and
control. Depending upon the goals of the evaluation, different methodologies and strategies are
used to guide inquiry. The methodologies and strategies are selected based on the type of
evaluation required. Evaluation falls into three main types, those oriented toward the
construction of knowledge, those orientated toward placing value, and those oriented toward how
information is used (Chapman, n. d.). Evaluation can be further broken into two distinct
32 categories, formative and summative (Scriven, 1967). Scriven was the first to define two types
of educational programme evaluation-formative and summative (1967) to describe the evaluation
of educational curriculum. Formative evaluation focuses on processes and summative evaluation
focuses on outcomes (Scriven, 1967). Formative evaluation can serve a variety of purposes. It
produces information that is fed back during the course of a programme to improve it.
Summative evaluation is done after the programme is finished, and provides information about
its effectiveness. Scriven later simplified this distinction, as follows: ‘When the cook tastes the
soup, that’s formative evaluation; when the guest tastes it, that’s summative evaluation.
Recently, researchers outlined their sequential nature: first, formative data are collected and used
to prepare for the summative evaluation; then, a summative evaluation is conducted to provide
data for external accountability. This is because programmes are seldom ‘finished’; they
continue to adapt and modify over time, in response to internal and external conditions.
Therefore, the need for ‘formative’ information continues – to be fed back to programme staff to
improve the programme.
Fig. 1: Context of formative and summative evaluation Formative Summative Primary purpose is improvement Primary purpose is accountability Used by primary stakeholders Used by upstream stakeholders Summary of what is occurring Summary of what has occurred Decisions as a result of recommendations based on what is occurring
Decisions as a result of what has been completed
Chef tastes the soup Customer tastes the soup Provides information that helps improve your programme. Generates periodic reports. Information can be shared quickly
Generates information that can be used to demonstrate the results of your programme to funders and stakeholders.
Focuses most on programme activities, outputs, and short-term outcomes for the purpose of monitoring progress and making mid-course corrections when needed.
Focuses most on programme’s intermediate-term outcomes and impact. Although data may be collected throughout the programme, the purpose is to determine the value and worth of a programme based on results.
Helpful in bringing suggestions for improvement to the attention of staff
Helpful in describing the quality and effectiveness of your programme by documenting its impact on participants and the community.
Adopted from Roxburgh (2008).
33
Evaluation Designs
According to Alkin (2004), the most commonly used evaluation (and research) designs are.
• One-Shot Design: In using this design, the evaluator gathers data following an
intervention or programme. For example, a survey of participants might be conducted
after they complete a workshop.
• Retrospective Pretest: As with the one-shot design, the evaluator collects data at one
time but asks for recall of behaviour or conditions prior to, as well as after, the
intervention or programme.
• One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design: The evaluator gathers data prior to and following
the intervention or programme being evaluated.
• Time Series Design: The evaluator gathers data prior to, during, and after the
implementation of an intervention or programme.
• Pretest-Posttest Control-Group Design: The evaluator gathers data on two separate
groups prior to and following an intervention or programme. One group, typically called
the experimental or treatment group, receives the intervention. The other group, called
the control group, does not receive the intervention.
• Posttest-Only Control-Group Design: The evaluator collects data from two separate
groups following an intervention or programme. One group, typically called the
experimental or treatment group, receives the intervention or programme, while the other
group, typically called the control group, does not receive the intervention. Data are
collected from both of these groups only after the intervention.
• Case Study Design: When evaluations are conducted for the purpose of understanding
the programme’s context, participants’ perspectives, the inner dynamics of situations,
and questions related to participants’ experiences, and where generalization is not a goal,
a case study design, with an emphasis on the collection of qualitative data, might be
most appropriate. Case studies involve in-depth descriptive data collection and analysis
of individuals, groups, systems, processes, or organizations. In particular, the case study
34
design is most useful when you want to answer how and why questions and when there is
a need to understand the particulars, uniqueness, and diversity of the case.
Evaluation Instruments
From the literature reviewed, the researcher observed that there has often been the
reliance on one method of data collection and analysis. Such give rise to a narrow view of the
programme implementation. Nevertheless, Chen (2009), opine that all researchers, perspectives
and methods are value laden,biased, limited as well as illuminated by their framework, particular
focus andblind spots. To serve the purpose of this study therefore and learn more from the
programme to inform decision, assortment of instruments were developed and adapted to yield
qualitative and quantitative data. These include checklist, pro-forma, questionnaire,
observational checklist, interview schedule, focus group protocols and pictogram.Hence,
adoption of triangulation method of data collection in this present study will give weight to both
divergence and convergence perspectives in searching for answers to questions of interest to
stakeholders who are the key decision makers in the NTI PGDE by DLS programme. These
assortments of instrument were therefore employed to effectively use qualitative and quantitative
methods; focus on the questions of interest to the stakeholders; triangulates findings from
different sources; use dialogue to examine and authenticate stakeholders’ inputs and; promote
stakeholder involvement which guarantees use of findings in decision making.
Given the importance of stakeholders’ participation in evaluation process, in developing
these instruments, the researcher had personal interactions with the zonal co-ordinator, some
state co-ordinators, center managers and quality assurance consultants of this programme. This
gave the researcher insight into the nature of implementation and context of this programme.
35 According to Stufflebeam, involving stakeholders from the beginning insures the process gather
meaningful information in which stakeholders have real interest on which helps in determining
the focus the evaluation. Most importantly, this assures democratic participation of stakeholders
in all stages of the evaluation geared to maximize evaluation impacts and finding’s usability.
Following on the insight, various instruments were developed in line with the CIPP model of
programme evaluation. In that sense these instruments were used for the following purpose.
Questionnairesand surveys: Questionnairesand surveysare best to find out about opinion or an
increase in knowledge and understanding after a short session of a given population. They are
not expensive and can be easy to analyse, quick to administer, and can gather a lot of data. But
the questions need to be worded carefully, respondents’ interpretations of questions may vary
and they do not allow measurement of progress on more complex aspects of learning. It is
always necessary to pilot a questionnaire. Questionnaire instruments are lists of questions or
statements to which the individual is asked to respond inwriting; the response may range from a
checkmark to an extensive written statement.
Researchers such as Gay and Airasian (2000) and Oppenheim, (2001) have provided
general guidelines to be taken into consideration when constructing a questionnaire. They
suggest that a questionnaire should: be as clear and simple as possible; avoid questions that are
too long; ask only important questions which respondents can answer; avoid questions with two
parts; follow a natural logic and order; and in multiple choice questions, ensure that all the
possibilities are covered. Gay and Airasian (2000, p.280) also pointed out that the questionnaire
is a valuable means to collect "standardized, quantifiable information from all members of
population or sample". As a technique of gathering data for social research, the questionnaire has
a number of advantages which could be summarized as follows: they are easy to distribute and
complete; they can be given to a large sample of respondents at the same time; responses are
36 easily quantified and tabulated (depending on the design of the instrument); a written
questionnaire provides a vehicle for expression without risk of embarrassment to the
respondents; and people in remote or distant areas can be reached (Cohen, 2001)
Questionnaires in this study were developed to analyses quantitative and qualitative data.
The questionnaires of this study would be used to find out about stakeholders’ agreement in
knowledge and understanding of the achievement of the programme. They were not expensive to
construct and can be easy to analyse, quick to administer by the researcher, and can gather a lot
of data. For ease of comprehension on the part of the respondents, their items were worded
carefully because respondents’ interpretations of questions may vary.
Interviews: Interviewswith open questions might be better to gather more in-depth information
and insights into what has been learned. They are more flexible, allow clarification of responses
and allow unanticipated outcomes to be uncovered. But they can be intensive, time consuming
and expensive. They are dependent on the person doing the interview. Data need to be
transcribed and can be hard to analyze and compare.
In this study,Interviews schedules with open open-ended questions were used to solicit
more in-depth information and insights from respondents into what has been done and what need
be done in actualizing the goals of the programme. This is because the researcher made them to
be more flexible, allow clarification of responses and allow unanticipated outcomes to be
uncovered. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2001) pointed out that open-ended questions which do
not require answers from a given range of responses means that respondents can answer the
questions in their own way and in their own words; that is the research is responsive to the
participants' own frames of reference. Though intensive, time consuming and expensive, its
qualitative nature is highly dependent for clarifying and triangulating other source of data. This
37 study utilized the face-to-face interview method because it guarantees a much higher return rate.
Interview schedules have therefore been developed in this study to gather detailed data in that
they provide the respondents with the opportunity to freely express their points of view without
restriction or limit. They were designed to be open-ended but their questions, wordings, and
sequence were defined to lead and structure the interview in line with the purpose of the study.
According to Nworgu (2006), this data collection technique is advantageous in evaluation
scenario because it offers the opportunity for the interviewer to gather data in detail and in depth,
hence, verbal as well as non-verbal behaviour can be noted in face-to-face interviews.
Focus groups:Focus groupsare useful to gather ideas and different viewpoints about what has
been learned in a short time. But the information gathered cannot always lead to generalizations
and responses can be difficult to analyze. Meetings are difficult to schedule and need the skills of
a good facilitator. : Focus groups in this studywere useful to pulling together participant
perception and outlook from different viewpoints about what has been learned and experienced
in the programme. This instrument is apt in this study in ascertaining students’ level of
satisfaction and their experience in the programme. In this study, the focus group discussions
were therefore developed to gather students’ general impression of the programme quality and
how it could be improved in terms of the courses and the process of implementation. Such
meetings are difficult to schedule but not impossible, hence the researcher deemed it necessary to
pilot them with the skills of a good facilitator.
Observations: Observations(structured or unstructured) can be useful in obtaining data about
how people think and feel, and what they do. But they tend to be expensive and time consuming,
require certain skills to conduct, and the data collected might be difficult to categorize and
analyze. Although observation could usefully be deployed (mainly with regard to observing
38 teaching methods) but considering a large number of participants, time constraints and also
actually getting observers, this method may not be feasible. Cohen (2001) pointed out that that is
danger of 'going native' as a result of playing a role within such a group and also posed the
question: "How do we know that observers do not lose their perspective and become blind to the
peculiarities that they are supposed to be investigating? Also any observation can be expensive in
terms of both time and money as it has to be carried out for significant (perhaps lengthy) periods
of time.
Observational checklist (structured) in this study was meant to obtain first hand data on
state of the art of inputs of this research. They were developed to obtain real-time assessment on
how subjects actually perform in a given task of research interest. This instrument is meant to be
used to observe what PGDE facilitators do in the classroom in facilitating teaching and learning.
The use of this instrument tends to be expensive and time consuming and require certain skills to
conduct, but the researcher made it usable by categorizing them to gather primary baseline data
on the facilitators’ classroom activities.
Fig. 2: Pros and Cons of Evaluation Instruments
S/N Instrument Advantages Disadvantages
1 Questionnaires and Surveys Types include Self-administered and interview administered by telephone
• Inexpensive • Easy to analyze. • Easy to ensure anonymity. • Can be quickly administered to many
people. • Can provide a lot of data • Easy to model after existing samples
• Wording of questions might bias responses.
• No control for misunderstood questions, missing data, or untruthful responses.
• Not suitable for examining complex issues.
• Can be impersonal. • By telephone: respondents may lack
privacy 2 Interviews
Types include informal conversational interview; Standardized open-ended interview;
• Can allow researcher to get a full range and depth of information.
• Develops relationship with client. • Can be flexible with client. • Can allow you to clarify responses. • Interviewer controls situation, can probe
irrelevant or evasive answers.
• As a rule not suitable for younger children, older people, and non-English speaking persons.
• Not suitable for sensitive topics. • Respondents may lack privacy. • Can be expensive. • May present logistics problems (time,
39
Closed fixed-response interview.
• With good rapport, may obtain useful open-ended comments.
• Usually yields richest data, details, and new insights.
• Best if in-depth information is wanted.
place, privacy, access, safety). • Often requires lengthy data collection
period unless project employs large interviewer staff.
• Can take much time. • Can be hard to analyze and compare. • Interviewer can bias client’s responses.
3 Focus groups
• Useful to gather ideas, different viewpoints, new insights, and for improving question design.
• Researcher can quickly and reliably obtain common impressions and key information about programmes from group.
• Can be efficient way to get much range and depth of information in short time.
• Information obtained can be used to generate survey questions
• Not suited for generalizations about population being studied.
• It can often be difficult to analyze responses.
• A good facilitator is required to ensure safety and closure.
• It can be difficult to schedule people together.
4 Tests Types include Norm-referenced. Criterion-referenced. Performance assessment tests
• Test can provide the "hard" data that administrators and funding agencies often prefer.
• Generally they are relatively easy to administer.
• Good instruments may be available as models
• Available instruments may be unsuitable.
• Developing and validating new, project-specific tests may be expensive and time consuming.
• Objections may be raised because of test unfairness or bias.
5 Observations
Types include Observations and Participant observations.
• If done well, can be best for obtaining data about behaviour of individuals and groups.
• You can view operations of a programme as they are actually occurring.
• Observations can be adapted to events as they occur.
• Can be expensive and time-consuming to conduct.
• Needs well-qualified staff to conduct. • Observation may affect behaviour of
programme participants and deliverers. • Can be difficult to interpret and
categorize observed behaviours. • Can be complex to categorize
observations. 6 Documentation
and Record Review
• Can be objective. • Can be quick (depending on amount of
data involved). • Get comprehensive and historical
information. • Doesn’t interrupt programme or client’s
routine in programme. • Information already exists. • Few biases about information.
• Can also take much time, depending on data involved.
• Data may be difficult to organize. • Can be difficult to interpret/compare
data. • Data may be incomplete or restricted. • Need to be quite clear about what
looking for. • Not a flexible means to get data.
7 Case Studies
• Fully depicts client’s experience in programme input, process and results.
• Can be a powerful means to portray programme to outsiders.
• Usually quite time- consuming to collect, organize and describe.
• Represents depth of information, rather than breadth.
Adopted from McNamara (2003)
40
Evaluation Models
Discussion on the subject of evaluation models/types may appear somewhat academic.
However, since programme evaluation is a comprehensive form of ascertaining to what extent
goals/objectives have been achieved, evaluation literature inevitably leads to the very type of
evaluation that best suit different purpose. To effectively conduct educational programme
evaluation therefore, one first needs to have a programme (a strong impression of what
students/customers/clients actually want and need). This is because type and model of evaluation
one undertakes to improve one’s programmes depends on what one wants to learn about the
programme. One should worry less about what type/model of evaluation one needs and worry
more about what one needs to know to make the programme decisions one needs to make, and
worry also about how one can accurately collect and understand that information. Patton (2002,
p. 244) notes that among the key questions to consider when designing a programme evaluation
the following are of priority: 1) For what purposes is the evaluation being done, i.e. what do you
want to be able to decide as a result of the evaluation? 2) Who are the audiences for the
information from the evaluation, e.g. students, customers, bankers, funders, board, management,
staff, customers, clients, etc? 3) What kinds of information are needed to make the decision you
need to make and/or enlighten your intended audiences, e.g. information to really understand the
process of the product or programme (its inputs, activities and outputs), the customers or clients
who experience the product or programme, strengths and weaknesses of the product or
programme, benefits to students, customers or clients (outcomes), how the product or
programme failed and why, etc. 4) From what sources should the information be collected, e.g.
41 students, employees, customers, clients, groups of customers, or clients and employees together,
etc. 5) How can that information be collected in a reasonable fashion, e.g. questionnaires,
interviews, examining documentation, observing customers or employees, conducting focus
groups among customers or employees, etc. 6) When is the information needed (so, by when
must it be collected)? 7) What resources are available to collect the information?
These questions of Patton stress the need to focus on goals/objectives before initiating an
evaluation. To undertake evaluation one must also choose an appropriate type, and then
determine if anyone “model” or “method”, and/or combination of such, best fits one’s situation.
Some major evaluation models are therefore thematically described below. These evaluation
schemes exist because they have been developed to serve different purposes and satisfy different
goals (i.e. to evaluate with regard to: cost savings, study-time savings, pedagogic improvements,
usability, efficacy, etc.) (Zinovieff, 2008). Therefore, methods are chosen which are capable of
yielding the type of information required. Depending on the purpose of evaluation, there are
many over-reching frameworks available.
Donald Kirkpatrick’s 4 levels
One of the most famous – and applied – evaluation model was developed by Donald J.
Kirkpatrick (notably in his “Evaluating Training Programmes”). Kirkpatrick described 4 levels
of training evaluation: reaction, learning, behaviour and results. He identified the four levels as:
• Reaction – a measure of satisfaction (what the trainees/fellows thought and felt about the
training); evaluation here focuses on the reaction of individuals to the training or other
improvement intervention:
• Learning – a measure of learning (the resulting increase in knowledge or capability); evaluation
here assesses what has been learned as measured with end of course tests;
42 • Behaviour – a measure of behaviour change (extent of behaviour and capability improvement
and implementation/application); evaluation here measures the transfer of what has been learned
back to the workplace;
• Results – a measure of results (the effects on the institutional environment resulting from the
fellows’ performance); evaluation here measures (at least tries to) the impact of the training on
overall organizational results (in the private sector on business results). The major question
guiding this kind of evaluation is, “What impact did the training have on participants in terms of
their reactions, learning, behaviour, and organizational results? (Alkin, 2004).
In the framework of the above summary of “types” of evaluation levels 1 and 2 are
normally seen as part of formative evaluation, whereas levels 3 and 4 are typically associated
with summative evaluation. There have also been attempts to establish a level 5 by measuring the
impact at a societal level (in business terms, by calculating return on investment (ROI). Levels 4
and 5 are associated with normative and/or meta-evaluation to achieve an ideal “full-scale”
evaluation. Level 1 (reaction) and level 2 (knowledge and skills) evaluations can lead to a false
sense of security; there may be no relationship between how participants feel about the training
and improved individual and organizational performance; level 3 evaluations can be used to
refine the training provided, but level 4 will determine whether it has value. It may not be
desirable, practical, or necessary to do all levels of evaluation. Each organization needs to select
the level that will produce the information required to evaluate the target programme. Again,
Kirkpatrick’s model consists of 4 levels that progress in difficulty from 1 (the easiest to conduct)
to 4 (the hardest). When choosing the appropriate model to include in an organizational
assessment, it is essential first to identify the questions the evaluation needs to address. This is
expressed in the tabulation:
Fig. 3: Donald Kirkpatrick’s 4 levels Level Measurement focus Questions addressed 1 - Reaction Trainees’ perceptions What did trainees think of this
training? 2 - Learning Knowledge/skills gained Was there an increase in knowledge
or skill level? 3 - Behaviour Worksite implementation Is new knowledge/skill being used
on the job? 4 - Results Impact on organization What effect did the training have on
the organization?
43
Level 1 (Reaction) is the most commonly-used method of evaluation, probably because it
is the easiest to administer and evaluate. This level produces what has been dubbed the “smile
sheet”, which measures how well the trainees like the training. Level 2 (Learning) is not as well-
used in business settings as an evaluation technique; public sector/academic settings are more
likely to use level 2 techniques; these are most reliable when pre- and post- evaluations are
utilized. Few studies have actually gone beyond the first two levels. And in this (understandable,
no doubt) failure lies much of the current sense of dissatisfaction with evaluation exercises. The
fact is that in both private and public sectors there is today an increasing need to show concrete
evidence that training/fellowships are achieving their goals of changing behaviour on the job
(level 3) and are also contributing to the institutional “bottom” line. The problem is that trainers
will probably not do levels 3 and 4 evaluations unless they are told to do so. Level 3 evaluations
are difficult because human behaviour needs to be measured. Some believe level 4 evaluations
may actually be easier to accomplish than level 3, since level 4 is (at least ideally) tied to
measurable information. Some trainers therefore believe that a positive level 3 evaluation implies
success at level 4. For UN agencies, the issue is whether they are prepared to spend the money to
carry out genuine evaluation exercises which go beyond the first two levels. If it is, they would
then need to decide on the most appropriate evaluation model/methodology.
Critique of the Kirkpatrick model
In particular there have been questions with respect to the levels of reaction and learning. Before
assessing reactions some critics call for a broad analysis of the organizational context, its values,
practises and current situation. Also, they call for a more explicit focus on the needs of the
organization and how these tie to the development of objectives and the design of the most
appropriate solution. Research undertaken has shown that, just because people liked a course, it
44 does not necessarily mean they learned anything. In some cases it appears that the more the
trainees liked a course, the less they learned.
Within the results level there are suggestions the benefits to the organization should be
made more explicit and focus on monetary values such as ROI. There may also be a need for
evaluating beyond the organization by examining the effects on the economy and the societal
consequences. Additionally, there is a need to identify the reasons for the evaluation; the tools
and techniques employed will alter depending on why the evaluation is taking place and who is
for it. The evaluation strategy must be tailored to the audience within the organization rather than
putting measures in place just for the sake of it. For instance, the Indiana University website
cited below identifies 7 specific limitations of the Kirkpatrick model: Not situation driven; Not
programme specific; It depends on contextual needs; You need to specify unit of analysis
(groups or teams, individual, organization); Misleading – Levels are different perspectives not a
hierarchy; Level 1 can only provide participant reaction and is subjective and; Most institutions
do level 1 or level 2 evaluations which only provide limited information.
E.F. Holton (The flawed four-level evaluation model”, 1996) is one of the main critics.
To him the levels form a “taxonomy” of outcomes rather than a model, due mostly to the
assumption of causal relationships between the levels that are not empirically tested. Holton also
argues that no evaluation can be validated without measuring and accounting for the intervening
variables that effect learning and transfer processes. For Holton, Kirkpatrick provides a model
for thinking about how to evaluate but the model does little to inform what to evaluate and how
to link the results to strategy. Holton and other critics specifically note that Kirkpatrick’s model:
Implies a hierarchy of values related to the different values, with organizational performance
(result) being seen as more important than reaction, etc.; Assumes that the levels are each
associated with the previous and next levels; this causal relationship, it is argued, has not always
45 been established by research; Is too “simple” and fails to take account of the various intervening
variables affecting learning and transfer; Implies correlation between learner reactions and
measures of learning and subsequent measures of changed behaviour – but we know now that
“satisfaction” is not necessarily related to good learning and changed behaviour (see also above);
Implies that performance during training is a prediction of post-training performance; Ignores the
frequent failure of training to transfer into the workplace (due to the range of organizational
factors which may inhibit success) and; Ignores – when it comes to the level of “result” – the
inherent difficulty on linking soft skills training to hard results.
Objective-Based Evaluation: In this, Tyler (1949) was pre-eminent. Directly and indirectly, he
influenced many noteworthy developments such as objective-referenced testing, objective-based
programme evaluation, mastery learning, achievement test construction, item banking; the
taxonomic classification of educational outcomes, and co-operative test development (Madaus &
Stufflebeam, 1989). Objective-based evaluation describes whether students have met their goals,
with the results informing how to handle new instructional strategy. This might inform decisions
about whether to revise, adopt or reject. The evaluation in this model is almost entirely
summative (at the end) as it relies on the measuring of students' achievements. Tyler's model has
four stages: (1) setting the objectives to be attained; (2) determining the types of learning
experiences to be provided; (3) deciding how these should be organized; and (4) determining the
ways in which the achievement of objectives would be measured (Bellon & Handler, 1982).
According to Chen (2009), one noted weakness of this approach is that it tends to very much
limit the scope and perception of the evaluation and may cause the evaluator to miss important
outcomes not directly related to the goals of the evaluation. That is unexpected outcomes may be
overlooked. Arguably it is too prescriptive and blinkered and may thus produce an outcome
which may render a disservice to the programme. Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (2007) commented
46 that the selection of appropriate objectives to evaluate was problematic as not all objectives
could be evaluated and the process by which objectives were selected was open to bias. This
model tends to largely ignore process. The emphasis is on product, that is, the test outcomes.
Consumer-Orientated Evaluation: The emphasis of this approach is to help consumers choose
among competing programmes or products. ConsumerReports provides an example of this type
of evaluation. The major question addressed by this evaluation is, “Would an educated consumer
choose this programme or product?” The focus here is on meeting consumer needs and societal
ideals more than achieving the developer's objectives for a given programme (Guerra-Lopez,
2008). Scriven (1967) made a major contribution to this approach by developing the distinction
between formative (during) and summative (at the end) evaluation. He proposed that summative
evaluation enables administrators to decide whether the entire finished curriculum, refined by the
use of formative evaluation, represents a sufficiently significant advance or improvement on the
available alternatives to justify the expense of adoption by a school system (Fitzpatrick, 2004).
Scriven proposed a set of seminal criteria for evaluating any education product. He calls it a Key
Evaluation Checklist (Scriven, 1991, 2002). He continues to revise this checklist and used it as
part of a data-reduction process, where large amounts of data are obtained and assessed and then
synthesized in an overall judgment of value (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 2007).
The checklist also addresses meta-evaluation. Stufflebeam, Madaus and Kellaghan,
(2000) comment that this type of evaluation requires highly credible and competent experts with
sufficient resources to conduct a thorough evaluation. Beyer (1995) indicated that the primary
purpose of formative evaluation is to improve the quality of the programme being developed so
that it will be possible to achieve the objectives for which it was designed. Brown & Gerhardt
(2002) regarded summative evaluation as useful to conduct if it is needed to provide decision-
makers or potential customers with judgments about the worth or merit of a programme in
47 relation to important criteria. The strengths of a consumer-orientated approach are thought to be
that it makes evaluation of products a service and it advances the knowledge of consumers about
the criteria most appropriate for use in selecting educational materials or services. They thus
become more aware of the products. The weaknesses of this approach are that it does not appear
to necessarily help practitioners do a better job and it requires credible and competent
evaluations. It can thus increase the cost of products because of the time and money spent on
product testing. It is considered to be essentially a "backwards-mapping approach" and does not
help make predictions about future impacts (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 2007). Also it tends to
play down the nature of human interaction with the products being tested.
Discrepancy Model of Evaluation:The major exponent here is Provus. Provus (1971) considered
that pre-established objectives formed the basis for the evaluation. He also emphasised the
importance of providing data about the consistency of (or discrepancy between) what was
planned and what was actually executed. His focus is on improvement. The model has four basic
phases: (1) establishing the objectives; (2) collecting evidence of compliance with the standards;
(3) identifying any discrepancies between pre-established objectives and what was
accomplished; and (4) identifying and starting corrective actions. This model lends itself to a
self-evaluation framework and a systematic approach to improvement.
Goal-Free Evaluation:This approach focuses on the actual outcomes rather than the intended
outcomes of a programme. Thus, the evaluator has minimal contact with the programme
managers and staff and is unaware of the programme’s stated goals and objectives. According to
Alkin (2004), the major question addressed in this kind of evaluation is, “What are all the effects
of the programme, including any side effects?This approach developed by Scriven (1974)
compensates for inherent weaknesses in a goal-orientated approach by providing an unbiased
perspective of on-going programme.The evaluator here remains purposely uninformed about the
48 programme's predetermined goals and looks for all the effects of a programme regardless of its
developer's intended objectives. If a programme is meeting its intended purpose, the evaluation
should confirm this. The evaluator will also be more likely in this model to find unanticipated
effects that goal-based evaluation might miss because of the specificity of their search.
Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (2007) believe that goal-free evaluation provides important
supplementary information, expands the sources of evaluative information, is effective for
finding unexpected information, is cost-efficient, and is welcomed by clients. Scriven also
emphasised the importance of not only evaluating to test if goals have been met but also to see if
the goals themselves are worthy. Brown (1989) however came to realise that whilst evaluating to
test if goals and objectives are met the evaluation procedures could also be used to facilitate
curriculum change and improvement and so began a paradigm shift in programme evaluation
research from product to process-oriented approaches.
Responsive/Client-Centred Evaluation:This approach calls for evaluators to be responsive to the
information needs of various audiences or stakeholders. The major question guiding this kind of
evaluation is, What does the programme look like to different people? (Alkin, 2004). Stake
(1975) called this model (first mooted by him in 1967 but not formulated until 1975) responsive
evaluation. Instead of focusing, as Tyler had, on whether programme intentions had been
realised, he realised and indeed assumed that programme intentions would change over time thus
requiring continuing communication between evaluator and stakeholders for the purposes of
discovering, investigating, and addressing important issues (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 2007).
This approach aims at observing and identifying all (or as many as possible) of the concerns,
issues, and consequences integral to the human services enterprise. Participants in this approach
are not simply the direct beneficiary target group of a project but other stakeholders and potential
beneficiaries are also within its contemplation. There is rarely a formal plan drawn up in advance
49 but rather patterns in the data are looked for as the evaluation progresses. Data is gathered in a
variety of ways, using a range of techniques and sought from many different sources. The
evaluator's role is to represent multiple realistic and values rather than through singular
perspectives. According to Chen (2009), the disadvantage of this model of evaluation is that
unless a very experienced evaluator facilitates the process it can degenerate from an "organic"
approach to one which is chaotic and lacking in focus.
Utilization-Focused Evaluation:Although many authors have contributed to this approach,
Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (2007) consider Patton as the most prominent figure. In his book,
published in 1997, Utilization-Focused Evaluation, Patton sets out his approach to this type of
evaluation. He describes it as one done "for and with specified intended primary users for
specific, intended uses". In short, this approach to evaluation is concerned with designing
evaluations that inform decision making. According to Patton (1997), utilization focused
programme evaluation is evaluation done for and with specific, intended primary users for
specific, intended uses. As such, it assumes that stakeholders will have a high degree of
involvement in many, if not all, phases of the evaluation. The major question being addressed is,
what are the information needs of stakeholders, and how will they use the findings?
Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP): The CIPP model was developed by Daniel
Stufflebeam from 1971 onwards (his latest work is “Evaluation Theory, Models, and
Applications”, 2007). It distinguishes four types of evaluation (which we have encountered
tangentially in earlier pages):Context evaluation – which helps in planning and developing
objectives; Input evaluation – which helps to determine the design by examining capability,
resources and different strategies; Process evaluation – which helps to control the operations by
providing on-going feedback and; Product evaluation – which helps to judge and react to the
programme attainments in terms of outputs and outcomes. In general, these four parts of an
50 evaluation respectively ask. What needs to be done? How should it be done? Is it being done?
Did it succeed?In its checklist, the “Did it succeed?” or product evaluation part is divided into
impact, effectiveness, sustainability, and transportability evaluations.
Respectively, these four product evaluation subparts ask. Were the right beneficiaries reached?
Were their needs met? Were the gains for the beneficiaries sustained? Did the processes that
produced the gains prove transportable and adaptable for effective use in other settings?
As we will see later the “subparts” of the “product evaluation”, i.e. impact, effectiveness and
sustainability, are particular relevance to educational programmes.
To the present day, educational evaluators have always used the CIPP method. It is a
guideline providing a systematic structure for programme evaluation. According to Tseng, Diez,
Lou, Tsai and Tsai, 2010), the components of CIPP could be described as follow. Context
evaluation: deals with whether a curriculum includes focus, goals and curriculum objectives,
meaning the organizational parameters. It also assesses the environment where evaluation takes
place. The aggregate data and information gathered serve as a basis for curriculum decisions and
the subsequent development of objectives.
Context evaluation therefore includes: policy, surroundings, needs assessment, at the
least. Input evaluation: involves an examination of the intended content of teaching (i.e. the skills
or strategies the students learn), and it relates to deciding the resources and strategies used to
achieve curriculum goals and objectives. Besides, the purpose of input evaluation should support
the choosing of resources. Therefore, input evaluation must include work plan, equipment, funds,
and personnel resources, at the least. This item is used to revise the curriculum plan.
Process evaluation: relates to the implementation of teaching. Based upon results of the
pilot test or evaluation, it is necessary for process evaluation to describe the student’s need in
order to reconstruct the programme. Its goals are as follows: to forecast the mistake of designs;
51 to provide information for decisions; and to assure the procedure of plans. By using process
evaluation, it can provide regular feedback to the programme director. The researchers can
understand the original plan, find the process, trace the change of plan, and provide the material
to guarantee its efficiency and achievement. Finally, the ways to gather the data of process
evaluation are multiple. These include the use of teacher behaviour measure, teacher rating
measures, standardized achievement measures, expert referenced measures, and teacher-
constructed knowledge and performance instructions.
Product evaluation: is the assessment of teaching outcomes. The purpose is to carry out
an instructional product evaluation, where stakeholders try to find out whether the instructional
ideas actually made a difference. The product evaluation could determine whether the curriculum
should be modified, fine-tuned, or terminated and it also could evaluate the output of programme
activities. Based upon the information related to background, input, process, and so on, it refers
to comparing the difference between the outcomes and a predetermined standard or absolute
standard. It can provide the reasonable explanation and consultation for decision-making. The
goal is to evaluate the plan of programme in the endgame or particular gradations.
Nevertheless, a system-based evaluation model like the CIPP seems to be more useful in
terms of thinking about the overall context and situation but they may not provide sufficient
granularity. According to Zinovieff (2008), systems-based models may not represent the
dynamic interactions between the design and the evaluation of training. This is because few of
these models provide detailed descriptions of the processes involved in each steps. None provide
tools for evaluation (Tseng, Diez, Lou, Tsai & Tsai, 2010). Furthermore, these models do not
address the collaborative process of evaluation, that is, the different roles and responsibilities that
people may play during an evaluation process.
52
Fig. 4: The four types of evaluation in the CIPP model context Input Process Product Aim To diagnose
problems and assess needs
To assess the possible changes
To ensure the suggested changes are carried out as intended, and to identify problems in implementation
To find out whether the instructional programme or idea actually made a difference
Method Using methods such as classroom interviews, diagnostic tests, analysis of students’ written work
Using methods such as literature search, visits to exemplary programmes, pilot trials, ideas from teachers in the field
Monitoring the change process, by observing and recording the activities that take place, and both the expected and unexpected results
Measuring changes in performance compared with students’ work begun, including whether students have learned to transfer their knowledge to new problems. Measures can include interviews with participants, class tests, analysis of students’ written work
Decision- making
To provide a basis for deciding on the changes needed
To find where there is the most support for change and to find out which solutions are most feasible
To help in fine-tuning the programme, and also to provide data which can be used later to interpret the impact of the change
To decide whether the changes should be continued, terminated or modified
Adopted from Stufflebeam (2002)
Fig. 5: Stufflebeam’s CIPP Model
Evaluation Component
Evaluation Activity
Context
Attitudes, values, beliefs that members of a group or organization that impact or influence the programme
Input Assesses competing strategies and the work plans and budgets of the selected approach
Process Monitors, documents and assesses programme activities Product Impact Assesses a programme’s reach to the target population Product Effectiveness Assesses quality & significance of outcomes Product Sustainability Assesses extent to which a programme’s contributions are successfully
53
institutionalized and continued over time Product Transportability
Assesses extent to which a programme has (or could be) successfully adapted and applied elsewhere
Adopted from Stufflebeam's CIPP checklist (2003)
Triangulation
The evaluation of educational programmes in meeting their objectives is a difficult
process, partly due to the variety of stakeholders involved in making judgments. In the
educational setting, stakeholders may include students, parents, school personnel, government
agencies, and graduate employers. The evaluation of a unit can vary with each stakeholder
(Harvey & Green, 1993). So there is the potential for multiple notions of what quality
encompasses and what learning outcomes it generates. A comprehensive evaluation process
should therefore take the different conceptualizations into account by adopting triangulation of
data. Triangulated data collection refers to the utilization of three or more sources of data
(Bryman, 2010). Triangulating data increases the validity and reliability of the evaluation
findings because it allows cross-checking findings from other alternative sources.
Triangulation involves cross-checking the existence of certain phenomena and the
veracity of individual accounts by cross matching data from a number sources and subsequently
comparing and contrasting one account with another in order to produce as full and balanced a
study as possible.Patton (2002) stated that the use of multiple data resources such as interviews,
observations and document analysis enables the researcher or evaluator to validate and cross-
check findings. Hence, evaluators can build on the strengths of each type of data collection while
minimizing the weakness of any single approach. The advantage of using different techniques, as
Marshall and Rossman (1995) argued, is that limitations in one method can be compensated for
by the strengths of a complementary one.By way of illustration, Denzin (1978) observed that
54 triangulation can take many forms, but its basic feature will be the combination of two or more
different research strategies in the study of the same empirical units. The use of triangulated data
collection can increase confidence in the data findings as the assumptions made from findings
gained from single sourced data may be limited (Bryman, 2010). For instance, by combining
both quantitative and qualitative (mixed methods) in this study, the researcher can address some
of the weaknesses of objective-based approach in the process of evaluation.
Functions of mixed-methods approach, such as initiation, triangulation, complementarity
and development can possibly contribute to improving programme progress, avoiding
information narrowness and uncovering side effects. The examination of this design also reveals
that the mixed-methods approach is not only possible, but more effective, and has higher
validity. The mixed-methods is a more useful and accountable approach, which can be used in
integration with the traditional objective-based approach to conceive and implement evaluation,
especially in programme evaluations with broader audiences, longer terms, and more complex
goals (Luo& Dappen, 2003).
An evaluation is a purposeful, systematic, and careful collection and analysis of
information used for the purpose of documenting the effectiveness and impact of programmes,
establishing accountability and identifying areas needing change and improvement (sharehu,
2013). However, traditionally, there has often been the reliance on one method of data collection
and analysis. Hence, much research has employed particular methods or techniques out
ofmethodological parochialism or ethnocentrism. This is not helpful because according to Chen
(2009), all researchers, perspectives and methods are value laden,biased, limited as well as
illuminated by their framework, particular focus andblind spots. Methodologists often push
particular pet methods either because those are the only ones they have familiarity with, or
because they believe their methods are superior to others or easier. Cohen, Manion and Morrison
55 (2001)are quick to point out that triangulation does not prescribe or suggest which methods the
researcher should use. The potential problem within triangulation therefore is deciding which
methods to use. This present study did not have a problem in deciding which research methods to
use. As the research is evaluative in design and discourse based, hence mixed method have been
adopted.
In this instance, the triangulated data sources would include qualitative and quantitative
data, potentially collected from students, facilitators, employers, organizational supervisors, and
co-coordinators. The triangulated approach in this present study entails sourcing information
from the student, facilitators, center managers, desk officers, coordinators and supervisory
bodies. However, the value of the adopting triangulation is limited when the information is
utilized only at monotonous level (Hay & O’Donoghue, 2009). For example, it is worth
observing that data gathered from observation and questionnaire would have been based on
opinion and perception of respondents. The researcher also considered that the presence of an
observer might well have influenced the patterns of behaviour of those who were being
observed. In taking care of such monotony, triangulation of data becomes apt. for instance, in a
separate process of facilitators’ assessment on course content delivery, student feedback should
often be gathered at a group level through focus discussions or interview to validate the
assessment of facilitators. This separate process could also be integrated with the cited and
organizational feedback from the implementers. The challenge of adopting this method is in
developing a flexible framework with wide applicability across the spectrum of specific and
generalist issues under focus.
In this present study, this will be done while maintaining a critical attitude to teacher
education pedagogical and vocational value. This is because the development of competencies
needs to be contextual, meeting the levels of work-ready skills and knowledge that are required
56 of the graduates. The triangulated approach is therefore sound for this study. Ideally, it will help
data to be analyzed at group level to inform continuous improvement strategies. This is because
the commitment of triangulation to constructive alignment in the context of evaluation appears to
be a useful operationalization of teaching and learning objectives in general. It is proposed that
when each is considered alone, competency analysis, and constructive alignment are limited in
scope. Therefore, they may not have limited benefit in the evaluation and continuous
improvement of placements.
Similarly, triangulation of data can serve as an exercise in clarification: in particular it
can help to clarify the formulation of the research problem and the most appropriate ways in
which problems or aspects of problems may be theorized and studied.Cook and Richardt (1979)
stated that there are at least three benefits in using a combination of qualitative and quantitative
research techniques:
ü Multiple purposes - a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods can make it
possible to satisfy the research needs.
ü Each method building upon the other - each of the two methods has uses that are geared
and best suited for certain purposes.
ü Triangulation through converging operations - the use of both methods helps to reduce
bias.
In this present study, the researcher considered that, owing to the complexity of distance learning
system of education and the need to collect a significant amount of information, questionnaires,
checklists, on-site observation, focus group protocols, photographs, interviews and extant
documents are the most effective vehicles to collect relevant data. In consequence, triangulation
of data from different sources will help take care of these challenges.
Analytic Induction
Analytic induction (AI) is a research logic used tocollect data, develop analysis, and
organize the presentation of research findings. AI is often used by qualitative researchers in their
57 efforts to generalize about social behaviour. Ugwu (2013) seesthe qualitative method as very
attractive in that it involves collecting information in depth but form a relatively small number of
cases. Concepts are developed intuitively from the data, and are then defined, refined and their
implications deduced from the data. Its formal objective is causal explanation, a specification of
the individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for the emergence of some part of
social life. AI calls for the progressive redefinition of the phenomenon to be explained (the
explanandum) and of explanatory factors (the explanans), such that a perfect (sometimes called
“universal”) relationship is maintained. Initial cases are inspected to locate common factors and
provisional explanations.
As new cases are examined and initial hypotheses are contradicted, the explanation is
reworked in one or both of two ways. The definition of the explanandum may be redefined so
that troublesome cases either become consistent with the explanans or are placed outside the
scope of the inquiry; or the explanans may be revised so that all cases of the target phenomenon
display the explanatory conditions. There is nomethodological value in piling up confirming
cases; the strategy is exclusively qualitative, seeking encounters with new varieties of data in
order to force revisions that will make the analysis valid when applied to an increasingly diverse
range of cases. The investigation continues until the researcher can no longer practically pursue
negative cases.
Originally understood as an alternative tostatistical sampling methodologies, “analytic
induction” was coined by Znaniecki (1934), who, through analogies to methods in chemistry and
physics, touted AI as a more “scientific” approach to causal explanation than “enumerative
induction” that produces probabilistic statements about relationships. After a strong but
sympathetic critique by Turner (1953), AI shed the promise of producing laws of causal
determinism that would permit prediction. The methodology subsequently became diffused as a
58 common strategy for analyzingqualitative data in ethnographic research. AI is nowpracticed in
accordance with Znaniecki’s earlier (1928),less famous call for a phenomenologically grounded
sociology. It continues primarily as a way to developexplanations of the interactional processes
through which people develop homogeneously experienced, distinctive forms of social action.
There is no particular analytical scale to thephenomena that may be addressed with AI.
The research problem may be macro social events such as revolutionarysocial movements, mid-
scale phenomena such as ongoing ways of being a student in a given type of educational
institution, or everyday micro-social phenomena such as expressive gestures that can be seen
clearly only when videotape is reviewed repeatedly.
Overview of Teacher Education in Nigeria
The process of teaching is at the heart of education. Hence, the expertise, skills,
pedagogical know-how and organizational and technical competence of teachers are widely
considered to be central to educational improvement (Sarita & Tomar, 2004). This is because
the teacher is one of the major stakeholders in teaching learning process. Teachers are the
implementer of all the educational policies and programmes. The success of the school depends
upon the competency and commitment of the teachers (Mahmood &Azhar, 2013). Teacher
education is therefore an integral part of the education system at any level. Hence, policy-makers
pay attention to educational, social and economic factors that contribute to improved teacher
education and enhanced returns to investment in education. Teachers’ professional development
is that component of educational system concerned with the training of teachers to acquire the
necessary competencies and skills in teaching for improvement in the quality of teachers in the
school system (Iyunade, 2011). It is often planned and systematically tailored and applied for the
refinement of those who teach or will teach.
59
The history of teacher education in the country however dates back to the late 18th
century during the early Christian missionary era. According to Akinyeye, Olajumoke and
Amudat (2013), the rise of modern teaching profession in Nigeria coincides with the coming of
Christian missionaries who held tenaciously to the belief that proper Christianization of Africans
hinges on impartation of western education. The training of teachers in Nigeria thus began with
the introduction of formal education by the missionaries (Iyunade, 2011). Efforts were then
geared towards helping the individuals fulfil their roles as catechists, interpreters and teachers of
the Bible. At that time, teacher education was of the informal type; the teacher being the village
catechist chosen and trained by a priest to teach the new converts in the church. As missionary
education metamorphosed into western education, the need to train teachers to take charge of the
education process emerged (Ademiluyi, 2010). Thus, formalized teacher professional education
began in 1895 with the establishment of a training school in Abeokuta by the Church Missionary
Society (CMS) (Akintudire, 2010).
Upon the expulsion of the missionaries from Abeokuta, the institution was moved to
Lagos and later Oyo in 1896 as St. Andrew’s College, Oyo. The Baptist Mission also founded
the Baptist Training College at Ogbomoso in 1897, with the Wesleyan Methodist Missionary
Society establishing the Wesley College in Ibadan in 1918 for the training of catechists and
teachers (Ademiluyi, 2010). In the Eastern part of Nigeria, the Hope Waddell Institute was
founded in Calabar in 1899. The training of teachers in the Northern part of the country started in
1909 when the then Colonial Government established the Nassarawa Schools. Katsina and Toro
Colleges were later established in 1927 and 1929 respectively (Durosaro, 2006). In this system,
the pre – requisite qualification for admission into a teacher training institution was the Standard
IV certificate. Students that passed the examination were recruited as pupil – teachers for a
period of two years, passed the pupil – teacher’s certificate examination and would then act as
60 assistant teacher before the two year training course. At the end of the two years, the candidate
would sit for and passed a prescribed teacher’s certificate examination and would be certified if
he passed the examination (Durosaro, 2006; Muktari, 2006).
However, this teacher education programme concentrated on training teachers for
primary schools. At the initial stage, the missionaries devoted themselves to the development of
primary education in the country while the pupil – teacher system was the adopted method of
training (Ugwu, 2005). Then the amalgamation of northern and southern departments of
education in 1929 triggered the colonial governments’ interest in teachers’ education (Jekayinfa,
2006). At this time, the teacher education system was largely haphazard and pretty much
unregulated with attendant consequences on the educational outcomes (Durosaro, 2006). This
was because the many specialties in teaching, with their wide range of required skills and
knowledge mean that teachers need to be well prepared to a degree for the vastly different nature
of teaching functions, challenges and tasks therein. Thus, the Phelps – Stokes report of 1925
severely criticized the teacher training system of the missionaries, noting that it was
unsatisfactory and inadequate in terms of curriculum and supervision, while it led to the
overwork and under payment of the pupil-teachers (Iyunade, 2011). Hence, the system was
redesigned to redress the perceived inadequacies.
This led to the emergence of two types or levels of teacher training institutions each of
which lasted for two years; the Elementary Training College for lower primary school teachers
and the Higher Elementary Training College for higher primary school teachers. The Ashby
Commission report of 1960 further observed a lot of anomalies in the colonial education in
Nigeria, including the Teacher Training system which was seen to be highly inadequate (Osuji,
2009). Lord Ashby – an educator per excellence and one time Vice Chancellor of Cambridge
University observed that; the quality of teachers at the primary and secondary level is poor and
61 great majority of teachers have neither enough general education to qualify them to teach, nor
adequate professional training. The situation was very critical during the missionary era. This
resulted in the recommendation for massive expansion of intermediate education for teachers
aimed at upgrading the existing teaching force leading to the emergence of Advanced Teachers
Colleges (which awards Grade I certificate), and which later metamorphosed into Colleges of
Education meant to produce well-qualified non graduate teachers with the Nigeria Certificate in
Education (NCE) for secondary schools. The report also suggested the creation of more
universities, the institution of a Bachelor degree in Education to award such degrees as the
Bachelor of Education (B.Ed), Bachelor of Arts in Education (B.A. Ed) and Bachelor of Science
in Education (B.Sc.Ed) and the training of more teachers for the nation’s secondary schools.
In 1969, a National Curriculum Conference was held; the report of which spelt out the
objectives and contents of all levels of education, including teacher education in Nigeria. The
1969 Curriculum Conference provided the basis for the National Policy on Education of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria (1977) revised in1981, 1998 and 2004. The National Policy on
Education implementation blueprint specified the types of teacher that were needed to operate
the educational system in Nigeria. Six types of teachers, distinguished by their qualifications,
were expected to operate the Nigerian educational system. According to the Nigerian
Educational Research and Development Council (NERDC) as cited by Durosaro (2006), these
were: 1) Pre – primary education: Grade II teachers with NCE teachers as head; 2) Primary
education: NCE teachers with graduate teachers as head; 3) Junior secondary schools: NCE and
university graduate teachers; 4) Senior secondary schools: NCE and University graduates with
professional qualifications in their disciplines; 5) Technical Colleges, Polytechnics and Colleges
of Education: university graduates with post graduate qualifications in their disciplines together
with professional qualifications, practical industrial exposure and experience and; 6) University:
62 University graduates with postgraduate qualifications together with professional qualifications,
practical industrial exposure and experience
In line with the National Policy on Education as outlined above, the NCE became the
minimum qualification for entry into the teaching profession in Nigeria and the Grade II
certificate was subsequently abolished. These teacher-education programmes are designed to
prepare effective teachers by providing theoretical awareness of teaching and developing
teaching competency and teaching ability. Their programmes cover those theoretical aspects
through which knowledge, pertaining to specific subjects are transmitted to students and teachers
are prospected. This is because any teacher education programme must be able to create
necessary awareness among teachers about their new roles and responsibilities. According to
Fatima (2010), the purpose of a teacher – preparation programme should be to develop in each
student his general education and personal culture, his ability to teach and educate others, an
awareness of principles which underlie good human relations and a sense of responsibility to
contribute by teaching and example to social, cultural and economic progress. Rao and Rao,
2005) opine that investing in such teacher education has beneficial returns because of its
multiplier effects, which influences many people’s learning outcomes. This is because teacher
education is closely related to social change. In multifaceted societies, teacher education has a
very arduous role in preparing and orientating teachers with a view to bringing about desirable
and effective social harmonization.
Teacher education in this study is therefore the training that teachers or potential teachers
receive either to be classified as professional teachers or to improve professionalism as teachers.
Teachers’ education is the process which nurtures prospective teachers and updates qualified
teachers’ knowledge and skills in the form of continuous professional development. It revolves
around the policies and procedures designed to equip prospective teachers with the knowledge,
63 attitude, behaviour and skills required to perform their duties in the classrooms (Nakpodia and
Urien, 2011). Okafor (2008) defined teacher education as the form of professional education
which is planned and systematically tailored and applied for the cultivation of those who teach or
will teach particularly but not exclusively, in primary and post primary levels of education.
With more commitment from the government, and pursuant to implementation of Ashby
report, the country witnessed a substantial improvement in teacher training and focused on
professionalism (Ugwu, 2005). According to National Policy on Education (2004), the goals of
teacher education in Nigeria are to;
1. produce highly motivated, conscientious and efficient classroom teachers for all levels of
our educational system;
2. encourage further the spirit of enquiry and creativity in teachers;
3. help teachers to fit into social life of the community and the society at large and enhance
their commitment to national goals;
4. provide teachers with the intellectual and professional background adequate for their
assignment and make them adaptable to changing situations;
5. enhance teachers‟ commitment to the teaching profession.
Since teaching is a dynamic profession, efforts in meeting these objectives requires
continuous review in order to address contemporary issues and challenges, teacher education in
Nigeria has thus witnessed a lot of innovation in the past decades. These innovations were aimed
at improving teaching and learning and to effectively implement modern educational policies.
The Federal Republic of Nigeria through the National Policy on Education (2004) therefore
noted that the minimum qualification for teaching at senior secondary school is the degree or its
equivalent. Such policy statement if strictly followed without certain adjustment in teacher
education programme will certainly throw many serving teachers out of the teaching profession
64 thereby creating acute shortage of teachers in schools and increasing the rate of unemployment in
the country. Hence an in-service training programme for teachers becomes pertinent. In response
to this, the NTI instituted a PGDE by DLS for graduates in cognate discipline aimed at
upgrading, training and retraining of teachers to meet up this need. In meeting the requirements
of the TRCN, the modes of training of teachers in this programme are in four major components
and are highlighted below.
• A general broad education programme to bring out depth in the intellectual knowledge
of teachers. This aspect constitutes a core aspect of teacher education programme
designed for all trainees.
• The second component is the subject area specialization. In many training centres and
universities, a trainee is expected to specialize in maximum of two subjects‟
combination.
• The third component focuses on professional courses designed to ensure trainees are
grounded in science of teaching and learning. They include courses on philosophy of
education, educational psychology, sociology of education, curriculum and instruction,
guidance and counselling, educational administration, etc.
• The last component is practical intercom designed in two modes. The first mode is micro
teaching. Micro teaching is experimental in nature aimed at inculcating required
confidence in a classroom setting. The duration of teachings and number of students per
class is scaled down to a considerable size a non-experienced teacher can easily manage.
The actual teaching practice may take duration of two semesters. Student-teachers are
posted to schools to teach under the supervision of experienced teachers in the schools of
their posting, under supervision.
The implication is that the success of any educational system largely depends on the teacher
efficiency. According to Akinsolu (2010), teachers are the most important factor in the
effectiveness of schools and in the quality of learning. NTI PGDE by DLS was therefore
introduced to enhance the careers and accelerate the professional development of educators.
However, the quality of teachers that teacher-training institutions can produce for the nation’s
65 education system is largely dependent on the adequacy and quality of resources provided for the
training institutions (Asodike& Ebong, 2012 and Siddiqui, 2006). Osong (2014) noted that
because of improper planning, lack of fund, staffing, infrastructure and facilities, the above
teacher education policies in Nigerian educational system are poorly implemented. Hence, the
need for routine evaluation of teacher education programmes. Evaluation of teacher education
programme involves collecting evidence from various stakeholders, for the purpose of improving
the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process. A successful evaluation can generate
outcomes that are valid, reliable and indicate directions for necessary action.
The National Teachers Institute (NTI) Kaduna
The National Teachers’ Institute, Kaduna was established in 1976 by the Federal
Government to produce qualified teachers and upgrade the quality of teachers in the nation’s
education sector, and to contribute in various ways to the general educational development of the
country using distance education system. The NTI operates from over 350 learning centres
throughout the country, drawing field staff from other Colleges of Education and the
Universities. The Institute has state offices established in all the States in the country. These
offices have coordinators who oversee the activities in the learning centres. The Institute’s
enabling Law Act No. 7 of 1978charged it, to among other things; to provide courses of
instruction leading to the development, upgrading and certification of teachers as specified in the
relevant syllabus using Distance Education Techniques. With the launching of the Universal
Basic Education (UBE) programme by the Federal Government in 1999, the National Teachers’
Institute has been further tasked with the production of qualified teachers to meet the new
challenges posed by acute shortage of teachers needed to implement the programme.
66 The National Teachers’ Institute Act, 1978, establishing the Institute mandated it in section 3 a,
b, etc, to carry out the following functions:
(a) Upgrade under-qualified and untrained teachers.
(b) Provide refresher and other upgrading courses for teachers.
(c) Organize workshops, seminars and conferences, which would assist in the improvement
of teachers.
(d) Conduct Examinations
(e) Carry out research in conjunction with other bodies on any matter relevant to educational
development in the country.
(f) Formulate policies and initiate programmes at all levels of education designed to improve
by way of research the quality and content of education in Nigeria.
(g) Assess from time to time the training programmes offered by institutions controlled by or
associated with the Institute, with a view to ascertaining the professional competence of
those institutions.
(h) Offer such assistance, either alone or in co-operation with educational bodies as may be
requested by the institutions controlled by or associated with the Institute.
(i) Foster and enhance international co-operation in the education of teachers, and
(j) Perform such other functions as necessary or expedient for the full discharge of all the
functions of the Council under the Act.
In pursuant of these objectives, the institute is currently running programmes by Distance
Learning. So far, the institution has lived up to expectation as it has effectively carried out its
programmes to achieve the objectives for which it was established (Sharehu, 2011).This is as
evident in the programmes it has established and their number of beneficiaries. The institute’s
programmes and dates of commencement are:
• The Teachers’ Grade Two Certificate (TC II by DLS) 1982-2006, focused on teachers
that had lower than the TCII.
• The Nigeria Certificate in Education (N.C.E by DLS), 1990 to date, ensures that
graduates of the TCII upgrade themselves to NCE which is the minimum teaching
qualification in Nigeria.
67
• The Pivotal Teacher Training Programme (PTTP by DLS), 2000 to 2003, also trained
teachers that had below the TCII.
• Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) (affiliated to National Open University)
2005 to date, is 18-month training in pedagogy for graduate teachers without teaching
qualification.
• Advanced Diploma in Education (ADE) (in School Supervision and Inspection, Early
Childhood Education and Guidance & Counselling), 2005 to date, is an month training
programme that provides in-depth knowledge and skills in specialized fields in
education, and
• Special Teacher Upgrading Programme (STUP), 2007 to date, is an intensive 2year
programme aimed at fast tracking the attainment of the national goal of making NCE the
minimum qualification.
The institution operates through established bodies. They are: The School of General
Studies; The School of Educational Innovation; The School of Advanced Studies and; The
Facilities Department. The duties of bodies are as provided in Supplement to Official Gazette
(1978) Part A. As at 2010, there are 68,863 NCE, 7450 PGDE, 362 ADE, and 54,048 (1st set
26,748 and 2nd set 72, 3000) STUP students on the programme. Since inception, the Institution
has graduated 4999,955 TC II, 153,783 NCE, 39,546 PTTP, 9,948 PGDE, and 236 ADE
teachers. The above underscore the fact that, the institute has tremendously assisted many
serving teachers by offering them the opportunities to upgrade and improve their knowledge and
skill without withdrawing from schools for the purpose of retraining or upgrading as in the case
with full time study. This is because, DLS is not only cost effective but have been an enabler,
opening access to many who for one reason or the other are unable to study full time.
The combination of intellectual efforts with physical abilities in the planning,
coefficients were considered satisfactory to attest to the reliability of the instrument.
Procedure for Data Collection
The researcher approached the NTI South East zonal coordinators’ office with an
introductory letter from the Department of Science Education, University of Nigeria for
authorization to conduct an academic research in the selected study centers. The approval was
successfully gotten in written consent. This was used to approach the state coordinators for data
collection at their centers. In the conduct of the study, the researcher undertook personal visits to
the selected centers for data collection. There, the validated instruments were administered to the
sampled students, facilitators, Centre Managers and Center Desk officers after the purpose of the
study had been explained to them. This was however done with the help of six research
assistants; one in each of the centers visited. The research assistants helped in administration and
collection of questionnaire from the respondents. The research assistants were briefed on the
purpose and methodology of this study so that they could handle questions from the respondents.
With respect to collection of data with checklists, the researcher had guided tours of the
centers to observe the plant and input facilities. This means that the checklist was personally
‘checked’ by the researcher. With visit to the zonal and state coordinators’ offices, interview
appointments were approved. Questionnaire for National Open University of Nigeria staff was
mailed through the office of the zonal coordinator.
126
The researcher personally conducted the focus group meetings in each of the centers.
Participation of volunteers were facilitated by Centre Managers. For some ethical consideration,
names were not used in the focus group at any time. Participants in the focus group were thus
considered anonymous. Each participant was rather assigned a number. All information collected
in the focus group were tied only to the specified number in order to ensure confidentiality. The
focus group lasted approximately 45 to 90 minutes and was conducted during an agreed upon
time determined by the focus group participants. The researcher took notes of salient points
during the course of the discussion.
Method of Data Analyses
The collected data were arranged and analyzed according to the research questions that
guided the study. To interpret data obtained through questionnaire, mean and standard deviation
scores were used. Quantitative data collected were coded and analyzed using Statistical Package
for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 18.0. For its items, a mean of 2.5 and above indicate
acceptance (the acceptable mean set by the researcher is 2.5 and above). Checklists were
interpreted with reference to TRCN manual on minimum standard for teacher education. Ranks
were used to interpret the observational checklist.
In analyzing interviews and focused group discussions, a qualitative technique (analytic
induction) was used to present the findings. This involved a critical assessment of each response
and examining it using thematic interpretation in accordance with the main objectives of the
study and were then presented in narrative excerpts within the report. Interviews and focus group
data were thus qualitatively interpreted with reference to the objectives of the NTI PGDE by
DLS and the goals of this present study. Findings from different sources and groups of
respondents were triangulated to ensure their veracity.
127
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
128
The results of this study are presented in this chapter. The findings are analyzed and
presented in tables according to the research questions that guided the study.
Research Question One:
What is the context of implementing the National Teachers Institute Post Graduate
Diploma in Education by distance learning system in South East, Nigeria?
Question on context evaluation was answered with a rating scale on achievement of
objectives of the programme, focus group protocol, interview session with CDO and CM,
interview session with employers and a rating scale on the challenges of the programme.
Table 1: Mean ratings and standard deviations on the extent NTI has achieved the objectives of thePGDE programmein South East through distance learning system The NTI PGDE programme has been successful in X SD D Training and upgrade of teachers in cognate discipline 3.2 1.40 S providing background for teachers to go for further studies 2.9 2.23 S Producing teachers for the successful implementation of educational policies 2.4 1.35 NS
Providing opportunities for the training of teachers 2.6 1.26 S Promoting healthy learning environment. 1.7 1.34 NS Eliminating the inherent problems of teachers leaving schools for further training 2.7 1.29 S
Producing competent teachers who will demonstrate the knowledge of the subject in theories and principles 2.8 1.50 S
Motivating teachers to enroll and upgrade 2.9 1.42 S Distributing course materials to students 1.3 1.58 NS Providing orientation to teachers on effective pedagogy through workshops and seminars 1.7 1.30 NS
Producing highly motivated , conscientious and efficient teachers for secondary education 2.6 1.50 S
Encouraging further the spirit of enquiry and creativity in teachers 2.8 1.47 S Helping teachers fit into social life of the community and enhance their commitment to national goals 2.0 1.35 NS
Providing teachers with intellectual and professional background adequate for their assignment 2.8 1.41 S
Enhance teachers’ commitment to the teaching profession 2.2 1.21 NS Key: X = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; D = Decision; S = Successful; NS = Not Successful
Table 1 shows the extent the NTI has realized its PGDE objectives in the South East
States. It displays the item by item Mean Scores (X) and Standard Deviation (SD) on the
responses. Since the acceptable mean score set by the researcher is 2.5 and above, one can
129 therefore deduce that the NTI has taken measures to implement her PGDE objectives and has
been successful intraining and upgrade of teachers in cognate discipline; providing
background for teachers to go for further studies; providing opportunities for the training of
teachers; eliminating the inherent problems of teachers leaving schools for further training
and in producing competent teachers who will demonstrate the knowledge of the subject in
theories and principles. Other areas of success of the programme are in motivating teachers to
enroll and upgrade; producing highly motivated, conscientious and efficient teachers for
secondary education; encouraging further the spirit of enquiry and creativity in teachers and;
providing teachers with intellectual and professional background adequate for their
assignment.
On the other hand, the programme has not been able to produce enough teachers for
the successful implementation of educational policies; promote healthy learning environment;
motivate teachers to enroll and upgrade; distribute course materials to students; provide
orientation to teachers on effective pedagogy through workshops and seminars; enhance
teachers’ commitment to the teaching profession and helpthem fit into social life of the
community and enhance their commitment to national goals. The high standard deviations of
the items suggest that there are high levels of disagreement of the respondents on the items.
Table 2: Mean ratings and standard deviations on the challenges in implementing NTI PGDE programmes by DLS Challenges encountered in implementing NTI PGDE programmes by DLS in the South East are X SD D
Poor accommodation for lecture halls 1.2 1.04 NC Poor funding of NTI programme 1.7 1.25 NC
130
Poor management of NTI programme by coordinators 2.5 1.11 NC Delay of payment of course facilitators allowances or claims 3.8 1.20 C
untimely supply of course books to students 2.0 1.54 NC Inadequate supply of instructional materials 1.5 1.24 NC Ineffective use of varieties of teaching methods by course facilitators in teaching/learning 2.2 1.30 NC
Shortage of qualified course facilitators 1.5 1.27 NC Problem of accreditation of full science course in study centers 1.0 1.34 NC
Inefficient transfer process of students from one state to another 2.2 1.37 NC
Admission of unqualified student 2.2 1.29 NC Omission of students’ continuous assessment or examination scores 2.8 1.05 C
poor management and delivering of courses by facilitators
1.2 1.15 NC
Lack of proper guidance and counseling services in study centers 2.2 1.21 NC
Lack of infrastructures in the study centres (library, laboratory)
1.4 1.94 NC
Ineffective public address system 2.0 1.03 NC Poor performance of students 3.1 1.06 C
Key: X = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; D = Decision; C =Not Challenging; NC = Not Challenging
Table 2 indicates that the major challenges encountered include delay of payment of
course facilitators allowances or claims; omission of students’ continuous assessment or
examination scores and; poor performance of students. These challenges are no doubt hindering
the smooth running of the centers in South East states. These findings suggest that the problem
of NTI distance learning programme is not in the policy that established it but in the
implementation.
Research Question Two:
What inputs are utilized in implementing the National Teachers Institute Post Graduate
Diploma in Education by distance learning system in South East Nigeria?
131
Question on input evaluation was answered with a checklist on input facility, a checklist
on quality and quantity of facilitators, an observational checklist on facilitators’ effectiveness, a
rating scale on curriculum assessment, and a rating scale on facilitators’ assessment. Findings of
these instruments that required table analyses were presented below:
Table 3: Checklist showing the adequacy of input facilities for implementation of NTI PGDE programme by distance learning system
Input facilities provided Minimum Standard
Number Available Decision Rule
Classroom 1:50 per sdt Classroom=12:students=409 1:34
Adequate
Inside classroom with public address system
At least 2per center
Non available Not Adequate
Textbook on subjects At least 5 per subject
Textbook=112:Subject=13 9:1
Adequate
Duplicating machine 1 per center Non belonging to the center management
Not Adequate
Office stores 1 per center Non available Not Adequate
Teacher student ratio 1.30 Teachers=33:students=409 1:12
Adequate
Chairs and desk in the class room.
1 per student Chairs/desks=409:students=409 1:1
Adequate
Classroom windows At least 4 per class
Classroom=12:window=72 1:6
Adequate
Toilet system I per 30 students
Non available Not Adequate
Examination hall At least 1 per center
Exam hall=12:centers=6 2:1
Adequate
Library facilities/benches and stools
1 per center Non available Not Adequate
Laboratory size 10x8 and 12 x 9 square
1 per center Non available Not Adequate
Black board/white board 2 per class room
Board=24:classroom=12 2:1
Adequate
General course staff room
At least 1 center
Non available Not Adequate
Tutors with laptop All staff. 45 Adequate
Table 3 is on input evaluation with respect to plant and facilities provided at the study
centers. It shows the minimum standard as stated in the blue document that set up the NTI PGDE
programme by distance learning system. It also indicates the adequacy of availability of these
132 needed input facilities as used to implement the programme. This shows that the available
facilities that are adequate are class room; textbook on subjects, chairs and desk in the class room
and class room windows; examination hall and; black board/white board. The findings also
indicate that the teacher student ratio (1:12) is commensurate while the number of facilitators
with ICT facilities as laptop is adequate. The inadequate facilities at the center include inside
classroom display of public address system, cassettes, film/ videos / radio; duplicating machine;
office stores and; toilet system. Others are library facilities/benches and stools; laboratory size
10x8 and 12 x 9 square and general course staff room.
Table 4: Checklist showing the adequacy of human resources for implementing NTI PGDE programme by distance learning system curriculum
Courses No of facilitators
Facilitators’ qualifications
No of contact p/month
Foundations of education- historical, philosophical psychological and sociological
2 M.ED 3
Educational management 3 M.ED 2 Curriculum Organization and development 2 M.ED 3 Instructional design and development 3 M.ED 2 Vocational, career and guidance counseling 3 M.ED 2 Comparative education 1 M.ED 2 Special Teaching Methods for Individual Subject
4 M.ED 3
Tests, measurement and evaluation 2 M.ED 2 Educational research methods 4 M.ED 2 Statistical and data analysis 2 M.ED 2 Psychology of Learning 2 M.ED 2 Developmental Psychology 2 M.ED 2 Teaching practice 1 M.ED
Table 4 shows the number of facilitators per course and qualifications of NTI academic
staff used in implementing the PGDE curriculum. These indicate that on average, the institute
maintains the National Universities Commission (NUC)qualification ofMasters in Education as a
minimum qualification for teaching any post graduate course. With respect to ratio of facilitators
per course (1:2), it could be inferred that the number is sufficient since each course except
133 comparative education are taught at least twice a month as stipulated in the curriculum
implementation guideline for each cycle.
Table 5: Observational Checklist on Facilitators’ Effectiveness by CDO
Instructor personality X Knowledge of the subject-matter X Classroom management skills X Questioning skills X Communication skills X Interpersonal skills X Enthusiasm X Direct teaching technical skills X Indirect teaching technical skills X Evaluative skills X
The notion of teacher training indicates that the facilitators’ characteristics are extremely
important. If facilitators are not well trained and groomed, they cannot effectively deliver the
concepts and techniques of teaching to the prospective teachers. In particular, Centre Desk
Supervisors were asked to observe and rank facilitators on major characteristics relating to their
effectiveness in the classroom. The findings are contained in Table 5 and shows that the
facilitators are above average in personality; knowledge of the subject-matter; questioning skills;
communication skills and; interpersonal skills. They were also ranked high in enthusiasm; to
direct teaching of technical skills and possessing evaluative skills. The facilitators were found
wanting in classroom management skills and indirect teaching technical skills were they
performed below average.
Curriculum textbooks I use in this programme are good in X SD D MEETING LEARNERS’ NEEDS AND INTERESTS: do you find the beginning activities attractive enough to catch the attention of all categories of students: the slow/fast learners; the high/low achievers
3.30 0.87 A
SIGNIFICANCE: the subject-matter are formed from basic ideas/concepts/principles and daily life experiences 3.0 0.80 A
VALIDITY: I do not find the content difficult to comprehend 2.3 0.81 NA
134
Table 6: Mean ratings and standard deviations of students assessment of curriculum textbooks used in theprogramme
Key:A = Adequate; NA = Not Adequate
In this section of input evaluation, students were asked to assess the extent to which
NTIcurriculum textbooks used in the programme provide meaningful guidance based on the
reality of teachers lives. The instrument did not undertake a review of the general outlay of
curriculum used in the programme. The purposeof focusing on the curriculum textbooks is to
address the extent to whichteachers perceive their rationality and the extent to which they have
been adapted to meet the needs of individual learners. This shows that nearly all the students
agree on the suitability of the texts except on validity and gradient of difficulty of the content
which can be rounded up by stating that students find the content difficult to comprehend and;
secondly, the activities embodied in the content are not suitable bearing in mind the knowledge
level and the fact that they are mature student.
PRACTICABILITY/LEARNABILITY: The content is practicable enough for me to perform? 3.0 0.76 A
TRANSFERABILITY: I find the learning experiences embodied in the content transferable from school to life outside the schoolyard and from one learning situation to another?
2.8 0.86 A
GRADIENT OF DIFFICULTY OF THE CONTENT: The activities embodied in the content are suitable bearing in mind my knowledge level and the fact that I am a mature student
2.0 0.93 NA
FEEDBACK: There are workbooks, review questions and answers to help me judge my performances as to whether or not I have achieved specific objectives?
3.1 0.84 A
VARIETY: the curriculum activities provide me with various learning opportunities 3.0 0.93 A
RELEVANCE: The learning experience embodied in the curriculum are relevant to what I intend to achieve in this programme 2.5 0.92 A
BALANCE: The curriculum maintains a balance among the subject disciplines so that one subject area does not overshadow others? 2.9 0.93 A
SCOPE OF COVERAGE: Sufficient subject-matter is covered in each form/level? 2.9 0.91 A
CONTINUITY: The content and learning opportunities are continuous so as to ensure that I smoothly move from one concept level to the next, without difficulties in understanding what is taught at the higher level
2.5 0.86 A
SEQUENCE: The order of curriculum sequence and content allows for subsequent experiences to build on earlier ones 2.7 0.51 A
INTEGRATION: The learning opportunities are organized in such a way that I relate one field of knowledge to another 3.1 0.70 A
135
Table 7: Mean ratings and standard deviations of course facilitators’ assessment of the NTI PGDE programme by DLS
Statement X SD D The NTI PGDE Distance Learning Scheme Scope
Sets moderate objectives for students 2.85 0.83 S Has a reasonable subject scope 2.70 0.87 S Selects contents, which reflect contemporary developments in knowledge 3.13 0.83 S Gives students sufficient learning experience 3.00 0.83 S Utilizes varieties of teaching methods 2.50 0.94 S Is relevant to Nigeria educational goals/objectives for teacher education at that level
2.71 0.74 S
Maintains continuity from one cycle to another 3.23 0.81 S Has well-sequenced learning content 2.84 0.80 S Has been successfully implemented 2.62 0.77 S
The Teaching/Learning Materials Consists of; Difficult textbooks written for students 2.73 0.69 S Inadequate guide material for course facilitators 2.69 0.46 S Insufficient textbooks for students 3.16 0.44 S Books supplied at unaffordable prices 2.06 0.34 NS Write ups without study guides 2.10 0.49 NS
The Study Centre Activities Consist of well-organized weekend activities for students 2.50 0.67 S Utilizes good student centered approaches 2.55 0.67 S Are sufficient for students to achieve their personal goals 2.90 0.29 S Makes the study centers to be vibrant 2.03 0.55 NS
NTI Tests/Examinations Are usually well organized 2.85 0.35 S Are usually free from malpractices 2.43 0.69 NS Are fair to every student 3.24 0.43 S Are usually valid 2.90 0.29 S Have reliable results 2.60 0.49 S
NTI Course Facilitators Attend classes regularly 2.83 0.69 S Are punctual to classes 369 0.59 S Are enthusiastic for their work 2.98 0.13 S Carry moderate work loads 2.99 0.59 S Relate well with students 3.20 0.35 S Are effective teachers 3.04 0.24 S
NTI Students Are punctual for classes 2.34 0.33 NS Are regular for classes 2.40 0.81 NS Show much interest in studying 2.33 0.93 NS Have good understanding of textual materials 2.10 0.86 NS Follow usable rules/regulations governing the center 2.64 0.94 S Have aptitude for higher education 3.00 0.76 S Make useful contribution in the process of teaching and learning 2.55 0.63 S Are generally good 3.03 0.46 S
136
Findings on facilitators’assessment of the NTI PGDE programme are summarized in
Tables 7. For simplicity, these areas were grouped into six major purviews namely assessment
of: general scope the programme; teaching/learning materials; study center
activities;tests/examinations;course facilitators and; students. The results show that facilitators
rated the programme moderately high. Thus, it suggest that access to and components of the NTI
PGDE programme help students acquire certain knowledge, attitudes, strategies and skills
needed to be effective teachers. Respondents also indicated that they are relatively comfortable
with the teaching/learning materials available. While the study center activities are thought to be
sufficiently engaging but not vibrant.With respect to evaluation, facilitators believe that test
administration is valid but not usually free from malpractices. From the table, it can be seen that
the course facilitators gave themselves very high ratings on all aspect while students were found
wanting in punctuality and interest.
Research Question Three:
What is the implementation process of the National Teachers Institute Post Graduate
Diploma in Education by distance learning system in South East Nigeria?
Questionon process evaluation was answered with a rating scale assessing facilitators’
activities, a rating scale on adopted evaluation technique, and a rating scale on oversight
functions of the NOUN.
Table 8: Mean ratings and standard deviations of students’ perceptionof the activities of facilitators Facilitators activities X SD D facilitators use different ways to group students in the classroom (pair work, group work, individual work and whole-class work)
2.37 .86 NS
Facilitators’ set up rules and routines were clear 3.08 .78 S facilitators check students' learning process to carry everyone along 2.61 .88 S Facilitators give equal attention to all students in the class 3.11 .82 S The teaching methodology used by facilitators are helpful and effective 2.28 .96 NS Facilitators present tasks in an interesting and enthusiastic way which made the tasks seem achievable to the students
2.45 .80 NS
137
Facilitators boost students' self-confidence in adopting learner centered pedagogy
2.23 .88 NS
When needed facilitators are available for guidance and advice
3.09 .83 S
Facilitators give feedback to me about what I had done and what I still needed to work on
2.50 .91 S
Facilitators give me sufficient feedback on my performance in the assignments/quizzes/exams
2.86 .88 S
The marking received by facilitators are fair 2.57 .87 S Quiz/exam results demonstrated my actual proficiency in ability 3.02 .80 S Facilitators set out the assessment criteria before the tests 2.62 .88 S Homework /assignments are relevant to course objectives 2.81 .97 S Interaction between students are assessed 1.31 .99 NS Facilitators choose different materials or activities in order to assess your non cognitive domain
2.17 .85 NS
Key: S = satisfactory; NS = Not Satisfactory
Table 8 indicates 16 classroom behaviours of facilitators as identified by students. This
shows that facilitators’ set up rules and routines that are clear; check the students' learning
process to carry everyone along; give equal attention to all students in the class; are available for
guidance and advice when needed; give feedback about what students had done and what they
still need to work on; give sufficient feedback on performance in the assignments/quizzes/exams;
the marking given to students are fair, hence; Quiz/exam results received demonstrates students’
actual proficiency in ability. Facilitators were also rated high in setting out assessment criteria
before the tests; giving out HW /assignments that are relevant to course objectives. Students
however indicatedthat they are not satisfied with their course facilitators with respect to use
different ways to group students in the classroom (pair work, group work, individual work and
whole-class work); adopting teaching methodology that are helpful and effective and in;
presenting tasks in an interesting and enthusiastic way to seem achievable to the students. The
result also show that facilitators were also found wanting in boosting students' self-confidence by
adopting learner centered pedagogy; assessing interaction between students and; choosing
different materials or activities in order to assess non cognitive domain.
138
Table 9: Mean ratings and standard deviations of Alumni assessment of techniques adopted in evaluating students’ achievement
Assessment Technique X SD D Quizzes 2.9 .94 U Midterm Exam 1.1 .86 NU Final Exam (one short) 1.4 .75 NU Homework/ Assignment 3.1 .76 U Class performance (seminar) 1.5 .83 NU Participation and attendance 1.2 .83 NU Oral report 1.2 .90 NU Teaching Practice 2.2 .94 NU
Key: U = Utilized; NU = Not Utilized
Table 9 gives a summary of responses obtained in the questionnaires that were filled by
NTI PGDE graduates in relation to the major evaluation techniques used in assessing their
progress. This shows that the centers very often evaluate student progress through continuous
assessment procedures as quizzes and homework/assignment. However,midterm exam; final
exam (one short); class performance (seminar); participation and attendance and oral report are
not often utilized as a form of assessing students’ progress in the programme. Interestingly, the
results also suggest that teaching practice exercise is really organized to expose students to real
life experience of the world of work they will meet after graduation.
Table 10: Mean ratings and standard deviations of supervisory role of NOUN
S/N At the NTI study centers NOUN: X SD D 1 Routinely supervise NTI programme on semester basis 3.42 0.55 S 2 Routinely inspect to ensure minimum accreditation status 3.10 0.32 S 3 Inspect departmental facilities for teaching and learning 2.55 0.36 S 4 Monitor facilitators’ qualification 3.21 0.54 S 5 Inspect facilitators’ population per department 2.51 1.57 S 6 Inspect laboratory facilities 1.88 0.94 NS 7 Inspect buildings conduciveness for learning 2.50 0.53 S 8 Inspect library facilities 1.58 0.97 NS
Key: S = Supervised; NS = Not Supervised
Table 10 shows the extent to which the National Open University of Nigeria carries out its
supervisory functions as the affiliate institution. This result strongly suggests that to a great extent
139 the NOUN are in check of the implementation process of the programme in the zone. When such
data is triangulated with the findings on interview schedules of the coordinators and the center
managers, it was learnt that technical committees have been established in each state for proper
monitoring, coordinating, and supervising of NTI programmes.There were no inspection of
laboratory and library facilities. This is not strange because according to the findings of the checklist
on input evaluation, these facilities are not provided at the center. However, the NOUN sees
supervision as a vital process used to promote teaching and learning performance. Supervision of
the school programme is a necessary condition that must be put in place to ensure that planning and
implementation of the institute programmes are successfully carried out. Implementing minimum
standard and ensuring that the institute regularly train and retrain her facilitators among others were
mentioned as priority areas of NOUN.
Research Question Four:
What are the outcomes of the National Teachers Institute Post Graduate Diploma in Education by distance learning system in South East Nigeria?
Question on product evaluation was answered with an Alumni assessment scale and a
rating scale of employers on teachers’ effectiveness.
Table 11:self-evaluation of NTI PGDE graduates on imbibed skills/competencies/abilities
Skills/Competencies/Abilities Mean Gain Made
I could/can Before After Adopt learner centered instructional strategies 2.3 3.7 1.4
Appreciate individual difference in my students 3.6 3.7 0.1
Encourages students to participate in class work 3.0 3.9 0.9
Encourages my students to ask questions 3.4 3.6 0.2 Facilitates discussions among students 2.2 3.3 1.1 Demonstrates simple experiments for my students 2.0 2.1 0.1
Relates information presented in the lesson to students’ lives
shows similar expectations for both boys and girls 3.8 4.0 0.2
Ensure that students receive equal time and attention regardless of their background
3.6 3.7 0.1
Maintains an engaging class, without pressuring the students
2.7 3.8 1.1
Communicates both verbally and nonverbally in a positive and friendly manner
2.1 3.1 1.0
Adapts lessons for students with special learning needs
2.2 2.3 0.1
While the pupils are working, the teacher moves around the classroom to provide support and guidance
3.4 3.8 0.4
I addresses students by name 3.6 3.6 0 Encourages group study and cooperative learning 3.1 3.8 0.7
Use continuous assessment in evaluating learning achievement
4.0 4.0 0
Assesses pupils with different evaluation techniques 3.1 3.4 0.3
Table 11 illustrates a self-assessment rating scale of NTI PGDE graduates who were
requested to evaluate themselves with respect to specific gains of the programme they underwent
on their classroom practices. The responses were based on a 4point likert-type scale in which
they were asked to tick the alternative that best described their opinion before taking NTI PGDE
courses and after taking NTI PGDE courses. In the scale, participants indicated the extent to
which the PGDE programme helped them acquire specific classroom skills, competencies and
abilities. As the findings indicate, participants were unanimous with regard to most of the
knowledge, attitudes and abilities which the PGDE programme has helped them to acquire but as
indicated in the last column, the marginal change in behaviour was marginal.
Teachers’ Effectiveness Scale Table 12: Effectiveness of NTI PGDE Graduates
Teacher Readiness for Instruction X SD D
141
Writes good lesson notes 3.29 0.69 E Formulates adequate instructional objectives 3.34 0.66 E Selects relevant instructional materials 3.27 0.69 E Provides for step-wise lesson preparation 3.54 0.35 E Prepares coherent lesson plans 3.39 0.62 E Explores the environment for useable instructional resources 3.40 0.61 E Sets appropriates expectations for students 2.46 0.33 I 3.24 0.56 E
Teacher Personality Shows interests in individual students 3.51 0.50 E Has patience with students 3.49 0.53 E Smiles in class 3.46 0.53 E Is neat in appearance 3.49 0.53 E Is generally friendly 3.39 0.55 E Looks well-groomed 3.46 0.57 E Dresses shabbily 3.37 0.56 E Wears neat hair 3.36 0.61 E Works with self confidence 3.27 0.72 E Appears vibrant in class 3.32 0.71 E Over-dresses for class 3.27 0.68 E Handles lessons with confidence 3.34 0.69 E Is an excellent teacher 3.31 0.71 E 3.39 0.61 E
Teachers’ Knowledge of The Subject Matter Demonstrates mastery of the subject-matter 3.24 0.71 E Is generally literate 3.24 0.70 E Feels at home with numeracy skills 3.18 0.71 E Knows but cannot deliver 3.36 0.58 E Is generally knowledgeable in subject-matter area 3.42 0.61 E 3.29 0.66 E
Classroom Management Skills Goes around helping students in class 3.10 0.58 E Has a nature’s corner in class 2.92 0.60 E Formulates rules/regulations binding students 3.38 0.60 E Punishes offenders 3.32 0.67 E Keeps students’ attendance records 3.35 0.66 E Keeps records of students’ performances 2.74 0.64 E Orderly manages chalkboard space 3.28 0.71 E Maintains orderliness in class 3.25 0.64 E Uses class time effectively 3.29 0.68 E 3.27 0.64 E
Questioning Skills Interspaces Questions in the course of lesson delivery 3.21 0.72 E Fairly distributes questions to reach everybody 3.27 0.66 E Asks direct questions 3.26 0.65 E Asks questions that require high cognitive skills 3.31 0.62 E Repeats questions 3.30 0.66 E Answers own questions 3.21 0.67 E Repeats students’ answers 3.30 0.64 E Gives insights into questions 3.11 0.61 E 3.25 0.65 E
142
Communication Skills Makes orderly/logical communication of information 3.14 0.70 E Talks clearly 2.80 0.83 E Speaks fluently while teaching 2.94 0.62 E Amplifies students’ responses 2.90 0.76 E Gives students attention 2.84 0.79 E Uses vocabulary appropriate for the class 2.92 0.13 E Explains sometimes in vernacular 2.54 0.73 E Talks while writing on the board 1.98 0.71 I Establishes eye contact with students 1.58 0.67 I Varies pitch, stress and tone 2.16 0.77 I Makes facial expressions 2.46 4.59 I Writes legibly on the chalkboard 2.14 0.39 I Communicates effectively in English language 1.10 0.32 I Writes well in English language 1.15 0.36 I Lacks self-expression 3.21 0.54 E Makes spelling mistakes on the board 2.51 1.57 E Demonstrates the ability to read and understand professional material
1.88 0.94 I
2.37 0.91 I Interpersonal Skills
Is friendly with students 2.54 0.73 E Praises students when they do well 1.98 0.71 I Asks the class to clap for those who do well in class 1.58 0.67 I Smiles at the students 2.16 0.77 I Informs students of their progress 2.46 4.59 I Encourages students to participate in class 2.14 0.39 I Has a good rapport with people 2.11 0.73 I Calls students by name 1.53 0.94 I Jokes with students 1.66 0.61 I Accepts students’ ideas 1.40 0.93 I Criticizes students 1.09 0.29 I Is harsh to students 1.56 0.37 I Is warm to students 2.94 0.71 E Punishes students 2.16 0.87 I Makes students to answer questions 3.20 0.76 E 2.03 0.94 I
Teacher Enthusiasm Starts classes promptly 1.92 0.72 I Varies tone and pitch 1.62 0.75 I Makes frequent demonstrative movements 2.37 0.68 I Makes facial expressions to show joy, sadness, awe etc. 3.07 0.52 E Uses many adjectives and descriptive words 1.99 0.65 I Works with vigour 1.68 0.49 I Has a high degree of drive and vitality 2.94 0.55 E Is enthusiastic for his/her work 2.02 0.63 I 2.20 0.62 I
Direct Teaching Technical Skills Asks students questions 3.22 0.74 E Gives notes of lessons to students 2.88 0.82 E Utilizes advance organizers in lesson presentation 2.70 0.71 E
143
Uses teaching/study guide 2.52 0.81 E Appears resourceful in lesson delivery 2.86 0.76 E Uses varied teaching methods 2.84 0.26 E Guides students to select learning activities 2.24 0.91 I Talks most often in class 3.45 0.67 E Tells stories to students 3.35 0.88 E Reads for students to listen 3.76 0.50 E Makes students stay quietly 3.73 0.51 E 3.05 0.69 E
Indirect Teaching Technical Skills Encourages students to participate in class 2.6 0.57 E Accepts contributions from students 2.3 0.85 I Makes students work in groups 1.2 0.70 I Provides for individual differences 2.2 0.78 I Develops lesson notes as he/she teaches 2.0 0.08 I Takes students out on excursions 1.0 0.88 I Uses students’ ideas in teaching 2.2 0.85 I Praises students when they make contributions 2.7 0.89 E 2.03 0.70 I
Tests/Examination Skills Gives homework/assignment 3.7 0.94 E Marks homework/assignment 2.2 0.60 I Sets fair examination questions 2.4 0.63 I Marks test/examinations 3.4 0.78 E Assigns difficult work to students 3.8 0.80 E Is fair in marking test/examinations 3.7 0.67 E Relates evaluation with instructional objectives 3.4 0.90 E Keeps records/charts of students’ progress 2.4 0.71 I Makes encouraging comments in students’ work-books 3.5 0.78 E Gives continuous assessment to students 3.5 0.64 E Gives high scores to the same students 3.3 0.72 E Coaches students for success in final exams 3.6 0.63 E Coaches students for success in external exams 3.4 1.05 E Helps students to develop self confidence in taking examinations through nice comments 1.2 1.15
I
3.11 0.79 E Teachers’ Aspiration For Professional Growth/Development
Has interest for further education 3.7 0.42 E Has enrolled for higher education 3.3 0.58 E Reads very widely 2.7 0.50 E Reads textbooks and teacher’s guides 3.5 0.50 E Is a member of a professional body 3.5 0.64 E Attends professional conferences 3.7 0.45 E Longs for professional growth development 3.8 0.40 E 3.46 0.50 E
Key: E = Effective; I = Ineffective
144
Employers’ assessment of the NTI PGDE produced teachers is one of the most effective
measures of the programme performance since they are the direct consumer of the product. Thus,
having been supervising NTI PGDE graduates over some time, identified employers were
requested to provide their rating of NTI PGDE products working under them. For simplicity, the
key priority areas were grouped into 12 major themesand the table above shows that teachers
were found to be effective (3.24)with respect to readiness for instruction; effective (3.39)in
This study evaluated theNational teachers Institute’s post graduate diploma in education
by distance learning system in South East Nigeria. The following conclusions are made on the
basis of the findings of the study.
1. Significant efforts have been made by the institute to realize the objectives of the PGDE
by DLS in South East, Nigeria
2. With respect to input evaluation, the institute does not place emphases on vital
educational services and facilities like library, counselling services and laboratory
180
3. The implementation process adopted by the institute has been effective in mediating the
gap between PGDE by DLS students and facilitators
4. The institute’s PGDE by DLS programme has helped graduates improve classroom
practices
Implications of the Study
The findings of this study have some important educational implications. The implications of
salient findings as they relate to objectives of NTI PGDE by distance learning are highlighted.
• With respect to context evaluation, it was found that the National Teachers Institute has
implemented measures to realize the objectives of its PGDE by DLS programme
objectives.This implies that the institute to a high degree provides effective pre and in-
service training for teachers through her PGDE distance learning System. Thus, the
institute’scontribution is significant in producing effective manpower to meeting the
demands of teachers
• Laboratory,library and counselling services are not provided at the study centers. This
implies that the NTI does not place emphases on provision of basic educational services.
This has serious implications on the learning experience of teachers since they are
expected to have practical and hands on experience in the course of the programme.
Centers were also found wanting with respect to provision and utilization of ICT. Hence,
the NPE’s objective of laying sound basis for scientific and reflective thinking and
providing the child with basic tools for further educational advancement, including
preparation for trades and craft of the locality is already undermined.
181
• It was found out that the centers have qualified instructors; this implies that with proper
supervision, the available manpower can effectively implement the programme
curriculum.
• Findings of the study showed that the centers very often assess student through many
evaluation strategies but rarely evaluate practical techniques like teaching practice. This
implies that the students are only evaluated on cognitive domain, while neglecting the
affective and psychomotor domains. Consequently, NTI PGDE produced teachers may
have developed the basic insights and understandings of subject matter but since the drill
of teaching practice is not properly implemented, these teachers may not be exposed to
the pedagogy of teaching or understanding basic practices, the learning process or
problems of behaviour peculiar to the concerned age group.
Recommendations
Bearing in mind the findings of this study, the following recommendations are made towards
improving the NTI PGDE programme in the South East, Nigeria.
1. Secondary school teachers should be trained in pedagogy consistent with the themes and
areas provided by the teachers, students and policy makers who participated in this
baseline study.
2. The goals and priorities of participants as set forth in the surveys, focus group discussions
and in-depth interviews should be incorporated into the NTI PGDE programme. This
includes the contextualized curriculum prospects as enumerated by Alumni and the
expectations of employers of labour to complement contemporary technique of teacher
education.
182
3. Techniques, skills and competency trainings, such as classroom practice and conflict
resolution should be prioritized in teacher education. Similar skills and competencies
should be emphasized in both training of teachers in the PGDE and NCE programmes of
the NTI.
4. Ways and means should be established for wide sectors of stakeholders –students,
facilitators, school heads, , community members– to monitor, evaluate and improve NTI
teacher education programmes, including through both formal and non-formal
discussions.
5. The relevant links to achievement of the objectives of the programme as those identified
in the survey tools and instruments such as proper monitoring and constant review of the
programme curriculum should be incorporated into NTI blueprint.
6. Community components of teacher education programmes should be assimilated into the
NTI programmes over time so that the NTI PGDE programme activities has the capacity
to emanates from the school to the community. This will go a long way to relate what is
taught and learned in the programme to the needs of the community and in fostering
acceptance of NTI graduates by employers of labour.
7. The goals and priorities of guidance and counseling as set forth in the surveys, focus
group discussions and indepth interviews should be integrated into the programme
according to criteria that best serve the needs of students, their schools, employers of
labour and the community. Following a successful final evaluation and report, guidance
and counselling should be scaled up in the programme and mainstreamed through other
programmes of the NTI.
8. A collaborative effort between NTI, educational policy makers, educators, employers,
and community members should be harnessed for efficient teacher education through the
183
NTI distance learning system so as to provide the most effective personal, social,
educational and career development for teachers as stipulated in the NPE.
9. The NTI should make the course texts to be more appealing to students by putting
colours, pictures and by using higher quality papers for their course texts. These
modifications would increase the reading appeal of thereading materials. Hence, NTI
course texts should be more aesthetically packaged to make it more readable to the
distance students.
10. On the basis of the findings, the starting point in achieving proper classroom management
is to heighten the awareness of facilitators to impact skills of effective communication of
the subject matter, and being positive role models for students to emulate.
Limitations of the Study
The generalization and conclusions of the result of this study is subject to some
limitations: first this study is limited to the evaluation of the NTI PGDE by DLS with respect to
Stufflebean’s Context, Input, Process and Product (CIPP) model. Other evaluation models could
as well be more congruent or encompassing in scope. Secondly, only South East states were used
for this study. There could be a wide discrepancy in the implementation of the programme
objectives elsewhere, since states in Nigeria are classified economically and educationally
advantaged or disadvantaged. Hence, overgeneralizing the finding of this study may be
unwarranted. The third weakness of the findings of this study relates to the inherent limitations
of each measuring instrument used in data collection which was however abated to a great extent
through triangulation of data.
Suggestion for Further Studies
184 Consequent on the findings and limitations of this present study, further studies should be
conducted in the following areas:
1. The use of other evaluation models other than Stufflebean’s CIPP model should be used
to evaluate the NTI PGDE programme.
2. Replication of this study is suggested in other zones of the federation and a comparative
study of NTI PGDE programme and similar distance learning system should be
undertaken.
3. Interactive behaviours of course tutors and their effect on the academic performances of
the distance education students should be investigated.
4. This study cannot claim it has investigated all variables regarding implementation of the
NTI PGDE programme in South East. It is therefore recommended that further studies are
necessary in other to identify other factors and variables that constitute effective
implementation and findings that can aid decision making.
Summary of the Study
The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the National Teachers Institute
Postgraduate Diploma in Education by Distance Learning System in South East Nigeria.
Literature related to the study was reviewed. The review of literature was basically on
documentary sources like unpublished thesis and dissertations, published books, NTI documents,
journal articles and internet sources.
Evaluative design was used for carrying out this study. The population of this study
comprised of all the students and facilitators in the 14 accredited designated study centres of NTI
PGDE by DLS in South East States in Nigeria. Included in the population are all the 14 Centre
Desk Officers (CDO) and 14 Centre Managers (SM) in the study area, all the graduates and
185 employers of NTI PGDE graduates in the study zone. The population was also extended to the
National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN) affiliate staff that these centers are responsible to.
Multi-stage sampling was used to select 206 respondents for the study. Various instruments
were adapted, developed and validated for the purpose of data collection for this study. This
includes structured and unstructured questionnaires, focus group protocol, interview schedules,
checklists and observational scales. Data were arranged according to research questions,
triangulated and analyzed with analytic induction.
The findings of the study were that:
1. The objectives of the NTI PGDE by distance learning system has significantly been met
in the South East Nigeria
2. With respect to input evaluation, it was found out that the programme is adequately
staffed but most vital educational services and facilities are inadequate at the study
centers
3. The implementation process of the NTI PGDE by distance learning has been responsive
to the objectives the programme
4. The NTI PGDE by distance learning system has helped teacher advance in classroom
skills, competencies but are rated low on flexibility and vitality
Based on these findings, the conclusion is that the institute has over the years contributed
moderately in producing effective teaching manpower in South East Nigeria through distance
learning system. Hence, the major educational implication of the findings of the study is that
there is still need for improvement in the programme delivery to meet the demands of quality
teachers in Secondary education. The major recommendation is that the institute should make
effort to equip study centers with basic educational service and facilities like laboratories,
libraries and counseling to provide students with hands-on experience. The major limitation
186
of this study is inherent in its methodology; hence, suggestions for further research are
highlighted.
REFERENCES Adamaechi, B. C. & Romaine, H., A. (2000). Issues, Problems and Prospects of Free
Compulsory and Qualitative Education in Nigeria: Onitsha: Nigeria Educational Publishers Ltd.
Adejimi, A. (2008). Teaching Technical Courses through Distance Learning in Nigerian Universities: Problems and Prospects. Being paper presented at the 2ndACDE Conference and General Assembly Held Between 8thand 11thJuly, 2008 at the National Open University of Nigeria, Lagos, Nigeria.
Ademiluyi F. A. (2010) Teacher Productivity in a Democratised Nigeria: The Historical
Perspectives. South West Journal of Teacher Education (SOWEJTED). 3, (1). December. Aderinoye, R. and K. Ojokheta (2004). Open-distance education as a mechanism forsustainable
development: Reflections on the Nigerian experience. InternationalReview of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 5, (1)
Ado, I. B., Akinbobola, A. O. & Inyang. G. B. (2010).Status of Human Resources:Implications
for theImplementation of Upper Basic OfThe Universal Basic Education (Ube)Programme in Bayelsa State ofNigeria. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy (Bjsep), 4, (2).
Akinsolu, A, O. (2010).Teachers and Students’ Academic Performance in Nigerian Secondary
Schools: Implications for Planning. Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy. 3, ( 2).Summer 2010
187 Akintudire I. O. & Ekundayo H. T. (2010) Teacher Education in a Democratic Nigeria:
Challenges and the way forward, Educational Research. 3(5): pp. 429-435, May Akpan, C. P. (2010). Enhancing Quality in Open & Distance Education through Effective
Utilization of Information & Communication Technology (ICT) in NIGERIA. Paper presented at the 2nd African Council for Distance Education(ACDE) Conference & General Assembly, Lagos, Nigeria.
Ali, A. (N.D). Evaluation of Some Distance Learning Programmes at Nigerian Universities.
Institute of EducationUniversity of Nigeria, Nsukka. Alkin, M. C. (2004). Evaluation roots: Tracing Theorists’ Views and Influences. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage. American Evaluation Association (2003). Evaluation in Contemporary Society. New York, Sage
Publishing Asodike, J. D. & Ebong, J. M. (2012). Resource Provision for the Implementation of National
Teachers’ Institute (NTI), Kaduna, Distance Learning Programme in South- South, Nigeria. Global Journal of Human Social Science Linguistics & Education. 12 (10).
Asodike, J. D. and Jegede, K.T (2010). Students’ Assessment of Course Delivery Systems of
National Teachers’ Institute (NTI), Kaduna, Study Centres in South/South Geo-political Zone, Nigeria. Paper Pesented at the International Conference on Open Learning and Distance Education, North-West University, Potechesftroom Campus, South Africa, 6 to 8 September 2010.
Asodike, J.D. (2008). Ascertaining the Level of Awareness and Opinion of Parents of the
Universal Basic Education: a Step to Effective Implementation of the Programme in Rivers State, Nigeria. African Journal of Educational Research and Development (AJERD. 2 (1): 88-100.
Atu, D. A. (2010). Evaluation of Final Year NCE Students on the Adequacy of The NCCE
Social Studies Programme For Citizenship Education. A Dissertation Submitted to the Department of Education, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Social Studies.
Baker, R. K. (2003)A Framework For Design And Evaluation Of Internet-Based Distance
Learning Courses Phase One - Framework Justification, Design And Evaluation. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. 6 (2). Summer 2003
Battalio, J. (2009). Success in Distance Education: Do Learning Styles and Multiple Formats
Matter? American Journal of Distance Education. 23(2): 71-87. Battalio, J. (2009). Success in distance education: Do learning styles and multiple formats
matter? American Journal of Distance Education, 23(2): 71-87.
188 Bell, J. (1987), Doing Your Research Project. Buckingham: Open University Press. Bellon, J. J. and Handler, J. R. (1982), Curriculum Development and Evaluation: A Design for
Improvement. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Beyer, B. K. (1995), How to Conduct a Formative Evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development. Boettcher, J. V. (1996). Distance Learning: Looking into the Crystal Ball. Home publishing.
New York. Brown, J. D (1989) Language Programme Evaluation: A Synthesis of Existing Possibilities'. In
K. Johnson (Ed.), The Second Language Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, K. G. & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Formative Evaluation: An Integrative Practice Model
and Case Study', Personnel Psychology. 55,(4) : pp. 951-983 Bryman, A. (2010). Types of Triangulation. Retrieved July 22, 2011 from
http://www.referenceworld.com/sage/socialscience/triangulation.pdf Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963), 'Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for
Research on Teaching'. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching(pp. 171-246). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Challen, A., Noden, P., West, A. & Machin, S. (2007).UK Resilience Programme Evaluation:
Second Final Report. http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DFE-RR006.pdf
Chaney, B.H., Eddy, J.M., Dorman, S.M., Glessner, L., Green, B.L., and Lara-Alecio, R., (2009),
A Primer on Quality Indicators of Distance Education, Health Promotion Practice. 10 (2): pp, 222-231.
Chaney, D., Chaney, E. & Eddy, J. (2011). The Context of Distance Learning Programs in
Higher Education: FiveEnabling Assumptions. The QuarterlyReview of Distance Education, 10(4): pp, 333-338.
Chapman, D. D. (n. d.) Building an Evaluation Plan for Fully Online Degree Programs. Online
Journal of Distance Learning Administration. 4 (1), Spring 2006. University of West Georgia, Distance Education Center
Chen, C. (2009). A Case Study in the Evaluation of English Training Courses using a Version of
the CIPP Model as an Evaluative tool. Ph.D Thesis, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/2912/
Cheng, D. X. (2001). Assessing student collegiate experience: where do we begin? Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6) : pp, 525–38.
189 Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2001), Research Methods in Education, (5th edition).
London: Routledge. Collins, J. P. (2010). Foundation for Excellence: An Evaluation of the Foundation Programme.
Medical Education England. University of Oxford and Green Templeton College, Oxford: NHS.
Cook, T. D., and Reichardt, C. S. (1979), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation
Research. California: Sage Publications. Coryn C, Noakes L, Westine C, Schroter D. (2011). A Systematic Review of Theory-Driven
Evaluation Practice from 1990 to 2009. American Journal of Evaluation 2011; 32(2): 199-226.
Dare, M. O., Ihebereme, C.I, & Maduewesi, E.J (2008). Management of Universal Basic
Education Scheme for Qualitative Education in Nigeria. Lagos: Reference Publication. Denga, D.I. (1999). The Eve of the 21th Century Threshold Education Strategies for Country and
Sustainable Development. Calabar: Rapid Educational. Denzin, N. K. (1978), The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods,
(2nd edition). New York: McGraw-Hill. Durning, S. J, Hemmer, P. & Pangaro, L. N. (2010). The Structure of Program Evaluation: An
Approach for Evaluating a Course, Clerkship, or Components of a Residency or Fellowship Training Programme. Teach Learn Med Journal. 19 (1): pp, 308–318.
Durosaro D. O. (2006). Teacher Education in Nigeria: Past, Present and Future Challenges. The
Pacesetter: Journal of Oyo State College Educ. 13 (1): 44 - 54. Eaton, J. (2000). Focus: Assuring Quality in Distance Learning. The Presidency. Ebirim, U. &Okenwa G. (2014). Utilization of Instructional Materials in Distance Education
Programmes in Nigeria. International Journal of Research in Arts and Social Sciences (IJRASS). 2 (1).
Ejembi, O. D. (2011). Quality Issues in Teacher Education in Nigeria the Teaching Practice
Component of TeacherTraining. A lead paper presented at the national Conference on Education for Colleges of Education held as F.C.E., Kano. Sept.9.
Eke, E. C. (2012). Appraisal of The Implementation of Universal Basic Education Programme in
Imo State. Unpublished M. Ed Thesis, University Of Nigeria. Enemuo, P.C. (2000). The Strive Toward the Philosophy and Goals of National Ideology and the
Educational Process: Nigerian at the Cross Roads.A Paper Presented at the 10th Annual Conference of the Philosophy of Education Association of Nigeria. 16th October-19th October.
190 Etuk, G. K. & Etudor, E. E. (2006) Differences between Administrators and Self-rating of
Teaching Effectiveness by Distance-learning products (t.m). Etuk, G. K., Akpanumoh, U. D., Etudor, E. E and Ngerebara, A. (2008). Distance Learning and
TeachingEffectiveness: The Impact of the DistanceLearning Scheme of the National Teachers’ Institute (NTI) in Nigeria. Education Research Network for West and Central Africa (ERNWACA)
Ezemenaka, E. I. (2009). Evaluation of the Implementation of Integrated Science Curriculum in
Anambra State. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Nigeria.
Ezeocha, C. (1990). Educational Administration and Planning. Nsukka: Optimal Computer Solutions
Fatima, J. (2010). A Study on Evaluation of Post-Graduate Programmes of Teacher Education in
Pakistan. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of PhilosophyinEducation; University Institute of Education and Research Pir Mehr Ali Shah, Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi Pakistan
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National Policy on Education. Abuja: National Educational
Research Development Council. Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004), Program Evaluaton: Alternative
approaches and Practical Guidelines (3rd ed.). Boston:Pearson/ Allyn & Bacon. Foley, D. (2008). Development of a Visual Analogue Scale to Measure Curriculum Outcomes.
Journal of Nursing Education. 47(5): 209-213. Fournier, D.M. (2005). Evaluation.in Encyclopedia of Evaluation, edited by S. Mathison. Pp.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 139 - 40. Frye, A. W & Hemmer, A. P. (2012). Program Evaluation Models and Related Theories: AMEE
Guide No. 67 University Boulevard, Galveston, Texas Frye, A. W and Hemmer, A. P. (2012). Program Evaluation Models and Related Theories:
AMEE Guide No. 67 University Boulevard, Galveston, Texas Gay, L. R. and Airasian, P. (2000), Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and
Application, (61h edition). Ohio: Prentice Hall. Goldie J. (2006). AMEE Education Guide no. 29: Evaluating Educational Programmes. Med
Teach 28:210–224 . Guerra-Lopez, I. (2008), Performance Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
191 Gwynne-Atwater, A. (2011). An Evaluation of a Special Education Pre-school Programme
Serving Children with Autism or Autistic-like Behaviors. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Hanser, R. (2006) On-line Education Service Delivery: Implications for Sustainable on-line
Education Programmes in Developing Nations. In U. Etuk (Ed.) University Education and Sustainable Development, pp. 80 – 96. Uyo: Minder.
Harvey, L. & Green, D. (1993). Defining Quality. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, 18(1): pp, 9–35. Hay, K., & O'Donoghue, K. (2009). Assessing social work field education: Towards
standardising fieldwork assessment in New Zealand. Social Work Education. 28(1), 42–53.
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J. D., and Smaldino, S. E. (2002). Instructional Media and Technologies for Learning (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall
Hoffman, J. & Thomson, G., (2003) Measuring the Success of Environmental Education
Programmes Canada: Network for Environmental Education. www.cpawscalgary.org/ Hubbard, W. G. (1995). Application of Theory-Based Evaluation on a Voluntary Non-formal
Adult Education Programme. The University of Florida Hung, J.-L., Hsu, Y.-C., & Rice, K. (2012). Integrating Data Mining in Programme Evaluation of
K-12 Online Education. Educational Technology & Society.15 (3): pp, 27–41. Idahosa S.A, Undie J., Eka. A. E & Nsan, E.A. (2012). Report of NTI Programme in Cross
Rivers State 2011 Unpublished.
Igbuzor, O. (2006). The State of Education in Nigeria. Retrieved on 02/06/2010 from http://www.dawodu.com/igbuzor.14.htm.
Igwe, R. O. & Rufai, S. A. (2012). An Evaluation of Teachers’ Service Delivery in Nigeria:
Measures for Programme Accountability and Improvement. Humanity & Social Sciences Journal 7 (2):pp, 121-127.
Igwe, U. O. (2005). Harnessing Information Technology for the 21st Century: Library Education
in Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice. 7(2) Iyunade, O. T. (2011).Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development as Correlates of
Sustainable Universal Basic Education in Bayelsa State, Nigeria International Multidisciplinary Journal. 5 (4): Pp. 161-17, July, 2011
Jabbarifar, T. (2009). The Importance of Classroom Assessment andEvaluation in Educational
System. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of Teaching and Learning, University College, Malaysia
192 Jekayinfa A. A. (2006) Development of Teacher Education in Nigeria. West Africa Journal of
Educational Research. 3(1): pp, 129-13 Jimoh, M. (2013). An Appraisal of the Open and Distance Learning Programme in Nigeria.
Journal of Education and Practice. Vol. 4. (2) www.iiste.org Jossey-Bass, G (2011). New Directions For Evaluation. MonographNo. 89, Spring, John Wiley
& Sons, Inc. Junaid, M. I. (2011).Evaluation of Capacity Building of National Teachers’ Institute.The
Commonwealth Of Learning,Vancouver Keegan, D. (1986). The Foundations of Distance Learning Education. London: Croom Helm. Kiely, R. & Rea-Dickins, P. (2005), Program Evaluation in Language Education. New Kirkpatrick, D. (1994). Evaluating Training Programmes: The Four Levels. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler. Kohil, V. K. (1992). Teacher Education in India. University Grant Commission, New Delhi,
pp.10 - 13. Kromrey, J. D. (2014). A Framework for Evaluation of Large Scale Technology Innovation
Project: Leason Learned in Higher Education. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Clearwater Florida, February 11 – 14 2014
Lawal, H. (2011). Assessing NTI Challenges. Implication for Quality Service Delivery. Online
Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(1): pp, 1–16. Luo, M & Dappen, L. (2003). Mixed-methods Design for an Objective-based Evaluation of a
Magnet School Assistance Project.Evaluation and Program Planning. 28 ( 1): pp, 109–118. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2003.12.001
Mahmood, Z. &Azhar, M. (2013). Monitoring and Evaluation Role of District Teacher Educators
in Rawalpindi. Hope Journal of Research (House of Pakistani Educationists).1 ( 2). June 2013.
Major, H. & N. Levenburg. (1999). The Technology Source Archives - Learner success in
distance education environment: a shared responsibility. Retrieved fromhttp://technologysource.org/article/learner_success_in_distance_education_environme
Marshall, J. C., & Rossman, G. B. (1995). Gender Differences in Adolescents' Attitudes toward
School Physical Education', Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 11(2): pp31-46.
193 Mbaya, I. S. (2005). The Place of Subject and Administrative Monitoring in NTI’s Distance
Education. NTI Newsletter.pp, 21-22. McNamara, C. (2003) Basic Guide to Programme Evaluation; Canada: NEE. Midling, M., Filion, L., David-Gnahoui, E. M., Gassama-Mbaye, M., Diallo, A. T. & Diallo, A.
K (2006). Program Evaluation for USAID / Guinea Basic Education Program Portfolio.DevTech Systems, Inc. Retriveved on 20/07/11 fromhttp://www.devtechsys.com
Mohammed, A. M. (2006). NTI Committed to Capacity Building for Teachers. NTI Newsletter.
Pp, 27-28. Mukhtari A. J. (2008). Teacher Education in Nigeria: An Overview, African Research Review. 1
(2) Murphy, T. H. (2000). An Evaluation of a Distance Education Course Design for General Soils.
Journal of Agricultural Education. 41( 3):pp, 103 – 113. Musa, S. (2006). Education, the greatest Investment: An interview. NTI Newsletter. Pp,11 – 14. Musick, D. W. (2006). A Conceptual Model for Program Evaluation in Graduate Medical
Education. Academic Medicine Volume 81 - Issue 8 - pp 759-765. August 2006. Muyinda, P. B. (2012). Open and Distance Learning in Dual Mode Universities: A Treasure
Unexploited, International Perspectives of Distance Learning in Higher Education, J. L. Moore (Ed.), Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/international-perspectives-of-distancelearning-in-higher-education/open-and-distance-learning-in-dual-mode-universities-a-treasure-unexploited
Nakpodia, E.D. (2011). Philosophy as a tool for Sustainable Development: A Contemporary
Issue in Nigerian Educational System. African Journal of Social Sciences. 1 (1): pp, 65 – 74.February 2011.
National Teachers’ Institute (2005, Nov.-Dec.). Nigeria Certificate in Education by Distance
learning systems: Students Handbook. Kaduna: TheAuthor. National Teachers’ Institute (2014). www.nti.nigeria.org/programmes National Teachers’ Institute (2015). www.nti.nigeria.org/objectives Nji. J. (2015) Challenges of The NTI Programmes in South East. Interview conducted with the
NTI Quality Assurance Person on 15th January 2015 Nwaneri, M. O. (2012). Evaluation of Distance Learning Programme of National Teachers
Institute in Owerri Education Zone.Unpublished Masters Thesis, Imo state University.
194 Nwanna O.C. (2000). Problems and Prospects of Successful Implementation of Universal Basic
Education in Nigeria. Commissioned Paper Presented at 43rd Annual National Congress of all Nigerian Conferences of Principals of Secondary Schools at Umuahia.
Nwoke, A. (2004). Teacher preparations and teaching Practice”. In Oyetunde, O. (eds.). The
Practice of Teaching Prospects and Strategies. Institute of Education, LECAPS publishers, Jos.
Nworgu B.G. (2006). Educational Research: Basic Issues and Methodology. Nsukka.
Enugu.University of Trust Publishers O’Lawrence, H. (2007). An Overview of the Influences of Distance Learning on Adult
Learners.Journal of Education and Human Development. 1( 1). Odia, L. O. & Omofonmwan, S.I. (2007). Educational System in Nigeria: Problems and
Prospects. Journal of Social Science.,14 (1): pp, 81-86 Ogrinc, G., Batalden, P. (2009). Realist Evaluation as a Framework for the Assessment of
Teaching about the Improvement of care. The Journal of Nursing Education 2009. 48 (12):pp, 661-668.
Okafor, F. (2008). Millennium Development Goals: Has Education in Nigeria been equipped to
respond? Paper presented at the 4th National Conference of the Association for Encouraging Quality Education College of Education Asaba 15th July.
Okama O.K. (2009) Problem of Programme Education in Nigeria:Cross.River State. Zenitt Press.
Okoh, S.E.N. (2002). High level Education, Manpower Development and Training.A Key to Sustainable Economic Growth and Development. Inaugural lecture series 63, University of Benin.
Okoye, C. A. (2012).Evaluation of the Implementation of the UNICEF Child Friendly School
Initiative Programme in Enugu State. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Olakulehin, F. K & Ojo, O. D. (2008). Factors Influencing the Completion of Dissertations by Students of Post-Graduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) by Distance Learning in South-Western Nigeria. Open Education - The Journal for Open and Distance Education and Educational Technology. 4 ( 1).
Omoniyi, J. O. (2010). Evaluation of NCE Business Education Programme as an Entry
Requirement into the First Degree Programme in Business Education in Nigerian Universities .Thesis Presented to Ahmadu Bello University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Education in Business Education.
195 Oni, J.O. (2008). Universality of Primary Education in Nigeria: Tends and Issues. Int. Journal of
African American Studies. 7 (2): pp, 51-70. Onukwube, V. (2014). Interview with the Enugu State NTI Coordinator. 12th Nov. 2014 Onukwube, V. (2015). Interview with the Enugu State NTI Coordinator. 3rd Feb. 2015 Oppenheim, A. N. (2001). Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement.
London: Pinter Publishers. Osong, J. (2014). Evaluation of the National Teachers’ Institute Nigerian Certificate in
Education Programme by Distance Learning System in Cross River State. Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Osuji, S. N. (2009). Teacher Education Curriculum in Nigeria in the Perspectives of Lifelong Education. The Journal of International Social Research. vol. 2 (8)
Osunde, A. U.; Omoruyi, F. E. O.(2004).An Evaluation of the National Teachers' Institute's
Manpower Training Program for Teaching Personnel in Mid-Western Nigeria.Australian Journal of Adult Learning. 44 (1): pp, 95-104. April 2004.
Parviz. B. & Mania, N, (2009). The Qualitative Program Evaluation of the Postgraduate English
Translation Major in Iran. The Journal of Modern Thoughts in Education. 4 (4): pp, 37-58.Autumn 2009
Patton M.. Q. (2011). Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance
Innovation and use. New York: Guilford Press. Patton, M. Q. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications. Perraton, H. (2000), Open and Distance Learning in the Developing World. New Zealand,
Routledge Popham, W. J. (1975), Educational Evaluation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Provus, M. M. (1971). The Discrepancy Model for Educational Programme Improvement and
Assessment. Berkeley, California: McCutchan. Rao, R. R & Rao, B. D. (2005). Methods of Teacher Training. New Dehli, India,Discovery
Publishing House. pp.1-2, 7, Roach, L. F., Noonan, B. M. and Walter, S. M. (2011). Counselor Education and Programme
Evaluation: A Systemic Approach to Programme Evaluation and Student Learning Outcomes in Counselor Education. Department of Counselor Education, Stetson University.
196 Roberts, T. G., Irani, T. & Lundy, L. K. (2004).Practices in Student Evaluation of
DistanceEducation Courses among Land Grant Institutions. Journal of Agricultural Education. 45(3):pp, 1 – 10.
Roxburgh, M. (2008). A Review of Curriculum Evaluation in United Kingdom Nursing
Education. Nurse Education Today. 28:pp, 881-889. Salawu, I. O, Adeoye, F. A, Ojo, O. D. & Olakulehin, M. (2010).Sustainability Indices as
Measures of Service Delivery in Open and Distance Learning Institutions in Nigeria. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE. 11 (1). Article 3January 2010
Samuel, J. and Okodoko, D. (2012).Evaluating the Implementation of NCE Primary Education
Programme in College of Education in Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 3 (4):pp, 30 -35.January 2012.
Sarita, M. & Tomar, B. (2004). Teacher Education: Making education effective., Dehli India.Isha
Books, Adarsh Nagar. pp.62-63. Scriven, M. (1967). The Methodology of Evaluation'. In R. Tyler, R. Gagne, & M. Scriven
(Eds.), Perspectives on curriculum evaluation.New York: McGraw-Hill. Scriven, M. (1974), Standards for the evaluation of educational programs and products. In G.D.
Borich (Ed.), Evaluating educational programs and products. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Educational Technology.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Shamim, F & Juma. A. (2006). Research and Policy Dialogues on Key Educational Issues,
Sharehu, A. L. (2011). Training Primary School Teachers Across Multicultural Settings In
Nigeria Using Distance Learning Techniques: National Teachers’ Institute’s Experience.A Paper Presented By Director General And Chief Executive National Teachers Institute Kaduna At The 37th Annual Conference Of The International Association For Educational Assessment Held From 23rd – 28th October 2011 In Edsa Shangri-La, Manila, Philippines
Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational
Telecommunications, 1(4), 337 – 365. Siddiqui, Z. S. (2006). Evaluation Paradigms in Medical Education. JCPSP Vol. 16 (4): 291-293 Smelser, B. (2001)Analytic Induction, in International Encyclopedia of the Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Chicago. Aldine. Stake, R. E. (1975), Evaluating the Arts in Education: A Responsive Approach. Columbus, OH:
Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
197 Stavropoulou, A. & Stroubouki, T. (2014). Evaluation of Educational Programmes – the
Contribution of History to Modern Evaluation Thinking. Health Science Journal.8.(2): pp,193 -204
Stenbäck, T. & Billany, N. (2010). Evaluation Report 2009: North-South-South Higher Education Institution Network Programme. http://formin.finland.f/public/download.aspx
Stufflebeam D & Shinkfield A. (2007). Evaluation Theory, Models, and Applications. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass/John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Stufflebeam, D. (2002). CIPP Evaluation Model Checklist . Retrieved August 1, 2004 from
http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/cippchecklist.htm Stufflebeam, D. L. (1967). The Use and Abuse of Evaluation in Title III', Theory into Practice, 6, 126-133.York: Palgrave Macmillan Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971) The Relevance of the CIPP Revaluation Model for Educational
Acountability', Journal of Research and Development in Education. 5, 19-25. Stufflebeam, D. L. (2002). CIPP Evaluation Model Checklist. Retrieved on October 19, 2014
from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/cippchecklist.pdf Stufflebeam, D. L. (2002). CIPP Evaluation Model Checklist: A tool for Applying theFifth
Installment of the CIPP Model to Assess Long-term Enterprises. Intended for use by Evaluators and Evaluation clients/stakeholders. Available from the NYLC Resource Center at www.nylc.org
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003-a). 'The CIPP Model for Evaluation', In T. Kellaghan & D. L.
Stufflebeam (Eds.), The International Handbook of Educational Evaluation (Chapter3). Boston: Kluwer.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007), Evaluation Theory, Models, and Applications.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Stufflebeam, D. L., Madaus, G. F., and Kellaghan, T. (2000), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on
educational and human services evaluation. Boston: Kluwer. Suleiman, E. B. (2004). Redesigning Nigeria’s Teacher Education System for Enhanced
Effectiveness and Efficiency: A policy Agenda for Colleges of Education. 3rd Convocation Lecture, Lagos State College of Primary Education. Thursdy 4th December 2014
Tseng, K., Diez, C. R., Lou, S., Tsai, H & Tsai, T. (2010). Using the Context, Input, Process and
Product Model to Assess an Engineering Curriculum. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education.8,(3). pp, 256 – 261.
198 Tyler, R. W. (1975), Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago, IL.The University
of Chicago Press. Udeh, C. (2011). Interview with the UNICEF Desk Officer in the Enugu State Universal Basic
Education Board. Conducted at the SUBEB headquarters on 11th Nov. 2011 Ugwu, O. U. (2013). National Interest And Nigerian Foreign Policy: A Critical Analysis Of
Obasanjo’s Administration, 1999-2007. Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Nigeria.
Ugwu, O.I. (2005). Teachers Motivation: A Challenge for Implementing Agricultural Science
Curriculum in Nigeria Journal of Curriculum Studies 12(1), pp. 234-238. Uko-Aviomoh, E.E. (2005). Constraints to Effective Implementation of Primary School Home
Economic Curriculum in JOCUMETER. Nsukka. CUDIMAC of Nigeria. 1 (1). 197-203. Umerah, C. F. (2014). Interview with the Enugu State NTI Coordinator. 10h Nov. 2014 Undie, J. A., Udida, L. A. & Ugal, G. (2012). Teachers’ Utilization and students’ academic
performance in Cross River State Private/public secondary schools. Nigerian Journal of Educational Administration andPlanning.5 (1), 154 – 160.
UNICEF (2009). Child Friendly Schools Programming: Global Evaluation Report.
www.unicef.org UNICEF (2010). Getting Ready For School: A Child-to-Child Approach. Programme Evaluation
Report for Year One. www.unicef.org United Nations, Educational Scientific & Cultural organization (2002). About Education for
Wahlstrom, C. (2003). The Successful Distance Learning Student. Belmont, CA: Scratch gravel. Welch, G. W. (2006). A Primer on Evaluation: Research Methodology Series National Center
for Research, University of Nebraska Yusuf, M. O. (2005). Information and Communication Technologies and Education: Analyzing
the Nigerian National Policy for Information Technology. International Education Journal. 6(3): pp, 316-321.
Zinovieff, M. A. (2008). Review and Analysis of Training Impact Evaluation Methods, and
Proposed Measures to Support a United Nations System Fellowships Evaluation Framework:Prepared for the WHO's Department of Human Resources for Healthon behalf of the UN Task Force on Impact Assessment of FellowshipsGeneva, July 2008
199
AppendixA: Population of the Study
S/N NTI PGDE Centers State 1 School of Health Technology, Aba Abia 2 Abayi Girls Sec. Sch., Aba Abia 3 Government college, Umuahia Abia 4 Nnewi High Sch Nnewi Anambra 5 Pauls Univ. Awka Anambra 6 Queen of the Rosary college Onitsha Anambra 7 Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechni, Unwana Ebonyi 8 Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki Ebonyi 9 Queens School Enugu Enugu 10 College of Education (Technical) Enugu Enugu 11 ESUT Barracks Nsukka Enugu 12 GSS Owerri Imo 13 Imo State university Owerri Imo 14 Boys. Model Secodary School, New Owerri Imo
Appendix B: Sample for the Study S/N NTI PGDE Centres State Std F CDM CM E G NAS Total 1 Pauls Univ. Awka Anambr
a 27 3 1 1 2 2 2 206
2 Queen of the Rosary college Onitsha
27 3 1 1
3 Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechni, Unwana
Ebonyi 27 3 1 1 2 2
200 4 Ebonyi State
University, Abakaliki 27 3 1 1
5 College of Education (Technical) Enugu
Enugu 27 3 1 1 2 2
6 ESUT Barracks Nsukka
27 3 1 1
Total 162 18 6 6 6 6 2 206 Key: F = Facilitators; CDO = Center Desk Officers;CM = Centre Managers; E = Employer of NTI PGDE by DLS Graduates; G = NTI PGDE Graduates; NAS = NOUN Affiliate Staff
APPENDIX C: Instrument for Data Collection CONTEXT EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS 1.1 Achievement of Objective Instrument (AOI) Respondents: Students
Dear respondent, This study is an academic research to evaluate the National Teachers’ Institute Post Graduate Diploma in Education by Distance Learning System in South East Nigeria You are kindly requested to supply relevant information by responding to the items contained in the questionnaire by ticking good [ √ ] in the appropriate column provided.Measures have been taken to insure that your participation as a respondent in this research will not in any way be used against you. Hence, your personal contact is not needed. You also reserve the rights to decline involvement as a participant. S/N To what extent has the NTI PGDE by DLS been VGE GE LE VLE 1 Training and upgrading teachers in cognate discipline 2 providing background for serving teachers to further develop their
teaching skills through in-service training
3 producing teachers for the successful implementation of the National Policy on Education
4 Providing opportunities for the training of professional educators 5 Promoting healthy learning environment by equipping teachers with
effective pedagogy
6 Eliminating inherent problems of teachers leaving schools for further training
7 Producing competent teachers who demonstrate the knowledge of the subject in theories and principles.
8 Motivating teachers to enroll and upgrade 9 Distributing course materials to students 10 Orientating teachers on effective pedagogy through workshops and
seminars
11 Producing highly motivated , conscientious and efficient teachers for secondary education
12 Encouraging further the spirit of enquiry and creativity in teachers 13 Helping teachers fit into social life of the community and the
community at large and enhance their commitment to national goals
14 Providing teachers with intellectual and professional background
201
adequate for their assignment 15 Enhancing teachers’ commitment to the teaching profession VGE = Very Great Extent, GE = Great Extent, LE = Low Extent, VLE = Very Low Extent 1.2Focus Group Protocol (FGP) Respondents: Students
General Questions/Comments/Perceptions of the PGDE Programme by Students Participant #: ___________. How long have you been in this programme?
• How did you come to know about this programme?
• Who or what influenced your decision to apply for this program and what were your
initial expectations?
• How do you feel about your decision?
• Think back over the time you have been in this programme. What about the program do
you perceive is going well?
• What about the programme do you perceive needs improvement?
• If you were talking to someone interested in this program, what would you tell them?
• Suppose you were in charge and could make one change that could make the programme
better, what would you do?
• What are your feelings regarding the quality of instructors in this programm?
• What are your thoughts regarding student/instructors interaction in this program?
• What are your thoughts regarding peer interaction in this programme?
• What are your thoughts regarding the class schedule? (time classes are held, types of
classes that are held, class sizes)
• What are your thoughts regarding the facilities for teaching and learning? (classrooms,
main office, areas for students)
• What are your thoughts regarding practicum/teaching practice placement? (sites,
supervisors and grading)
• What are your thoughts regarding the availability of the support staff and administration?
(level of assistance, communication, courtesy level)
202
• To become a qualified teacher, do you consider that the skills and knowledge you will
gain from the PGDE Courses (will) equip you sufficiently to get the job of your choice?
If yes, please explain how and in what ways.
• Does the institute do a good job teaching students what they really need to know.
• If the curriculum did not equip you sufficiently with the skills and knowledge you needed
to get the job of your choice, what more do you think should be done through the
programme or in any other way which would assist?
• Do you consider that the facilitators are sufficiently expert and skilled in their teaching?
Yes [ ] No [ ]. Please provide reasons for the answer you have provided at above.
• What other content could or should be included in the curriculum which you consider
would assist you in your future career? Why do you think this?
• Do you have any suggestions as to other way(s) through which the PGDE Courses could
be taught?
• Of all of the things we have discussed today, what is the most important to you?
• Would you recommend this programme to a friend, colleague? Why or why not?
1.3 Centre Interviews Schedule (CIS) Respondents: Centre Desk Officers and Centre
Managers
• What are the strengths and weaknesses with the variety and quality of the technologies
and tools available for teaching in your centre?
• Describe the types and levels of technical and pedagogical assistance that is required
when teaching in this programme?
• What are the important training needs you would want to be addressed during the training
sessions of facilitators with regard to these?
• How should student and instructor expectations be managed in this programme?
• What advice would you give instructors in managing student feedback and
communication?
• How would you describe the reliability and viability of the technology used in
administering your courses?
203
• What course development standards are in place or should be in place for maintaining
quality in this programme?
• What types of technical and pedagogical assistance are needed to maintain quality in this
programme?
• Do participants meet their own objectives?
• How adequate are the resources available to this programme?
• What do you consider central in the programme in order to maintain quality?
1.4 Employers Interview Schedule Guide (EISG)Respondents: Employers of NTI PGDE
Products (School Proprietors and Principals)
• For how long have you owned/run/managed an NTI PGDE graduate teacher?
• From your experience what qualities do you look for in a good teacher? Do you see these
qualities in those NTI PGDE by DLS graduates working with you?
• What competency level do you expect from the NTI PGDE graduate teachers? Please
give reasons for your answer.
• Do NTI graduates get to the competency you expect or require as they do their job?
• Using a rating scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the "highest" or "best", how would you rate
your satisfaction with the NTI PGDE graduates employed in your school overall?
• From your experience what suggestions for change or improvement would you make to
the NTI PGDE by DLS which you feel might better serve to address your needs as an
employer?
• Do you have any general comments to make on the graduates from NTI PGDE or on any
This study is an academic research whose main purpose is to evaluate the national teachers’
institute post graduate diploma in education by distance learning system in South East Nigeria
You are kindly requested to supply relevant information by responding to the items contained in
the questionnaire by ticking good [ √ ] in the appropriate column provided.Measures have been
204 taken to insure that your participation as a respondent in this research will not in any way be used
against you. Hence, your personal contact is not needed. You also reserve the rights to decline
involvement as a participant.
Kindly indicate as appropriate How long have you been with the NTI PGDE programme? Less than 2 years [ ]; Less than 5 years [ ]; More than 5 years [ ]
Challenges of NTIPGDE by DLS Programme
S/N To what extent do these constitute a challenge in implementing NTI PGDE by DLS in the South East
VGE GE LE VLE
1 Poor accommodation for lecture halls 2 Poor funding of NTI programme 3 Poor management of NTI programme by
coordinators
4 Delay of payment of course facilitators allowances or claims
5 untimely supply of course books to students 6 Inadequate supply of instructional materials 7 Ineffective use of varieties of teaching methods by
course facilitators in teaching/learning
8 Shortage of qualified course facilitators 9 Problem of accreditation of full science course in
study centres
10 Inefficient transfer process of students from one state to another
11 Admission of unqualified student 12 Omission of students’ continuous assessment or
examination scores
13 poor management and delivering of courses by facilitators
14 Lack of proper guidance and counselling services in study centres
15 Lack of infrastructures in the study centres (library, laboratory)
16 Ineffective public address system
205
17 Poor performance of students
INPUT EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS
2.1 Input Resources Checklist (IRC) Respondents: Checked by the researcher
Input facilities for the implementation of NTI PGDE by DLS in South East
Standard (STD) Minimum
Standard (MST)
Availability
Available Not Available Class room 1:80 Inside classroom display of public address system, cassettes, film/ videos / radio
At least 1
Textbook on subjects At least 5 per std Duplicating machine 1 per center Office stores 1 per center Teacher student ratio 1.30 Chairs and desk in the class room. 1 per student Class room windows At least 4 per class Toilet system I per 30 students Latrine sink 1 per class room Examination hall At least 1 per center Library facilities/benches and stools 1 per centre Laboratory size 10x8 and 12 x 9 square 1 Black board/white board 2 per class room General course staff room At least 1 centre Number of tutors with laptop All staff.
2.2 Facilitators’ Qualifications Checklist (FQC) Respondents: Checked by the Researcher
Facilitators’ Qualifications Checklist (FQC) S/N Courses No of
facilitators Facilitators’
qualifications No of
contact p/month
1 Foundations of education- historical, philosophical psychological and sociological
2 Educational management 3 Curriculum Organization and development 4 Instructional design and development 5 Vocational, career and guidance counselling 6 Comparative education
206 7 Special Teaching Methods for Individual Subject 8 Tests, measurement and Evaluation 9 Educational research methods 10 Statistical and data analysis 11 Psychology of Learning 12 Developmental Psychology 13 Teaching practice
2.3 Observational Checklist on Facilitators’ Effectiveness (OCFE) Respondents: Ranked by the Centre Desk Officers S/N Instructors’ Characteristics Ranks
207 2.4 Curriculum Assessment Questionnaire (CAQ)Respondents: Students S/N Curriculum textbooks I use in this programme are good in VGE GE LE VLE 1 MEETING LEARNERS’ NEEDS AND INTERESTS: do you find the
beginning activities attractive enough to catch the attention of all categories of students: the slow/fast learners; the high/low achievers
2 SIGNIFICANCE: the subject-matter are formed from basic ideas/concepts/principles and daily life experiences
3 VALIDITY: I find the content difficult to comprehend 4 PRACTICABILITY/LEARNABILITY: The content is practicable
enough for me to perform?
5 TRANSFERABILITY: I find the learning experiences embodied in the content transferable from school to life outside the schoolyard and from one learning situation to another?
6 GRADIENT OF DIFFICULTY OF THE CONTENT: The activities embodied in the content are suitable bearing in mind my knowledge level and the fact that I am a mature student
7 FEEDBACK: There are workbooks, review questions and answers to help me judge my performances as to whether or not I have achieved specific objectives?
8 VARIETY: the curriculum activities provide me with various learning opportunities
9 10 RELEVANCE: The learning experience embodied in the curriculum
are relevant to what I intend to achieve in this programme
11 BALANCE: The curriculum maintains a balance among the subject disciplines so that one subject area does not overshadow others?
12 SCOPE OF COVERAGE: Sufficient subject-matter are covered in each form/level?
13 CONTINUITY: The content and learning opportunities are continuous so as to ensure that I smoothly move from one concept level to the next, without difficulties in understanding what is taught at the higher level
14 SEQUENCE: The order of curriculum sequence and content allows for subsequent experiences to build on earlier ones
15 INTEGRATION: The learning opportunities are organized in such a way that I relate one field of knowledge to another
208 1. Please specify the content and materials used in the courses which you found most useful and
why you found them most useful.
2. Please specify the materials used in the courses which you found most unhelpful and why you
found them most unhelpful.
2.5 Course Facilitators’ Assessment of Distance Learning Questionnaire (CFADLQ)
Respondents: Course Facilitators
Course Facilitators’ Assessment of Distance Learning Questionnaire (CFADLQ)
Dear Respondent,
I am undertaking a study on the NTI Distance Learning Scheme. I solicit your co-operation and
honest opinions in answering the questionnaire that accompanies this memo. Your responses will
be held strictly confidential and will be used exclusively for academic purposes.
Thank you.
INSTRUCTION: This questionnaire is in two sections. A and B
SECTION A: PERSONAL INFORMATION OF RESPONDENTS
1. Name of study centre ___________________________________________________
2. Course tutor’s area of specialisation __________________________________
209 SECTION B: PROGRAMME ASSESSMENT S/N The NTI PGDE Distance Learning Scheme Scope SA A D SD 1 Sets moderate objectives for students 2 Has a reasonable subject scope 3 Selects contents, which reflect contemporary developments in knowledge 4 Gives students sufficient learning experience 5 Utilizes varieties of teaching methods 6 Is relevant to Nigeria educational goals/objectives for
teachers education at that level
7 Maintains continuity from one cycle to another 8 Has well-sequenced learning content 9 Has been successfully implemented The Teaching/Learning Materials Consists of; 10 Difficult textbooks written for students 11 Inadequate guide material for course facilitators 12 Insufficient textbooks for students 13 Books supplied at unaffordable prices 14 Write ups without study guides The Study Centre Activities 15 Consist of well-organized weekend activities for students 16 Utilizes good student centred approaches 17 Are sufficient for students to achieve their personal goals 18 Makes the study centres to be vibrant
NTI Tests/Examinations 19 Are usually well organized 20 Are usually free from malpractices 21 Are fair to every student 22 Are usually valid 23 Have reliable results
NTI Course Tutors 24 Attend classes regularly 25 Are punctual to classes 26 Are enthusiastic for their work 27 Carry moderate work loads 28 Relate well with students 29 Are effective teachers
NTI Students 30 Are punctual for classes 31 Are regular for classes 32 Show much interest in studying 33 Have good understanding of textual materials 34 Follow usable rules/regulations governing the centre 35 Have aptitude for higher education 36 Make useful contribution in the process of teaching and learning 37 Are generally good
PROCESS EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS
210 3.1 Teaching/Learning Process Questionnaire (TLPQ) Respondents: Students
Please respond to each of the following statements in terms of frequency of occurrence in the
courses.
S/N Facilitators activities Always Sometimes Rarely Never 1 facilitators use different ways to group students in
the classroom (pair work, group work, individual work and whole-class work)
2 Facilitators’ set up rules and routines were clear 3 facilitators check the students' learning process to
carry everyone along
4 Facilitators give equal attention to all students in the class
5 The teaching methodology used by facilitators are helpful and effective
6 Facilitators present tasks in an interesting and enthusiastic way which made the tasks seem achievable to the students
7 Facilitators boost students' self-confidence in adopting learner centered pedagogy
8 When needed facilitators are available for guidance and advice
9 Facilitators give feedback to me about what I had done and what I still needed to work on
10 Facilitators give me sufficient feedback on my performance in the assignments/quizzes/exams
11 The marking received was fair 12 Quiz/exam results demonstrated my actual
proficiency in ability
13 Facilitators set out the assessment criteria before the tests
14 HW /assignments are relevant to course objectives 15 Interaction between students are assessed 16 Facilitators choose different materials or activities
in order to assess your non cognitive domain
1. What do you find is the most useful/helpful teaching process in this programme which
best serve to improve your skills/competency/ability? Please describe it and why you
considered the process useful/helpful.
2. In your view which teaching-learning methodology should/could be used in the PGDE
Training Courses to the best advantage of students? Please set out your suggestions and
why you think they could be used to best advantage.
211
3. Please comment on any particular strength of those teachers whom you found most
helpful and effective in teaching their courses.
4. Please comment on any particular weakness of those teachers whom you found most
unhelpful and ineffective in teaching their courses.
3.2 Adopted Evaluation Technique Instrument (AETI) Respondents: NTI Graduates
To what degree were the following assessment tools effective in assessing your performance in
the NTI PGDE by DLS courses you undertook?
S/N Assessment Technique Very Often Often Sometimes Never 1 Quizzes 2 Midterm Exam 3 Final Exam (one short) 4 Homework/ Assignment 5 Class performance (seminer) 6 Participation and attendance 7 Oral report 8 Teaching Practice
1. What other assessment methods do you think could have helped measure your
performance in the courses you took? Please write any suggestions that you have and
why you think they could have helped.
3.3 Oversight Instrument (OI)Respondents: National Open University of Nigeria Staff
S/N At the NTI study centres Faculty/NUC Very Often
Often Sometimes Not At All
1 Routinely supervise NTI programme on semester basis
2 Routinely inspect to ensure minimum accreditation status
3 Inspect departmental facilities for teaching and learning
212 4 Monitor facilitators’ qualification 5 Inspect facilitators’ population per department 6 Inspect laboratory facilities 7 Inspect buildings conduciveness for learning 8 Inspect library facilities
PRODUCT EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS
4.1 Alumni Assessment scale (AAS)Respondent: NTI PGDE by DLS Alumni
Dear Graduate,
I am contacting you to request your co-operation with a piece of research I am
conducting for a doctorate degree from University of Nigeria. I would be grateful if you could
help me by completing a questionnaire. This questionnaire is part of an evaluative study which is
focused on context, input, process and product evaluation of NTI PGDE by DLS which you
213 undertook a while ago. It is specifically designed to gather data to assist in the evaluation of the
programme in meeting set goals.
It is vital that as accurate and reliable data as possible is gathered for this study, so all the
questions should be answered as honestly and sincerely as possible. All the answers and
information you provide will be kept confidentially and will be anonymous and non-attributable.
The results will be used primarily for academic purposes but they are also expected to be helpful
in formulating the development of the programme.
Your participation is entirely voluntary. If you do agree to participate, please make sure
all the questions are completed and if you have any comments you would like to add please do
not hesitate to do so. Thank you for your anticipated assistance and co-operation.
Okoye, C. A.
Section A: Personal Information
Please answer the questions below by either ticking the response suitable to you or by writing in
the space provided whichever is appropriate
Gender: Male [ ]Female [ ]; Year of graduation: [ ]; Number of years spent before
Please tick [ √ ] as appropriate by reference to the statements set out below. Please select a
competence level from each side of the grid. i. e. after taking the courses side (the right hand
side) which best describes your competence levels at the relevant time in the skills itemized.
Questionnaire for Graduates of NTI with Respect to Product Evaluation of the PGDE by DLS Skills/Competencies/Abilities Before taking the
course NTI PGDE courses
After taking the course NTI PGDE
courses I could/can NC
1 PC 2
C 3
VC 4
NC 1
PC 2
C 3
VC 4
Adopt learner centered instructional strategies Appreciate individual difference in my students Encourages students to participate in class work Encourages my students to ask questions
214
Facilitates discussions among students Demonstrates simple experiments for my students Relates information presented in the lesson to students’ lives
Utilizes instructional materials appropriately shows similar expectations for both boys and girls Ensure that students receive equal time and attention regardless of their background
Maintains an engaging class, without pressuring the students
Communicates both verbally and nonverbally in a positive and friendly manner
Adapts lessons for students with special learning needs
While the pupils are working, the teacher moves around the classroom to provide support and guidance
Staff addresses students by name Encourages group study and cooperative learning Use continuous assessment in evaluating learning achievement
Assesses pupils with different evaluation techniques
Key: NC = Not Competent; PC = Partially Competent; C= Competent; VC = Very Competent
4.2 Teachers’ Effectiveness Scale (TES)Respondents: Employers of NTI PGDE by DLS Graduates
Teachers’ Effectiveness Scale (TES): This instrument will be used to gather employers
assessment of PGDE programme product effectiveness with respect to readiness for instruction;
teacher personality; teachers’ knowledge of the subject matter; classroom management skills;
questioning skills; communication skills; interpersonal skills; teacher enthusiasm; direct teaching
aspiration for professional growth/development. Section A is demographic while sections B – M
is a 123 item rating scale in Likert format. its items are with rating in Strongly Agree, Agree,
Disagree and Strongly Disagree where SA= 4 points, A= 3 points, D= 2 points and SD= 1 point.
SECTION A: TEACHERS’ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA Teacher’s Year of Teaching Experience ----- . Teacher’s Educational Qualification Instruction: In section: B-F that follow, there are five (5) columns in which to record observed behaviours. The columns read as follows:
215 AS = Strongly Agree; A = Agree; UN = Undecided; D = Disagree and SD = Strongly Disagree S/N The Teacher: Response Section B: Readiness for Instruction SA A D SD 1 Writes good lesson notes 2 Formulates adequate instructional objectives 3 Selects relevant instructional materials 4 Provides for step-wise lesson preparation 5 Prepares coherent lesson plans 6 Explores the environment for useable instructional resources 7 Sets appropriates expectations for students
Section C: Teacher Personality 8 Shows interests in individual students 9 Has patience with students 10 Smiles in class 11 Is neat in appearance 12 Is generally friendly 13 Looks well-groomed 14 Dresses shabbily 15 Wears neat hair 16 Works with self confidence 17 Appears vibrant in class 18 Over-dresses for class 19 Handles lessons with confidence 20 Is an excellent teacher
Section D: Teachers’ Knowledge Of The Subject Matter 21 Demonstrates mastery of the subject-matter 22 Is generally literate 23 Feels at home with numeracy skills 24 Knows but cannot deliver 25 Is generally deficient in the subject-matter area
Section E: Classroom Management Skills 26 Goes around helping students in class 27 Has a nature’s corner in class 28 Formulates rules/regulations binding students 29 Punishes offenders 30 Keeps students’ attendance records 31 Keeps records of students’ performances 32 Orderly manages chalkboard space 33 Maintains orderliness in class 34 Uses class time effectively
Section F: Questioning Skills 35 Interspaces Questions in the course of lesson delivery 36 Fairly distributes questions to reach everybody 37 Asks direct questions 38 Asks questions that require high cognitive skills 39 Repeats questions 40 Answers own questions 41 Repeats students’ answers
216 42 Gives insights into questions
Section G: Communication Skills 43 Makes orderly/logical communication of information 44 Talks clearly 45 Speaks fluently while teaching 46 Amplifies students’ responses 47 Gives students attention 48 Uses vocabulary appropriate for the class 49 Explains sometimes in vernacular 50 Talks while writing on the board 51 Establishes eye contact with students 52 Varies pitch, stress and tone 53 Makes facial expressions 54 Writes legibly on the chalkboard 55 Communicates effectively in English language 56 Writes well in English language 57 Lacks self-expression 58 Makes spelling mistakes on the board 59 Demonstrates the ability to read and understand professional material
Section H: Interpersonal Skills 60 Is friendly with students 61 Praises students when they do well 62 Asks the class to clap for those who do well in class 63 Smiles at the students 64 Informs students of their progress 65 Encourages students to participate in class 66 Has a good rapport with people 67 Calls students by name 68 Jokes with students 69 Accepts students’ ideas 70 Criticizes students 71 Is harsh to students 72 Is warm to students 73 Punishes students 74 Makes students to answer questions
Section I: Teacher Enthusiasm 75 Starts classes promptly 76 Varies tone and pitch 77 Makes frequent demonstrative movements 78 Makes facial expressions to show joy, sadness, awe etc. 79 Uses many adjectives and descriptive words 80 Works with vigour 81 Has a high degree of drive and vitality 82 Is enthusiastic for his/her work
Section J: Direct Teaching Technical Skills 83 Asks students questions 84 Gives notes of lessons to students 85 Utilizes advance organizers in lesson presentation 86 Uses teaching/study guide 87 Appears resourceful in lesson delivery
217 88 Uses varied teaching methods 89 Guides students to select learning activities 90 Talks most often in class 91 Tells stories to students 92 Reads for students to listen 93 Makes students stay quietly
Section K: Indirect Teaching Technical Skills 94 Encourages students to participate in class 95 Accepts contributions from students 96 Makes students work in groups 97 Provides for individual differences 98 Develops lesson notes as he/she teaches 99 Takes students out on excursions 100 Uses students’ ideas in teaching 101 Praises students when they make contributions
Section L: Tests/Examination Skills 102 Gives homework/assignment 103 Marks homework/assignment 104 Sets fair examination questions 105 Marks test/examinations 106 Assigns difficult work to students 107 Is fair in marking test/examinations 108 Relates evaluation with instructional objectives 109 Keeps records/charts of students’ progress 110 Makes encouraging comments in students’ work-books 111 Gives continuous assessment to students 112 Gives high scores to the same students 113 Coaches students for success in final exams 114 Coaches students for success in external exams 115 Helps students to develop self confidence in taking examinations
through nice comments
Section M: Teachers’ Aspiration For Professional Growth/Development 116 Has interest for further education 117 Has enrolled for higher education 118 Reads very widely 119 Reads textbooks and teacher’s guides only 120 Is a member of a professional body 121 Attends professional conferences 122 Longs for professional growth development
218
Appendix D: Analysis of Research Questions Descriptives
Notes
Output Created 23-August -2014 04:12:29
Comments
Input Active Dataset DataSet0
Filter <none>
Weight <none>
Split File <none>
N of Rows in Working Data
File 108
Missing Value Handling Definition of Missing User defined missing values are treated
as missing.
Cases Used All non-missing data are used.
Syntax DESCRIPTIVES
VARIABLES=VAR00001 VAR00002
VAR00003 VAR00004 VAR00005
VAR00006 VAR00007 VAR00008
VAR00009 VAR00010 VAR00011
VAR00012 VAR00013 VAR00014
VAR00015
/STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV.
Resources Processor Time 00:00:00.000
Elapsed Time 00:00:00.016
219
[DataSet0] Research Questions
Descriptive Statistics (Objectives) N Mean Std. Deviation
VAR00001 120 3.2424 1.4034
VAR00002 120 2.9324 2.1645
VAR00003 120 2.3723 1.3252
VAR00004 120 2.6283 1.2629
VAR00005 120 1.7274 1.3433
VAR00006 120 2.7498 1.2941
VAR00007 120 2.7797 1.5023
VAR00008 120 2.9276 1.4194
VAR00009 120 1.3164 1.5842
VAR00010 120 1.7144 1.3017
VAR00011 120 2.6442 1.5034
VAR00012 120 2.7562 1.4723
VAR00013 120 2.0477 1.3534
VAR00014 120 2.8352 1.4137
VAR00015 120 2.2455 1.2064
Valid N (listwise) 120
[DataSet0] Research Questions
Descriptive Statistics (Challenges) N Mean Std. Deviation
VAR00001 18 1.2235 1.036436
VAR00002 18 1.6553 1.252376
VAR00003 18 2.5371 1.105376
VAR00004 18 3.8774 1.203536
VAR00005 18 2.0253 1.547673
VAR00006 18 1.4563 1.244333
VAR00007 18 2.2136 1.301353
220
VAR00008 18 1.4653 1.266356
VAR00009 18 1.0333 1.345353
VAR00010 18 2.1753 1.372376
VAR00011 18 2.2436 1.291363
VAR00012 18 2.7753 1.046476
VAR00013 18 1.2433 1.154363
VAR00014 18 2.2363 1.217463
VAR00015 18 1.3733 1.947444
VAR00016 18 2.0376 1.035532
VAR00017 18 3.1233 1.062633
Valid N (listwise) 18
[DataSet0] Research Questions
Descriptive Statistics (Curriculum Assessment) N Mean Std. Deviation