AMHARA MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

SCHOOL OF LEADERSHIP AND POLITICAL ECONOMY

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC POLICY AND LEADERSHIP

ASSESSING THE PRACTICE AND CHALLENGES OF SCHOOL

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION IN SECONDARY
SCHOOLS: THE CASE OF GONDAR CITY ADMINISTRATION

BY

BEYENE DERJEW

ADVISOR: WASIHUN TIKU (PHD)

JANUARY,2023

BAHIRDAR
ASSESSING THEPRACTICEAND CHALLENGES OF SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION IN SECONDARY
SCHOOLS: THE CASE OF GONDAR CITY ADMINISTRATION

By

BEYENE DERJEW

ADVISOR: WASIHUN TIKU (PHD)

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES OF

AMHARA MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
IN –PUBLIC POLICY AND LEADERSHIP

JANUARY, 2023
BAHIRDAR
 ASSESSING THEPRACTICE AND CHALLENGES OF SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION IN SECONDARY
SCHOOLS: THE CASE OF GONDAR CITY ADMINISTRATION

By

BEYENE DERJEW

Approved by Examining Board

Advisor Signature

--------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------

Examiner Signature

--------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------

Examiner Signature
--------------------------------------------------------- ------------------
 DECLARATION

I declare that, this thesis is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other
university and that all sources or materials used for the thesis have been clearly acknowledged.
This thesis, to assess the challenges of school improvement program implementation in
secondary schools of Gondar city in Administration is approved as the original work of
BeyeneDerjew.

Name: _____________________________________________________________
Signature: __________________________________________________________
Date: ______________________________________________________________
This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as university advisor
Name: _____________________________________________________________
Signature: __________________________________________________________
Date: ______________________________________________________________

i
 CERTIFICATE
Here with I state that Beyene Derjew has carried out this thesis on the topic entitled “Assessing
the Practice and Challenges of School Improvement program Implementation in Secondary
Schools: The Case of Gondar City Administration”, under my supervision. This work has not
presented for a degree in any university and it is sufficient submission for the partial fulfillment
for the award of Master of Arts In –Public Policy and Leadership.

Main Advisor:
Signature ________________________Date _________________

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I feel happy to extend my greatest thanks to my advisor, D/r Wasihun Tiku, for his precious and
constructive comments, suggestions and feedback. Without his constructive comments and
suggestions, this study would not have been successful. I have very much grateful to the
kindness, patience, and warm-welcome he has shown me in the course of time.
I would like to thank my belovedbrother to Nega Kassie for being such a dedicated person in
providing all his support and love during the course of my studies despite a number of prevailing
challenges. Without his it would have been much difficult task to achieve the goals I set out for
myself.
I would also like to extend my thanks to the selected secondary school’s principals, teachers,
PTA members, School supervisors and education office expertise who contributed a lot for the
success of this study by giving information from interviews and focus Group Discussion.
Last but not least, this thesis would not have been possible without the love and strength of my
dearest family, my friends Amare Mazengiyaw and Mhiret Mengstie for all those who help me
by their eagerness and warm-hearted encouragement.

iii
 ABSTRACT

School improvement program is a national program that developed by Ministry of education

(MOE) in 1999by sharing of experience from different developed nations. The main purpose of
this program was to improve students result in primary and secondary schools, the general
objectives of the study was to assess the practice and challenges of school improvement
program implementation in 6 secondary schools with the population 345 teachers, 18 sip
committee members,12PTAmembers,6schoolprincipals,2clustorsupervisors,4educationexperts
were selected using bothStratified andPurposivesamplingTechnique, in the case of Gondar city
administration.The study used both quantitative and qualitative approach, to this end
descriptive design was employed. The data were collected by means of questionnaires, semi-
structured interviews, focused-group discussion and document analysis. Therefore, the data
obtained through questionnaires were analyzed by using mean values and standard
deviations. However, the data collected through focused group discussion, semi structured
interviews and document analysis, were analyzed by using content analysis technique.
Stratified sampling was used to select secondary schools, selected school teachers, and
principals, cluster supervisors; purposivesampling was used to selecte school improvement
committees and woreda education office experts. The major findings of the study indicated
that planning SIP implementation was lacked conducting self-assessment to identify the
current status of the school and limited budget was also presented as another challenge.
Teachers’ attitude and the capacities of the school leaders were revealed as the internal factor
that delayed the successfulness of the program. As a result, school leaders were recommended
todo self-assessment and prioritized the problems during planning for school improvement
program. It was also forwarded that after the assignment of school leaders, woreda education
administrators should be employed better school principals and cluster supervisors with
management related or leadership training. Finally, make strong the community involvement
and collaborative planning were recommended to school principals as well as teachers of the
schools.

Key words: Challenges, Practices, Principal, Strategies, Sip

iv
ACRONYMS

ACT Australian Capital Territory

CSA Central Statistics Authority

E.C Ethiopian Calendar

EIC Education Improvement Commission

EQAO Education Quality and accountability Office

ESDP Education Sector Development

GEQIP General Education Quality Improvement Package

ICT Information Communication Technology

IQEA Improving the Quality of Education for All

MOE Ministry of Education

PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty

REB Region Education Bureau

SEGE Student Achievement Gap Elimination

SIP School Improvement Program

TDP Teacher Development Program

UNDP United Nation Development Program

v
 Table of Contents

Contents page
DECLARATION............................................................................................................................ i
CERTIFICATE ............................................................................................................................. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ............................................................................................................. iii
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. iv
ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................. v
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGUREs ....................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................... 1
1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the Study..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................................... 4
1.2.1 Basic questions............................................................................................................................. 7
1.3 Objectives of the Study ....................................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 General objective ......................................................................................................................... 7
1.3.2 Specific objectives ....................................................................................................................... 7
1.4 Significance of the Study .................................................................................................................... 7
1.5 Delimitation of the Study/scope/......................................................................................................... 8
1.6. Operational definitions of key terms .................................................................................................. 8
1.6.1 Organization of the study ............................................................................................................. 9
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 10
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ............................................................................... 10
2.1 Theoretical Study of school improvement program (SIP) ................................................................ 10
2.1.1. The Concept of School Improvement ....................................................................................... 10
2.1.2. Rationale of School Improvement Program .............................................................................. 11
2.1.3. Assumptions of School Improvement Program ........................................................................ 12
2.1.4. Principles of School Improvement ............................................................................................ 14
2.1.5. School Improvement Committee .............................................................................................. 15

vi
 2.1.6 A Framework for School Improvement ..................................................................................... 16
2.1.7The domain of school improvement program ............................................................................. 16
2.1.7. 1 Learning and teaching domain ............................................................................................. 17
2.1.7.2 Safety and conducive learning environment domain .............................................................. 17
2.1.7.3 Community involvement domain............................................................................................ 18
2.1.7.4 Leadership and managing domain .......................................................................................... 18
2.1.8 The need for school improvement program ............................................................................... 19
2.1.9 Principles of school improvement.............................................................................................. 20
2.1.10 The role of school partners in implementing school improvement program ........................... 21
2.1.11the role of School improvement team in the implementation of SIP ........................................ 21
2.1.12 Practices and problems of school improvement program. ....................................................... 22
2.1.12.1 Practices of school improvement program ............................................................................ 22
2.1.12.2 Problems for implementation of school improvement program (SIP) .................................. 24
2.2. Empirical Studies of school improvement program implementation............................................... 24
2.2.1. The case of USA ....................................................................................................................... 24
2.2.2. Arab Republic of Egypt ............................................................................................................ 25
2.2.3. United Kingdom........................................................................................................................ 26
2.2.4. Australia .................................................................................................................................... 26
2.2.5. Ethiopia ..................................................................................................................................... 27
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................... 30
3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................ 30
3.1 Description of the study area ............................................................................................................ 30
3.2 Research Design................................................................................................................................ 31
3.3 Research Approach ........................................................................................................................... 32
3.3Targatepopulation, sample size, and sampling Technique................................................................. 32
3.3.1 Tar gate Population of the Study................................................................................................ 32
3.4. Sample Size...................................................................................................................................... 33
3.5. Sampling Techniques ....................................................................................................................... 34
3.6. Sources of Data ................................................................................................................................ 35
3.6.1 Primary Sources of Data ............................................................................................................ 35
3.6.2. Secondary Sources of Data ....................................................................................................... 36

vii
 3.7. Instruments of Data Gathering ......................................................................................................... 36
3.7.1 Questionnaires............................................................................................................................ 36
3.7.2. Semi-Structured Interviews....................................................................................................... 36
3.7.3 Focus Group Discussion ............................................................................................................ 37
3.7.4. Document Analysis ................................................................................................................... 37
3.8. Procedures of Data Collection ......................................................................................................... 37
3.9. Validity and Reliability Test ............................................................................................................ 38
3.10. Methods of Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 39
3.11 Ethical Consideration .................................................................................................................... 40
CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................................... 41
4. DATAPRESENTATION, RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS .............................................. 41
4.1. The backgrounnd information of the respondant ............................................................................. 41
4.2. Research findings ............................................................................................................................. 44
4.3 Results of the study based on domains of SIP Implimentation ......................................................... 47
4.4. Teachers’ perception on the SIP ...................................................................................................... 60
4.5. Major challenges the SIP implementation encountered ................................................................... 62
CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................ 67
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 67
5.1. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 67
5.2. Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 68
REFERENCE .............................................................................................................................. 70
APPENDICE፡ A .......................................................................................................................... 74
APPENDIX B .............................................................................................................................. 80
APPENDIX C .............................................................................................................................. 82
APPENDIX E .............................................................................................................................. 84
APPENDIX E .............................................................................................................................. 85
APPENDIX F .............................................................................................................................. 86

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Size of population and samples teachers by schools ................................................... 34

Table 3.2: Summary of Sample Size by Types of Respondents and Sampling Techniques. ....... 35
Table 3.3 The Cronach’s Alpha model was used for analysis reliability statistics....................... 39
Table 4.1 the characterstics of the repondant................................................................................ 41
Table 4.2: Teachers’ Response on the participations of stakeholders in school Improvement
Planning. ....................................................................................................................................... 44
Table 4.3 Teachers’ Response on School Leadership Domain..................................................... 47
Table 4.4: Teachers’ Response on Community Involvement ....................................................... 49
Table 4.5: Teachers’ Response on the Teaching-Learning Domain ............................................. 52
Table 4.6: Teachers’ Response on Learning Environment Domain ............................................. 54
Table 4.7 Teachers’ Response on School Improvement Program Monitoring and Evaluation.... 57
Table 4.8: Teachers’ Responses on the Perception of School Improvement Program. ................ 60
Table 4.9: Teachers’ Responses on the Challenges of School Improvement Program ................ 62
Table 4.10 Grand mean and standard deviation of each variable ................................................. 65

ix
 LIST OF FIGUREs

Figure 2. 1: School improvement domain & its elements in Ethiopia ........................................................ 29

Figure 3.1 Map of Gondar cities ................................................................................................................ 31

x
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

The Purpose of education is to prepare the next generation for expected life challenges, from
simpleday-to-day problems to complex social, economic, and political challenges. It is a project
that improves science and technology, develops capability, skill, and eliminates harmful
practices MoE, (1991). As the institutions where the formal teaching and learning activity takes
place, schools are vital to achieving these goals of education. As a result, schools can provide
awareness into how well an educational system is performing. In this regard, Macbeth, (2022)
stated that "improving the micro-efficiency of the school has been observed as a means of
addressing some of the Macro problems of the state and society Cited in Harris, (2005).

On the other hand, what is goingon in the larger educational system and the external environment
highly affects schools’ performance Ayalew, (1991). Since the early 1980’s educators around the
world have been faced with continual and dynamic changes both in their schools and in those
systems that are in support of them. Such a merciless change at schools makes the variety of
complex educational demands to be the responsibility of teachers and administrators Telford,
(1996).

Such increasingly competitive environment in which schools operate forced them to raise
standards and to improve the quality of their service Harris, (2005).Additionally, it was more
important than ever to adopt new ways of thinking about educational issues and strategies for
helping schools accomplish the necessary and desired reforms. As a result, wide reform
initiatives are being questioned by school systems all across the world. In order to maintain the
effectiveness of their educational institutions, many nations made important adjustments. The
most significant reform introduced was Carlson's School Improvement Programs (1996: 2).
Different authors have provided different definitions of school improvement programs.
According to Barnes (MoE c. i., 2007), school improvement is the process of changing particular
practices and policies in a way that helps to enhance teaching and learning process. People
involved in the school improvement program should be aware of the factors that can be changed
in schools to produce higher levels of educational quality as well as the conditions outside of the
1
schools that are required for improvement, according to Carlson (1996). This is because specific
practices and policies can only be changed by those involved in the program. In this regard, it
must be noted that there cannot be a single widely accepted school improvement strategy that
functions in all educational systems and settings because schools differ in shape, size, structure,
culture, political environment, and other dimensions. As a result, various countries have created
various approaches to school improvement that are appropriate for their respective educational
issues.

Peter Mortimore in Hopkins (2004) has recently described school improvement as, “the process
of improving “the way a school organizes, promotes and supports learningand teaching. It
includes changing aims, expectations, and organizations, ways of learning, and method of
teaching and organizational culture. In supporting this Hopkins (2004) described school
improvement as an appropriate response to the current pressures for educational reform that
focuses both on the learning needs of students and on estabmengistulishing the appropriate
organizational conditions within the school. Based on the above description of scholars and by
scaling up the experience of other countries, Ethiopia has initiated to reform change to improve
teaching –learning process and school conditions of the country as the result school improvement
program started in all schools of the country since 2007 by setting strategies and the objectives
of school improvement program.

According to MOE (2007), the objectives of school improvement program were, to improve the
capacity of schools to prioritize needs and develop a school improvement plan; to increase
school and community participation in resource utilization, decisions and resource generation; to
improve government’s capacity to deliver specified number of schools grant at woreda level; and
to improve the learning environment by providing basic operational resources to school.

To achieve these objectives Mengistu, (2017)has developed a General Education Quality

Improvement Package which comprises the six pillars: such as Teacher development program,
Curriculum improvement program, management and leadership, School improvement, Civic
and Ethical Education and Information Communication Technology. School improvement
program is one of the components of general Education Quality Improvement Package. The
school as a social institution needs to adjust itself in order to be in a steady state. One of the
mechanisms for this adjustment is improving their overall activities in relation with the needs of
2
the student, parent and community at large. Accordingly, by taking the demand of society into
consideration, Ministry of Education (MOE) has connected new program for schools. This newly
introduced program is known as school improvement program /SIP/.

According to MOE (2010), school improvement program was designed to support schools in
addressing school domains such as, teaching learning, school leadership and management,
community participation, and safe and healthy school environment. Each of these domains is
similarly important, if anyone is weak, the strength and the success of the whole will be affected.
Thus, the schools should give due emphasis for each domain. Assessing the practices and
challenges of school improvement program implementation in the schools with different school
domains and self-assessment, help to improve the inputs and process of schools this facilitate the
teaching learning process of the school to promote academic performance of the students. One of
the issues stressed in the school improvement Program document is the fact that, school
improvement program must be a continuous and cyclical process through its implementation that
involves SIP activities such as planning; Implementing, Evaluating and Reporting all these
activities should be implemented continuously at school level MOE, (2007).The major focus
areas of the school improvement programsare school leadership and management, parent and
community partnership, student- centered learning, professional development and collaboration
and quality instructional program. To this end school improvement program guideline has
developed MOE, (2005). The intention to conduct this research is that the document (2015),
communitymobilization and annual report of Gondar City Administration education
officereported that the low status of implementation of SIP. This is the very reason that
motivated the researcher to conduct the study in secondary schools of Central Gondar zone in
Gondar Cityparticular emphasis on Challenges.

3
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Achievement of institutional planning depends on the capacity and flexisbility of leaders and
effective school principals should look at the system as whole, asses the strengths and
weaknesses carefully create a feeling of readiness for changeARARSO, (2014)But a primary
reason that school improvement plans fail to show success is that the sip planwere not set in
front of the school’s daily life and plan that is put on the shelf and forgotten or initially
implemented, but neglected not contribute to the achievement of the students at the school
Talesra, (2002)The school leaders having the capacity to organize staff, trust others, and
communicate with the organization’s vision certainly come up with change and development.
Hopkins in Harris (2005 )identified different type of schools such as improving, failing, trapping
and dynamic in which the failing type is one which is attributed by low growth and low
maintenance; poor at the day-to-day management tasks and tends to be inactive rather than
proactive in their approach tolimits or problem solving. School improvement program is very
complex that it might be stuck by various obstacles that challenge the implementation. These
challenges include: complexity of the program, mobility of teachers and principals, principal’s
coordination problems and, low support from top level officials and lack of involvement of the
stakeholders. In order to play active and effective leadership role in school improvement
programs, principals need to have the academic knowledge, skill and adequate experiences in
school leadership MoE, (1999 ),

More specifically, principals are expected to play a great role in the implementation of SIP,
based on four domains such as learning and teaching, student environment, school leadership and
management and community involvement. Principals articulate and communicate clear and
motivating visions and must also convince followers that the visions are achievable. School
principals implementing school improvement program in Ethiopia are facing lots of problems.
Challenges are major contributing factors that lead to ineffectiveness of principals’ performance.
In turn, this challenge negatively impacts schools and finally influences student achievement and
success. MoE, (2010) identified problems in school improvement program implementation, such
as limited capacity of leadership at sector and school level, limited SIP implementation capacity
at both woreda and school levels, unsustainable monitoring and evaluation system of SIP, less
student achievement in relation with low quality, MoE (2010) listed key outcome targets of SIP

4
for primary and secondary education expected at the end of 2014/2015 at national level. Among
these one was student teacher ratio was 33:1. In line with these key outcome targets
according to the 2014/15 annual report of Amhara Regional Education Bureau AREB, (2015
)indicated, that student teacher ratio was 27:1;student section ratio was 59:1. In the same
way, the 2014/15 annual report of Gondar City administration education office listed, as
the student teacher ratio was 53:1; the student section ratio was 65:1. Based on these indicators
of quality education, implementation of SIP in Gondar City administration secondary schools (9-
12) is much below than the national standard and even less than average implementation of SIP
at regional level. Thus why, this study was very important in Gondar City administration
secondary schools (9-12) to identify challenges observed in implementation of SIP were few of
the problems identified. Based on the above problems the researcher assessedthe academic
achievement of grade 9-12 students in selected schools on the past three years were listed as
follow. Therefor as researcher assessed the achievements of students in the consecutive three
years, their achievement indicated that 38.52%, 48.09% and 39.45%of students were not pass
in 2011, 2013 and 2014 E.C. respectively. From thisreport one can conclude that large number
of students did not pass to the next grades, this is due to ineffective implementations of school
improvement programs. According to the report of City administration education office, most
school principals did not effectively practice school improvement program. This indicates that
there are different variables that affect the practice of principals in implementing SIP. Different
studies have been conducted on some of the domains of SIP. Dereje (2012) and Abera (2013),
for example, conducted related studies focusing on the implementation challenges of SIP in
secondary schools, though they chose different study areas, the former did it in schools in towns
surrounding Addis Ababa. Lemessa (2016), also did his study on the status of the
implementation of school improvement program in primary schools of in Ilu Aba Bora Zone.
Husen (2016), studied the effectiveness of school leadership in implementing school
improvement program in secondary schools of West Arsi Zone in Oromia Regional State.
Additionally, Tigistu (2012 )conducted a case study on the perception of leadership in
effectiveness of school improvement program in selected high schools in Addis Ababa. The
emphasis of this research was on perception of leadership on school improvement. A further
study carried out on SIP related topic was by Chaltu (2015) focused on assessment of School

5
Improvement Program implementation practices and challenges in selected secondary schools of
West Hararghe AdministrativeZone

. MULU, (2018) conducted on the school improvement program implementation by focusing on

its practices and challenges in selected Secondary Schools of Kirkos Sub City Most of these
studies focused on Implementation and challenges of SIP however the researcher tries to study
its practiec and challengs concerning secondary schools so it is the same from the previous study
but the only difference was no more studies in Gondarcity secondary schools on this topic.For
the failures of SIP, Mekango (2013 )concluded that difficulty of understanding of school
improvement program, shortage of educational finance, lack of school facilities, and inadequate
support from Woreda education office, cluster supervisors; PTA members and lack of practical
training on implementing SIP were the major challenges that hinder the implementation of SIP.
This shows the challenges identified by MoE, (2010) in implementation of SIP. These include
low capacity to implement SIP at school and Woreda level and low SIP monitoring and
evaluation system. Furthermore, as far as the knowledge of the researcher is concerned, and he
observed some of implementation problems that hinder the program from achieving its
objectives in secondary schools. Some of these were inadequate participation of stakeholders,
lack of experience and skills among school principals, low coordination of school community to
implement the program. So, the study area makes it different from others, since all school’s
problems are somewhat different this study was designed, to assess Implementation of School
Improvement Program in Gondar City Administration Secondary Schools.In addition, no one
conducted research about the challenges of school improvement program implementation in
secondary schools of Central Gondar Zone.Therefore, all these were motivated the researcher to
study the research on practices and challenges of SIP in secondary schools of the city

6
1.2.1 Basic questions
1. To what extent teachers, students and parents participate in school improvementplanning
and implementation of SIP in Gondar City Administration Secondary Schools?
2. How far monitoring and evaluating mechanisms are used for implementation of SIP in
school?
3. How do teachers' and school leaders perceive SIP in secondary schools of
Gondar City Administration?
4. What major challenge affects school principals in implementing SIP in secondary schools
of Gondar City Administration?

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General objective

The general objective of the study is to assess the challenges and practice of school improvement
program in secondary schools.

1.3.2 Specific objectives

• To assess the extent of teachers’, students’ and parents’ participation in school
improvement planning and implementationof sip.
• To find outHow far monitoring and evaluating mechanismare usedfor in implementation
of SIP in Schools.
• To assess teachers' and school leader’s perception about SIP in secondary schools of
Gondar City Administration.
• To identify What major challenges that affects implementation of SIP in government
secondary schools of Gondar City Administration

1.4 Significance of the Study

The school improvement program needs to be emphasized by the government and educational
experts to make an investigation in identifying the problems that hinder its practices, and to
recommend possible solution. Thus, the results of the study would have the following
contributions as significances of the study.

7
 ❖ The study may highlightthe advantages and disadvantages of current practices,
obstacles, and future opportunities for SIP in secondary schools run by the City
Administration.
❖ This study's main findings could lead to alternative ideas for raising student success
and school quality.
❖ The research findings will close the information gap about the strategy, and increase
stakeholder awareness for improved implementation and outcomes,
❖ It May kindle additional research on the topic by other researchers.
❖ It is also believed that by engaging responsible parties in school development
programs, which finally result in the highest student achievement.
❖ The study would help to improve the quality of education.

1.5 Delimitation of the Study/scope/

. Geographically the scope of this study would be delimited to the six secondary schools of
Gondar City administration. Concerning the time, the study was conducted by focusing on
practices and challenges of SIP from 2015E.C, of secondary schools in Gondar City
administration.the researcher was interested toconduct this research due to inimplementation of
school improvementprograme, that affects the studentsaccadamic achievement.

1.6. Operational definitions of key terms

School Improvement Program - the process of improving educational inputs, improving the
elements performance and conducting self-assessment based on varied school domains (teaching
learning, school leadership and management, safe school environment, and community
participation) to develop learning outcomes of students by improving their learning and
behavior.

General Secondary School: According to Ethiopian educational classifications, it refers to the

level of educational structure from grade 9 to 12.

School Improvement Committee: Is a committee established from principals, teachers,

students, parents, and non-academic staff to coordinate and evaluate School Improvement
Program Implementation.

8
School improvement- To make schools better places for students to learn in.

. Implementation-Implementation is the carrying out, execution, or practice of a plan, a method,

oranydesignfordoingsomething.

1.6.1 Organization of the study

This research paper was organized into five chapters. The first chapter deals introductory part
which includes background of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study,
significance of the study, delimitations of the study, and operational definition of terms. The
second chapter would be presented review of relevant literatures. Chapter three would show that
research design and methodology as well as the sources of data, the study population, sample
size and sampling technique, procedures of data collection, data gathering tools and methodology
of data analysis. The fourth chapter deals with data presentation, analysis, results and discussion.
The fifth chapter consisted, conclusions and recommendations of the study.

9
 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Theoretical Study of school improvement program (SIP)

2.1.1. The Concept of School Improvement

The fundamental idea behind school improvement is that its dual importance on enhancing the
school capacity for change as well as implementing specific reforms, both of which have their
ultimate goal of increasing in student achievement. Hence, school improvement is about
strengthening school’s organizational capacity and implementing educational reform. Another
major concept of school improvement is that, school improvement cannot be simply associated
with educational change in general. Because many changes, whether external or internal, do not
improve students’ outcome as they simply imposed. They should rather focus on the importance
of culture and organization of the school (Hopkins as cited in Frew, 2010 and 1994 )When we
are talking about school improvement as a process, it is continuous activity of fulfilling different
inputs, upgrading school performance and bringing better learning outcomes at school level
MOE, (2005).

This improvement is not a routine practice which can be performed in a day-to day activities of
schools. Educational institutions have different settings and capacity in providing their services
to the needy. In general, the term improvement is familiar to all. It simply means reforming,
transforming or upgrading the quality of inputs, process, service or product. The school
improvement has been defined in different ways by different scholars. According to Harris
(2005), school improvement is defined as “a different approach to educational change that
enhances student’s outcomes as well as strengthens the school’s capacity for managing
improvement initiatives”. Hopkins further explained that school improvement is about raising
student’s achievement through focusing on the teaching and learning process and those
conditions which support it. And also, Velzen et al., as cited in Reynolds et al., ( 1996 )has
defined “a systematic, sustained effort aimed at change in learning conditions and other related
internal conditions in one or more schools, with the ultimate aim of accomplishing educational
goals more effectively.” Hopkins in Macbeath and Mortimore, (1996) also defined school
improvement as “a strategy for educational change that enhances student outcomes as well as

10
strengthening the school’s capacity for handling change.” In addition to these definitions, plan
international (2004 )define school improvement with some explanations as: School improvement
means making schools for learning. This relies on changes at both school level and within
classroom, which in turn depends on school being committed to fulfilling the expectations of the
children and their parents. In other Words, school improvement refers to a systematic approach
that improves the quality of schools.

In general, the central idea of SIP is a process of continued activity intended to improve students’
learning achievement through different strategies and capacity building efforts.

2.1.2. Rationale of School Improvement Program

According to the Plan International (2004), the school improvement supports the program
initiatives of government and others in achieving the goals of education for all by
2015.Specifically,this program aims to: support school based improvement plans, enhance the
quality of children’s basic education, achieve the enrollment, attendance and completion rates
that meet the Education for All goals; achieve equality of access to school for both girls and boys
and achieve better prospects for completing school. Therefore, to achieve such aims of school
improvement program, Plan International (2004)has also suggested core elements which have
greater implication by the program elaborating that this program aims to support schools in
address core elements such as:

“Ensuring teachers are competent and motivated, promoting active learning methods supported
by appropriate teaching and learning aids, promoting the active participation of children and
parents in school’s governance, ensuring a safe, sound and effective learning environment
establishing a relevant curriculum ensuring empowered and supporting school leaders and
advocating for supporting supervision”. Each of the core elements is equally important; if any
one becomes weak, the strength and the success of the whole will be affected. Therefore, the
school should give greater attention for each of the core elements to attain the purpose of school
improvement. Therefore, school improvement is an important aspect of the school system. It
contributes a lot to the efficiency and the quality of the educational provision. As suggested in
(MOE, 2007 )school improvement helps to create a learning environment toall learners. It
enables teachers to be responsive to the various learning needs of students in their teaching-
learning approaches. Moreover, school improvement is essentials to enhance the involvement of

11
the parents and the community in the school activities and to improve the effectiveness of the
school’s managements. In general, school improvement helps to realize the provision of quality
education for all children by making the overall practices and functions of school more
responsive to the various student’s needs. To this end, schools and educationalists in collaborate,
designed to strengthen the school’s ability to manage changes, to enhance the work of teachers,
and ultimately to improve students’ achievements.

2.1.3. Assumptions of School Improvement Program

According to Reynolds et al. (1996)have discussed the approach that school improvements
historical backgrounds. They said that, over the past thirteen years, school improvement has
been characterized by two different sets of assumptions. These two assumptions can be
discussed as follows for the purpose of clarification.

They have put their extended explanations as in the 1960’s and 70’s, SI in the United States, the
United Kingdom and internationally displayed a number of paradigmatic characteristics.

By the time, curriculum innovation was brought to schools from outside, and then introduced
‘top down’. The innovation was based up on knowledge produced by persons outside the school,
the focus was on the school’s formal organization and curriculum, the outcomes were taken as
given, and the innovation was targeted at the school more than the individual practitioner. The
whole improvement structure was based up on positivistic, quantitative evaluation of effects. The
worldwide failure of this model of school improvement to generate more than partial take-up by
schools of the curricula or organizational innovations became an established finding within the
educational discourse of the 1970’s.

Reynolds et al,(1996 )extended their explanation by saying, out of the recognition of the above
failure; the new improvement paradigm came in the early 1980’s, which is still reflected in much
of the writing on school improvement today. This new orientation celebrated a ‘bottom up’
approach to school improvement, in which the improvement attempts were ‘owned’ by those at
school level; although outside school consultants or experts could put their knowledge forward
for possible utilization. This approach tended to celebrate the ‘folklore’ or practical knowledge
of practitioners rather than the knowledge base of researchers and focused up on needed changes
to educational process, rather than to school management, or to organizational features which
were regarded as reified constructs. It wanted outcomes or goals of school improvement
12
programs to be debated and discussed, rather than merely accepted as given. Those working
within this paradigm also tended to operate at the level of the practitioner as well as the level of
the school, with a qualitative and quantitative measurement. Therefore, the improvement
attempts were ‘whole school’ oriented and school based, rather than outside school or course
based. Other scholars like Hopkins and Largerweij (al i. R., 1996 )stated additional assumptions
about school improvement.

The school is the center of change. This means that external reforms need to be sensitive to the
situation in individual schools, rather than assuming that all schools are identical. It also implies
that the school improvement efforts need to adopt a ‘classroom-exceeding perspective’, without
ignoring the classroom. Another assumption of school improvement is that, there is a systematic
approach to change.

That is school improvement is not a haphazard activity but it is a carefully planned and managed
process that takes place over a period of time. In addition to the above assumption, Hopkins and
Largerweij said that the “internal conditions” of schools are a key focus for change. These
include the teaching and learning activities in the school, the schools’ procedures, role
allocations and resources uses that support the teaching learning process.

The accomplishment of educational goals more effectively is the other parts of assumption of
school improvement. Because educational goals reflect the particular mission of a school, and
represent what the school itself regards as desirable. This suggests a broader definition of
outcomes than students’ scores on achievement tests, even though for some schools these maybe
prominent. Schools also serve the more general development al needs of student, the professional
development needs of teachers and the needs of its community.

School improvement has also an assumption of a multi-level perspective. That means, although
the school is the center of change, it does not act alone. The school is embedded in

an educational system that has to work collaboratively if the highest degrees of quality are to be
achieved. This implies that the role of teachers, heads, governors, parents, support staff and local
authorities should be defined, harnessed and committed to the process of school improvement.

Implementation strategies integrated in school improvement is also the other part of assumptions.
This means a linkage between ‘top down ‘and ‘bottom-up’, remembering of course that both
13
approaches can apply at a number of different levels in the system. Ideally, ‘top down’ policy
provides policy aims, an overall strategy, and operational plans; this is complemented by
‘bottom-up ‘responses involving diagnosis, priority goal setting and implementation. The former
provides the frame work, resources and menu of alternatives, the latter, provides the energy and
school- based implementation.

Therefore, school improvement to effective should integrate systematic approach to change,

accomplishment of educational goals effectively, multi- level perspective and implementation
strategies.

2.1.4. Principles of School Improvement

According to Abeya Geleta and Tamiru Jot (2009)researches in the area developed a number of
important principles that result in school effectiveness and excellence. Based on recent effort to
improve schools and the school reform, basic principles that school leaders can adopt for
improving their own schools are listed below the school has clearly stated mission or setoff goals
school achievement is closely monitored Provisions are made for all students, including tutoring
for low achievers and supplementation programs for the gifted; teacher and administrators agree
on what is good teaching and learning a general philosophy and psychology of learning prevail.;
emphasis on cognition is balanced with concern of students’ personal, social and moral growth;
students are taught to be responsible for their own behavior; teachers and administration expect
students to learn and convey these expectations to students and parents; teachers are
expected to makes significant contribution to school improvement; administrators give
sufficient support, information and time for teacher enrichment; Sense of teamwork prevails ;
there is inter disciplinary and inter departmental communication; Incentives ,recognition and
rewards are conveyed to teachers and administrators for their efforts on the behalf of the team
and school mission; the interest and needs of individual staff members are matched with the
expectation of the institution; The staff has the opportunity to be challenged and creative; there is
a sense of professional enrichment and renewal; staff development is planned by teachers
and administrators to provide opportunities for continuous professional growth; the school
environment is safe and healthy; there is a sense of order in classrooms; parents and
community members are supportive of the school and are involved in school activities; the

14
school is a learning center for the large community; it reflects the norms and values of the
community; the community see the school as an extension of the community.

2.1.5. School Improvement Committee

According to Hopkins in Harris et al. (2005), school improvement groups are an essential feature
of sustained school improvement. We sometimes refer to these “internal change agent “as the
cadre- group, a term borrowed from Schmuck and Runkels (1985) organizational development
cadre in Oregon who fulfilled a similar role in those schools. They are responsible for the day-
to-day running of the project in their own schools, and for creating link between the principals
and idea of school improvement and practical action. Typically, the cadre group is across
hierarchical team of between four six members of the staff. Though one of these is likely to be
the head teacher, it is important to establish groups that are genuinely representative of the range
of perspectives and ideas available in the school. Cadre group members should also not come
together in any existing group within the school, such as the senior management team or heads of
department group, so that the problem of pooled rationalization is minimized. In terms of their
school improvement work, cadre group members are involved in: Out of school training session
son capacity building and teaching and learning, Planning meetings in school, consultancy to
school working groups, Observation and in-classroom supports,

The cadre or school improvement group is essentially a temporary membership system focused
specifically upon inquiry and development Harris, (2005).

According to the MOE (2012), school improvement committee is a committee set up from
teachers, supportive staff members, students, parents and local communities to lead the
improvement program of their school. According to the document the head of the committee is
the school principal and the working period of time is three years. The committee has the
following roles and responsibilities to run school improvement program in their school:

To attend and actively participate, in all school improvement meetings; participate actively in all
school improvement program activities; assist the committee to develop and successfully
implement, a three-year school improvement strategic plan, and a one- year school
improvement action plan.; assist the school to raise resources from parents and community to
implement the one year school improvement action plan.; assist the school to realize

15
measurable improvement in student results for all students; assist the school to assess their
achievement and the end each school year and to report to parents and community members
twice a year (six month and twelve month). Therefore, school improvement committee is
essential a group of members to run the effective implementation of school improvement
program in all schools of the country.

2.1.6 A Framework for School Improvement

The School Improvement Framework supply the schools with a structure for raising quality,
achieving excellence and delivering better schools for better futures. The framework sets up a
dynamic relationship between research and planning that will assist schools to undertake self-
assessment, which is context-specific, evidence-informed and outcomes focused ACT, (2009).

All ACT public schools will use the School Improvement Framework to critically examine their
programs and practices. The framework provides a focus through which schools can evaluate the
extent to which they are meeting stakeholder expectations, delivering on system priorities and
implementing strategic initiatives.

As a result framework will help schools to: make best use of evidence-informed processes and
tools to evaluate their performance, self-assess to identify school priorities, develop a four year
school plan and an annual operating plan with a focus on improvement over time, establish
accountability measures and targets that indicate their improvements and inform further planning
report on their progress regularly ACT,( 2009).Effective implementation of the School
Improvement Framework will see schools developing a cyclic approach to achieving and
sustaining school improvement. The progress will be evident across four domains of school
improvement: learning and teaching; leading and managing; conducive learning environment;
and community involvement.

2.1.7The domain of school improvement program

School improvement domains are key areas of concern for improvement activities in which its
main focus is enhancing students learning outcome. It serves as a frame of reference
coordinating activities, planning, monitoring and evaluation etc of school tasks.

The domains of SIP vary from country to country based on their priorities. For instance, MOE
(2006) and ACT (2009) divided school domains into four categories.
16
According to ACT the four domains of the school; includes; learning and teaching, leading and
managing, conducive learning environment and community involvement. The domains represent
the four key areas in which school improvement takes place. They describe the essential
characteristics of an effective school. The form a structure with which school can review
question and analyze their systems and process ACT, (2009).

2.1.7. 1 Learning and teaching domain

The learning and teaching domain describe the context in which the curriculum is delivered high
quality learning occurs when teachers make appropriate decisions about what is taught, how to
engage students in meaningful experiences and how progress will be assessed to inform future
action. Some educators claim good teaching cannot be defined because the criteria differ for
every instructional situation and every teacher.

Harris, A (2002) states that, while it cannot be denied that there are conditions at school level
which can make class room improvement more possible, there teaching-learning process the
main determinant of educational out comes. Fulan (1992) in Harris, A. (2002) have stated that
school improvement research highlights the center of teaching learning in the purist of sustained
school improvement. Curriculum is the issue that should be taken in to account in the process of
teaching-learning process. In development and implementation of curriculum, teachers are the
fundamental agents and directing an institutional delivery and evaluation of the curriculum.

2.1.7.2 Safety and conducive learning environment domain

The student environment describes the promotion of positive and respectful relationships which
are stable, welcoming and inclusive in safe and productive learning environments students
willingly engaged and participate in the broad range of learning opportunities.

They contribute to decisions about their learning and their contributions are valued. In a safe
school issecure and disciplined environment personal and school property are not subject to theft,
destruction, students and staff respect each other and behave in ways that contribute to effective
teaching and learning.

Hence, safe conducive climate and health school environment plays significant role for school
improvement. MoE, (2006) states school environment consists of students focus, student’s

17
empowerment and students support and decisive domain for the implementation of school
improvement program.

2.1.7.3 Community involvement domain

The community involvement domain describes the development quality, ongoing, community
partnerships and networks. Schools are responsive to community expectations, suitable
environment for learning, school administration and community participation. Community
involvement in educational affairs is one of the most over used but least understood concepts in
developing countries. Community participation is a process through which stake holders
influence and share control over development initiatives and the decision and resource which
affect them.

Kruger.A.G.(1996) has also indicated the following activities as a means for parents to get
involved in schools; helping children with homework, fund raising; maintenance building and
grounds; transporting of pupil’s; Organizing functions at school helping with extracurricular
activities and supporting school activities. Several reports on community involvement indicate
that the school in general and teachers and students in particular benefit a lot from the
involvement of the community in the issue of schools.

2.1.7.4 Leadership and managing domain

The leading and managing domain is considered with communicating a clear vision for a school
and establishing effective management structures. Leaders set directions guide the school
community alignment of its purpose and practice. Effective leader ship with in the school is
collegial student centered and teachers focus promoting a collective responsibility for
improvement.

Harris and Linda Lambert, (2003) described that the concept of leader ship by explaining the
leader ship is an enacted variable depend up on interactions between leader follower and
Context. South worth (2004) also noted the relationship of leader ship and context when he states
that; Leadership is conditional upon environmental and contextual factors.One characteristic
that marks out successful leaders of school to their ability to understand the contexts in which the
operate. Leader ship is a shared function and only expresses it self with and through others. But

18
it cannot delegate. The expansions of leader ship are empowering others to lead and improve
schools.

In empowerment as Arcaro, (2019 )states that: “People are encouraged to be open, creative, and
innovative in finding new ways to work within the system enable everyone to achieve the system
wide vision” leadership a critical and essential variable in the process of generating capacity for
school improvement. It builds capacity for individuals to flourish and for schools to continually
improve and change.

School leadership plays a great role in implementing school improvement programs. To

implement school improvement programs effectively and sustainably school leader ship capacity
has to be enhanced. Hopkins et al, (2001) in Harries et al. (2003)point out school capacity is the
collective competency of the school to bring about effective change in four components. namely,
knowledge, skills and dispositions of individual staff; a professional learning community in
which staff work collaboratively; program coherence, and technical resource. School principals
empower others to leaarcard and the serves as catalysts for changes Harris and Linda Lambert,
(2003). Hal lingers and Heck, (1996)in Harris et al. (2003) indicate four areas in which head
teacher influences the school. The first is through establishing and conveying the purposes and
goals of the schools.

A second through the inter play between the school’s organizations and its social network. A
third is though influence over people and fourth is a relation to organizational culture. Successful
change leaders articulate a vision for their schools so that everyone articulates a vision for their
school. So that everyone understands the vision shares authority, responsibility and
accountability to accomplish it Lovis and Miles, 1990 in Harris and Daniel Muijes (2005).

2.1.8 The need for school improvement program

School improvement is an important aspect of the school system. It contributes a lot of the
efficiency quality of educational provision. As indicated in MOE (2007b) and ACT Government
(2004) school improvement helps to create a learning environment that welcomes all learners. It
enables teachers to be responsive to the various learning needs of students in their teaching
learning approaches. Moreover, school improvement is essential to enhance the involvement of

19
parents and the community in school activities and to improve the effectiveness of the school’s
management. The importance of implementing SIP as indicated in school improvement guide
line are: first, it will enable to improve the teaching process by systematically increasing the
competency, efficiency and motivation of teachers and the management through various
techniques(mutual teaching, by correcting weakness by self-evaluation and developing
strong unity by exchanging experiences and the realistic practical training…etc.).Second,
increases students for education and improving the necessary resources for education and to
create suitable condition for learning. Third, it increases the participation parents andcommunity
and their feeling of responsibility by increasing their awareness regardingeducation and fourth it
provides quality of education by providing the necessary resources through the coordination of
the community, non-governmental organizations, humanitarian agencies and religious
organizations, in addition to assistance provided by the government MOE, (2006).

Besides, effective school improvement program minimizes wastage of educational resources by

reducing class repetition, dropout and improving the learning capacity and academic
achievement of students MOE, (2006).

2.1.9 Principles of school improvement

School improvement process is a systematic approach that follows its own principles. Luneburg
and Ornstein (2009 )have listed the following guiding principles that need to be followed in
school improvement process Schools should employ asset of goals and missions which are easy
to understand.
Students’ achievement must be continuously checked and evaluated
• Schools need to help all students especially the low achievers need to be tutored and
enhancement program should be opened for high talented students.
• Principals and staff should be actively involved in continuous capacity building to update
their knowledge, information and to develop positive thinking.
• Every teacher needs to contribute to successful implementation of school improvement
program.
• Teachers must involve actively in staff development by planning implementing it.
• School environment has to be safe and health.

20
 • School community relationships should be strengthened so that community and parents
need to involve in SIP implementation; and
• School leader ship should be shared among staff, students and parents.

2.1.10 The role of school partners in implementing school improvement program

Schools exist within the context of parents‟ community, school districts, others educational
organizations and institutions, and levels of government. each of them has an impact on school
and though school of pupils. The partners that contribute for the school improvement described
by Stoll and Dean Fink (2011) include parents, community pupils and school area and the others.
If schools create a strong sense partnership with parents, they contribute a lot to pupil’s success.
They support schools by providing their knowledge, skills and resources. The school
surrounding community should support schools in various aspects.

The community has to participate in school development programs and has to make financial and
material support. Pupils have to be involved in decision making of school development programs
and they have to be encouraged to take responsibility inday-to-day routine work in class room
level. School districts support schools in providing equitable and purpose full distribution of
resources not only monetary but also human material and psychological support. There are other
partners such as nongovernmental organizations (NGO), charitable organizations, universities
etc. that could support schools in their improvement efforts.

2.1.11the role of School improvement team in the implementation of SIP

School improvement is work that requires collaborative efforts of stake holders, form plan
preparation through implementation and evaluation. To begin with school improvement, process
the first step should be establishing school improvement committee/team. Barnes (2004 )suggest
that the way to start school improvement is to create a school improvement team and the team is
a group of people who work together to develop lead, and coordinate the school improvement
process. Accordingly, he pointed out the characteristics of effective school improvement to be
small size representative group, coordinate effort and commitment task. According to the same
author the responsibility of school improvement team/committee includes: meet with each
other members of the school community to inform them of self-study and its objectives
and process: obtain the input of faculty and staff and incorporate in to self-study process,

21
collect data, meet regularly to discuss progress, make preliminary conclusions and reflect on
what data shows ,as well as on the process itself; assist with documentation and
evaluation of self-study ;and assign and negotiate collection tasks with in school
community Barnes, (2004).The committee members are comprised of teachers,
management personnel, students, parents and community and the principal of each
schools works as the committee chairman MOE,(2006).The responsibilities of school
improvement committee in the document includes; they prepare school improvement plan
,they out line strategies through which the school community contribute substantially to the
school improvement; they organize a system which a school community participates in the
school improvement program starting from self-evaluation to implementation and
assessment ;and they implement such systems closely supervises school improvement plan
provide the necessary assistance and support; and at the end academic year present a
report to the school community on the improvement activities carried out by the school. Based
on the evaluation report they inform the schools‟ status to the local community MOE, (2006).

The school improvement team/committee conducts school self-evaluation that is the starting
point to draft school improvement plan it gives direction to what issues should be addressed first
and what follows based on the priority given by school leaders, students and parents. School can
plan and implement their school improvement programs only when they are aware of their
current status in respect to the four domains based on reliable and accurate information and when
they design and perform their improvement plan MOE, (2006).

2.1.12 Practices and problems of school improvement program.

2.1.12.1 Practices of school improvement program

In Ethiopia with the intension of improving the quality of education, much effort has been
exerted. For instance, during supervision of the program many efforts were made to assess the
experience of the best promoting school with in the country and experiences of other countries.
Different guidelines and frame works were developedand awareness raising training was
conducted at different level MOE, (2007)

Thus, the secondary schools are expected to successfully implement the school improvement
program. However, SIP is a very wide spread phenomenon and a wide variety of improvement
efforts can be found. to be any importance for school effectiveness school improvement should
22
use the school effectiveness, knowledge base and be directed to the application of this
knowledge as focused intervention, emphasizing implementation, emphasis outcomes and
evaluation techniques to practice school improvement program. Implementation in the first year:
preparation the school improvement unit decides how to implement and guide the frame work.
The school improvement committees and all stakeholders of the school will help for
implementation of the framework and school preparation; collect evidences regarding the school
domains making system survey: regarding current school work efficiency assess the views of
stakeholders (students, parents and teachers). It is duties which school engage feedback
regarding the four domains of schools using survey decide and reachan agreement by
investigating the collected data for school work efficiency. The key stakeholders (teachers,
students and parents) should participate in the annual school evaluation.

In this respect the school improvement framework implementation will relate with teaching&
learning activities; and prepare plan of the school, the improvement unit, using the result of
evaluation will prepare plan for three years and annual plans. The plan incorporates goals of
objectives and priorities of the activities. Implementation of the school plan: implementing the
plan will start when the school improvement committee is believed that the plan prepared is
ready for implementation.

This means that using feedback transfer from the previous plan and new improved plan, follow-
up and control the committee itself and other stakeholders will make followed up and control
system, report of the implementation, the school improvement committee will present the annual
report for the school community and for the responsible bodies. Implementation in the second
year: - schools will evaluate their improvement regarding the goal sets and priorities differentiate
where there are new priorities, select where there are standards which are not evaluated, lastly
the committee will report the progress of the SIP. Implementation of the third year: - schools will
control then improvement throughevaluation; implementation of strategic plan will continue;
making follow up and evaluation; schools’ activities and results will be evaluated and provided
feedback by out of school unit using the concrete evidences of the schools by identifying their
strengths and weakness recommendation will be provided and feedback will be reported to the
school MOE, (1999).

23
2.1.12.2 Problems for implementation of school improvement program (SIP)

The school improvement is complex process which can be challenged by different factors during
its implementation. In this respect, Fullan (2001) has noted that when a new imitative is
introduced undoable it will create difficult to both individuals and institutions. Thus, for success
of the program it needs to consider challenging factors prior to the implementation of the
program and in due process. Rendering quality and relevant education to its citizen has been the
most challenging concern to all countries. It is even more serious in developing countries like
ours. A lot of attempts made in reform and improvement to change endeavor has been facing
challenge.

Some of the problems identified by Khosa (2009) include; many schools are dysfunctional, and
are not transforming time, teaching, physical and financial resources in learning outcomes. Next
curriculum delivery is poor; teachers do not complete the curriculum, and pitch their teaching at
levels than those demanded by the curriculum. In addition, district support and monitoring
functions are inadequate and in effective. Last but not least, community support of school is low.

2.2. Empirical Studies of school improvement program implementation

This part dealt with some experience over the world which exercised SIP. Accordingly, an
attempt has been made to assess of their research findings and literatures on the issue of SIP on
the ground long history on the development of the program and experience.

2.2.1. The case of USA

Good lad(1966) in Lieberman, (2005:2)discussing about the roots of school improvement in the
context of the USA states that: sponsored by the growing infusion of federal funds through the
national defense education act of 1958, the national science foundation and other
private foundations educators began to look more closely at schools, classrooms and
thecurriculum and how to improve theme, whowas to take responsibilities to take change? How
were they to be made? What conditions would be necessary to support serious reform? These
were some questions that were gaining national attention as, for the first time, large
amounts of federal funds were being appropriate to improve school. Expanding Good lad’s
idea, Smith and Giacquinta also in Liberman, (2005:3), stated that curriculum reform efforts,
civil right movement pressures, commitment towards, war on poverty‖, and money provided for a
24
wide variety of educational programs to support equity and the improvement of school
eventually cause evaluation of how school used the money and how the program for change
actually made their into school practice that led to understand school as social organizations and
the enormous difficulties that were involved in trying to change them and all of which to
give ground for the beginning of school improvement.

As a response to Evans statement, Harris, (2002), argues as follows: within the United States;
particularly, school improvement efforts are yet the success of restructuring as a means of
improving schools remains questionable‖.

According to Jones, et al. (1988:5), the following were focus areas of school
improvement strategies for Americans since World War II; new math, flexible schedule ling,
desegregation, educational television, management by objectives, open classrooms, competency-
based curricula, micro-computers, master teachers or merit pay plans, teachers
preparations programs, and mainstreaming‖ special needs students.

Passow (1989) in Cookson, et al. (1992:454-455), have also discussed the following futures of
the two waves of the post 1980s: the first wave was concerned primarily with the issue of
accountability and achievement with a top-down reform measure represented by increased
graduation requirements; toughened curriculum mandates; and increased the use of standardized
test scores to measure student achievement proven being ineffective to dealing with the schools’
numerous problems. The second wave was more decentralized to the local and school levels.

2.2.2. Arab Republic of Egypt

According to Cookson, et al. (1992:150-153), educational reform in Egypt goes back to1868.
And educational reform that took place in between 1868 and 1952 includes: democratization of
education, with free and compulsory education; encouraging female education; coverage versus
quality; and improvement of teachers’ training. Especially in 1980s, efforts were also made
through a series of declarations which aimed atexpanding compulsory education; improving
quality of education; linking education to development and productivity; keeping up with
the expansion of knowledge andadvancement of science and technology to respond to
information explosion; requiring flexibility in the education system; and demanding closer links
between education and the work force.

25
2.2.3. United Kingdom

United Kingdom is one of the countries that have a long history by exercising school
improvement program to enhance the provision of quality education. According to Hopkins
(1987:8), school improvement in the UK which provided a context for more detailed discussion
of the four major themes that emanated from International SIP: namely school-based review for
school improvement, the role of external support, the role of the head-teacher and internal
change agents in school improvement and the development and implementation of school
improvement policies by education authorities. International school improvement program (ISIP)
aimed in the UK improve teaching and learning of the pupils. As Hopkins et al. (1994:74) study
since 1990s the model of IQEA is become the activities of the many schools across the world.

Improvement of quality education for all (IQEA) is the result of international school
improvement program which focuses on the improvement of teaching-learning by improving the
main agents of the school. Supporting this idea Hopkins (2002:71) has discussed that IQEA
project is fundamentally based up on central premises that without an equal focus on the
developmentof capacity, or internal conditions of the school and classroom development,
innovative work quickly becomes marginalized. This implies that development focusing to
improve some area or partial improvement is not guarantee the school improvement; rather, the
entire system needs the emphasis to be treated well to bring quality education and to realize
school improvement.

2.2.4. Australia

School improvement program in Australia has a large extent been due to state education system
initiatives Marsha, (1988:13). The emergence of a very different, decentralized system in
Victoria in the 1980s warrants special mention. The coming labor government introduced
series of ministerial papers during 1982-1984 to announce the creation of school council, a state
board of education Marsha, (1998:14). Moreover, this authority described that it is evident that
other states education system in Australia are likely to follow the lead given by the Act school
authority and the Victorian education ministry in devolving decision making to the local school
level. Many different patterns many emerge during the next decade, but highly likely that parents
and students will be encouraged to be more closely involved in local school decision-making.

26
School improvement projects in the future are therefore likely to involve and should involve
parents and community members and students, as well as teachers and related professional
group.

2.2.5. Ethiopia

Education is all rounded instrument and fundamental for the production of ethical citizens and
changes the behavior of the society to the desired direction of change, adopting the society with
the new technology and scientific innovation initiates socio-economic cultural development of
the country. In our country, to make education an instrument of development, the new policy
and training was promulgated and implemented since 1994 E.C.

The implementation of the new policy played crucial role in all levels of education in terms of
access and equity parallel with access and equity, to improve the quality of education several
activities have been done. Among those activities developing the skill and knowledge of
teachers through different training mechanisms, inspection and improvement of curriculum,
educational training for the leaders of education, creation of awareness in community to
develop the sense of ownership and increase participation in the issues of education,
increasing the supply of educational materials, supporting the instruction in the classroom
by technology and the others MoE (1999).

But supplying and accessing what mentioned above couldn’t’ bring the desired result of
education MoE (1999). This statement in a sense improving some parts of school safeties and
narrowing the gap of equity and access doesn’t guarantee the role of education supposed to play
and problem of quality yet not solved. According to MoE (1999), the evidence from research
conducted shows that students within different levels were scoring average result in their
education. This is because of the teaching-learning system was not systematic and scientific
rather than practicing routine or traditional approach in teaching and learning did not focus on
the students ‘achievement. In response to the low level of achievement of pupils,
Ministry of Education making of collaboration with the regional educators by scaling up the
good practices of the schools in the countries and comforting with the experiences obtained from
other countries schools improvement program was promulgated MoE, (1999:2). School
improvement program is designed by focusing on quality provision of education in the classroom

27
and improving the achievement ofstudents learning outcomes/by identifying the domains
that have an impact on learning outcomes of the pupils MoE (1999:1).

In the year 1999 E.C, Ministry of Education has identified four domains of school improvement
program by assuming high performing schools supporting students’ learning through best
Practices across a range of elements within the four domains of school improvement program.
The four domains are teaching and learning; safe, conducive and healthy school environment;
leadership & management and community participation. These four domains are the pillars and
future can be broken-down in to elements consisting of twelve essential points.

When we generalize school improvement program in Ethiopian context, the Ministry of

Education has been engaged in formulation and implementation of different policies and
programs, one of the land marks to this effect is putting the 1994 Education and Training Policy
along with the Education Sector Strategy and Education Sector Development Program (ESDP
IIII) in place. Another program recently developed and currently under implementation is the
general education improvement package (GEQIP) which has six important pillars. Those are the
following: teacher’s development program (TDP), School improvement program (SIP), civic
and ethical education (CEE), information and communication technology (ICT), and curriculum
improvement program (CIP) and management and leader ship. Although an attempt to provide
basic education for all and the educational coverage has shown a remarkable progress, the
quality of education provided in the country has a serious problem among the evidence that
indicate the problem of quality in education, the result of national learning assessment
MoE (2005) in ESDP III, the national primary and secondary leaving examination results
researches on the implementation of curriculum, MoE (2006) are a few to mention. Due to poor
quality of education students, achievement for most subjects is below average. This is the
main reason for the promulgation of GEQIP in Ethiopia. Attitudes, and are linked to national
goals for education and positive participation in society. Therefore, quality education is the base
for all rounded development of any nation that enables individuals and society to make all
rounded participation in the development process by acquiring knowledge, ability, skills and
attitudes MoE, (1994). Based on the importance of quality education, Ethiopia has initiated
to reform change to improve teaching-learning and school conditions of the country by
developing a General Education Quality Improvement Program (GEQIP) which includes
six program components: (i)Teacher Development; (ii)Curriculum improvement; (iii)
28
Leadership and Management improvement, (iv)School Improvement Program (SIP);
(v)Civic and Ethical Education; and (vi) Information Communication Technology
expansions MoE, (2008)The school as a social institution needs to adjust itself in order to be in a
steady state. One of the mechanisms for this adjustment is improving their overall activities in
relation with the needs of the student, parent and community at large that accomplished by SIP.
The SIP focuses on four major domains MoE, (2008): Teaching and learning process, school
leadership and management, parents-community school relationship, and safe and healthy school
environment. As Mekango (2013), each of these domains is equally important, if anyone is
weak, the strength and the success of the whole will be affected. Thus, the schools should give
due emphasis for each domain

Figure 2. 1: School improvement domain & its elements in Ethiopia

Teaching and Learning

Student Environment
• Teaching practice • Student focus
• Learning and • Student empowerment
assessment • Student support
• curriculum

Student’s Community Involvement

Leading and Management achievements
• Partnershipswithparentandcare
• Strategic vision ers
• Leadership behavior • Engaging with the community
• School management • Promoting education

Source: - ME 1999E.C school improvement frameworks

29
 CHAPTER THREE

3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents description of the study area, research design and method, source of data,
sample size and techniques, data collection instruments and procedures, data analysis techniques
and ethical consideration.

3.1 Description of the study area

The city of Gondar is located in North-western parts of Ethiopia, Amhara Regional State. It is at
1203’N latitude and 37028’E. Gondar is situated at 727 km from Addis Ababa, the capital city of
federal government of Ethiopia, and 120 km from Bahir Dar, the capital city of Amhara National
Regional State. Gondar has a total area of 192.3 km2 with undulating mountainous topography.
According to the 2007 National Population and Housing Census, Gondar consists of a total of
50, 817 housing units. Gondar is the center of political and economic activities of the North
Amhara region and it is main city of the enteral Gondar Zone. The city is classified into 12
administrative sub-cites. Gondar has one of the largest urban populations in Ethiopia. According
to the Central Statistics Agency (CSA) population projection (2013), the population of Gondar
was estimated to be 323,875 by 2015 and to be increased to 360,600 in 2017.

Rainfall of Gondar city is erratic and characterized by fluctuations. Under normal condition, it
deviates from mean value. Th e mean annual rainfall in Gondar city has been 1025mm in the past
26 years. However, there were great variations in between years.Gondar can be characterized by
three major land use types namely agriculture, built up and green areas with pavedasphalted and
all-weather roads. Most of Gondar’s economic activities relate to trade and commerce while, as
the capital of the North Gondar Zone, public administration is also one of its core activities. The
government is the main employer of the city’s mainly young population while many generate
income in the informal sector. Enterprises engaged in trade accounted for 54% while service-
providers accounted for 27% of the total enterprises in the city (Ethiopian Ministry of Urban
Development and Housing Construction (EMUDHC), 2015:39).

30
Figure 3.1 Map of Gondar cities
Source: Gondar city Administration office. (2015)

3.2 Research Design

Research design is a plan that fulfilling research objectives as well as answering research
questions (Creswell, 1994 )which means it is master plan identifying the methods and procedures
for collecting and analyzing necessary information. This study was adopted a descriptive
surveydesign becausethe study wasplanned to investigate the existing conditions concerning the
practice and challenges of school improvement program implementation in public secondary
schools of Gondar city Administration. A descriptive design was deliberately chosen because of
its appropriateness for studies that involve assessing and reporting a given situation as it exists.
Cohen et al. (2011) and Orodho et al. ( 2016)Other advantages considering for choosing
descriptivesurvey design that enables the collection of data on a large scale within a short period.
Additionally, it makes possible generalization of research findings Best and Kahn,
(1989)considering the foregoing advantages, the descriptive survey designappropriately enabled

31
the researcher to assess the practice and challenges of school improvement program
implementation in public secondary schools in Gondar City Administration.

3.3 Research Approach

In the study both qualitative and quantitative eapproach were used to data collection and
analysis, to find out challenges of school improvement program implementation in secondary
schools because it is difficult to fully explore the concept of school improvement solely through
one research method Gay, et al (2009).Hence, this method would be chosen in order to address
more exactly and effectively the challenges of school improvement program implementation in
secondary schools. Quantitative approach was suitable for identifying general trends in
populations For this research, questionnaire would be adopted for selected secondary school
teachers and qualitative approach enables the researcher to develop an understanding of
individuals and events in their natural surroundings, taking into account the relevant
context, for this reason interview would be carried out for cluster supervisors and selected
school principals, to get their opinions on the current situation of school improvement
program, Hence, to examine and analyze the practices and challenges of school
improvement program implementation, as stated by Gay, et al. (2009 )Combining both
quantitative and qualitative research approaches were adopted. There for the researcher used a
mixed approach particularly concurrent parallel mixed research approach in order to make the
study more reliable through triangulation, in order to collect data from different source, and
cross-checking the result and it increase the validity and reliability of the results.

3.3Targatepopulation, sample size, and sampling Technique

3.3.1 Tar gate Population of the Study

According to the data obtained from Gondar City Administration Education Office; there are
twelve government secondary schools and seven hundred eighty-eight (788) teachers with male
453 female 335 in the city. These twelve secondary schools are classified in to four clusters.
Thus, this study was focusedon only two cluster schools: namely Angereb, Walaje, Edegetfleg,
Adiyamsehged Iyasu, Ayertenaand Shenta secondary schools. Moreover, the data obtained from
Gondar City Administration Education Office showed that; 345teaching staffswith male 230
female 115 are currently working in the six secondary schools included in this study.
Thoseacademic staffs are the main sources of the data and considered as the population for this
32
study. Furthermore, 6 Principals from six secondaryschool,182 teachers from six
secondaryschools; 18 Members School improvement committee; 12 PTA Members; 2 cluster
supervisors from the schools; and 4 Experts from Education Office werealso regard as a
population of the study. So, the required sample sizewouldbe determined from the 224 total
number those groups of study population found in six government secondary schools of the City
and Education Office Gondar City Administration. (2015).

3.4. Sample Size

To determine the number of sample respondents for this study, a formula developed by Kothari
(2004 )and recommended by Cohen et al., (2007) in educational research was used. Since, this
formula has been practically tested and used by scholars for more than four a decade, the
researcher considered the formula to correctly determine appropriate sample size for this study.

𝒛𝟐 ∗𝒑∗𝒒∗𝒒∗𝑵
n=( 𝒆𝟐 (𝑵−𝟏)+(𝒛𝟐∗𝒑∗𝒒

Where:

n= the required sample size

Z2 = is the abscissa of the normal curve that cuts off an area α at the tails (1- α equals the desired
confidence level. The value for Z is found in statistical tables which contain the area under the
normal curve. e.g., Z=1.96 at 95%confidence level; and Z2=3.841).

N= the population size (345)

P= the population proportion (assumed to be 0.5 since this would provide the maximum sample
size)

q= 1-p

e = is the desired level of precision or margin of error (5% error or 0.05)

𝟑.𝟖𝟒𝟏∗ 𝟎.𝟓 ∗(𝟏−𝟎.𝟓)∗𝟑𝟒𝟓

Thus= = 182
( 𝟎.𝟎𝟓𝟐 (𝟑𝟒𝟓−𝟏)+(𝟑.𝟖𝟒𝟏∗𝟎.𝟓∗(𝟏−𝟎.𝟓)

33
The sample size of teachers in each school is proportional to the probability proportion of the
total sample size shown below.

Table 3.1: Size of population and samples teachers by schools

Names of schools Total number of teachers Sample size

Angereb 74 39
Walaje 32 17
Edegetfleg 59 31

Adiyamsehged Iyasu 67 35
Ayertena 51 27
Shenta 62 33
Total 345 182

Accordingly, using the formula, among 345 teaching staffs of the schools; 182 (52.75%) of them
were identified as a sample size for this study. Then, the identified sample size was distributed
to each secondary school included in this study proportionally as illustrated in Table1.

Besides, all members of school Boards, PTA members, Principals and vice principals, and
members of students‟ councils found in secondary schools included in this study were selected
as a sample from each school respectively.

3.5. Sampling Techniques

Among the total number of teachers of the six schools, the number of sample size determined for
this study was selected using stratified sampling technique from each secondary school included
in this study.using stratified samplingtechnique was preferred and used to select sample teacher
respondents, because this sampling technique used to selecte different respondants for each
member of the population of being chosen for the study as a sample. Thus, using stratum of
teachers from work attendance sheet, the sample respondents were selected by sratum was
obtained from each secondary school included in this study.

34
Table 3.2: Summary of Sample Size by Types of Respondents and Sampling Techniques.

Respondents Sample Size Sampling

Population Number % Techniques
Teachers 345 182 52.75 stratified

Educational Principals 6 6 100.00

Leaders stratified
Sip committee 18 18 100.00 Purposive
PTA Members 12 12 100.00 Purposive

school supervisors 2 2 100.00 stratified

Experts from Education 4 4 100.00 Purposive
office
Grand Total 387 224 57.88
Source (2022)

Moreover, since Principals; members school improvement committee; PTAmembers; cluster

supervisors of the schools; experts from Education Office are directly responsible for the
implementation of SIP in the school’s understudy; all of them were selected using purposive
sampling technique and included in the study to respond the questionnaire. Furthermore, four
officials Gondar City Education Office were selected through purposive sampling technique for
interview; because they are small in number and their position is important in describing issues
related to the practices of SIP in government secondary schools of the City.

3.6. Sources of Data

To gather data from relevant source both Primary as well as secondary sources of data were used
in the study.

3.6.1 Primary Sources of Data

The primary sources of data were city administration educational officials and experts, secondary
school principals, teachers and school SIP committee members. The reason to use these sources

35
as a source of data was based on the expectation that they have a better experience and
information about the implementation of SIP activities in secondary schools.

3.6.2. Secondary Sources of Data

City administration education offices and school documents such as SIPC minuets, school plans,
planning and evaluation formats as well as reports would be checked as secondary sources of
data. The data obtain from these sources believe to strengthen the data obtain through
questionnaires.

3.7. Instruments of Data Gathering

For the purpose of collecting the necessary data questionnaire, interview, focus group discussion
and document analysis check list was used.

3.7.1 Questionnaires

The questionnaires comprising both close ended and limited open-ended items were
prepared to collect quantitative and qualitative data from sample secondary school teachers,
school principals and secondary school cluster supervisors. This is because questionnaire is
suitable to collect information from large number of respondents with in short period of
time and in a cost-effectiveway, in addition it allowed respondents to respond the given
questions confidentially and independently so it minimizesbiasness.

3.7.2. Semi-Structured Interviews

Semi-Structured interview was used to acquire qualitative data from sample school PTA
membersandGondarcityadministration education office experts onthe
practice and challenges in implementation of school improvement program. The interview
question was prepared. Semi-Structured interview is preferred because it has the advantages of
flexibility in which new questions were forwarded during the interview based on the
responses of the interviewee. This was helped to get relevant evidence concerning the issue
under the study.

36
3.7.3 Focus Group Discussion

Focus group discussion would be conducted with some selected school improvement
committee members. The number of SIPC members involved in each group from sample
secondary schools each group were six to eightfrom Angereb, Walaje, Edegetfeleg,
Adiyamsehged Iyasu, Ayertena, and Shenta secondary schools. This focus group discussion
techniques would be worked to obtain qualitative data concerning the various aspects of school
improvement program implementation. In addition, this method of data gathering would enable
the researcher to generate qualitative data which gives an awareness into attitude and perceptions
in a social context where people can consider their own views in the context of others and where
new ideas can be introduced as it allows observation of group dynamics.

3.7.4. Document Analysis

In addition to primary sources, relevant information would be included from secondary sources.
This technique was helped the researcher to cross check the data that would be obtained
through primary sources (i.e., questionnaire and interview). Document analysis were focus
on such documents were SIP implementation plan, SI committee minutes, self- assessment tools,
evaluation tools and over all SIP practices records.

3.8. Procedures of Data Collection

A series of data gathering procedures were employed in this study. Initially, the questionnaire
was prepared in English language. Then pilot test was made on randomly selected respondents
from one secondary school, the term pilot study is used in two different ways in social science
research. It can refer to so-called feasibility studies which are “small scale type or trial scores,
done in preparation for the main study” Polit et al, (2001: 467). However, a pilot study can also
be the pre-testing or ‘trying out’ of a particular research instrument Baker (1994: 182-3)One of
the advantages of conducting a pilot study is that it might give advance care about where the
main research project could fail, where research procedures may not be followed, or whether
proposed methods or instruments are inappropriate or too complicated. Based on the comments
given by those respondents, necessary correction was made and copying of the questionnaire was
done considering the sample sizes of each group of the respondents. During data collection
process, in order to get permission to collect data required for the study, the researcher primarily

37
established official relationship with concerned bodies of the school’s understudy. This was done
by providing official letter written from the University to them. Then, selection of the sample
respondents and conducting orientation programs for respondents on the purpose of the study
and how to fill the questionnaires was carried-out at respective sample schools. Following the
orientations, the set of questionnaires were distributed to the respondents and their responses
were collected from them. The distribution of the questionnaire for all sample respondents and
the collection of the questionnaire from them was carried-out by the researcher himself with the
assistance of two trained data collectors. Moreover, in the process of data collection assistance
was made for those respondents who did not clearly understand the contents of the questionnaire
by the two trained data collectors particularly for respondents selected from members school
improvement committee and PTA members.

Moreover, the interview session was managed with the sample interviewees by the researcher on
face-to-face bases and one-to-one bases. This enabled the researcher to focuses on some specific
issues to be raised for different interviewee’s separately during the interview session. The
question was raised for the interviewees in Amharic language during the interview session to
reduce communication barriers and to obtain more clarified information regarding the subjects of
the study. In addition, the collection of data from secondary sources was made by the researcher
with the assistance of one responsible person from the school’s understudy.

3.9. Validity and Reliability Test

In order to assure data quality, the questionnaire prepared for this study was validated and tested
at pilot level for its reliability before used as data collection instrument. Primarily, the validity of
the instruments was tested by instructors of the department including the research advisor; to
judge the items on their appropriateness and clarity of its contents. Then, the reliability of the
questionnaire was tested through pilot study. During the pilot test, the questionnaires prepared
for this study were distributed to 32 randomly selected respondents from secondary schools not
included as a sample for this study. To measure the reliability of these questionnaires,
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated for all parts and items of the questionnaire.

38
Table 3.3The Cronach’s Alpha model was used for analysis reliability statistics.
NO Variables Cronbach’s
Alpha
1 The participations of stakeholders in SIP. 0.64
2 School Leadership and managmentDomain 0.73
3 Community participttion 0.79
4 Teaching-Learning Domain 0.76
5 Conducive Learning Environment Domain 0.77
6 School Improvement Program Monitoring and Evaluation 0.83
7 the Perception of teachers on School Improvement Program 0.68
8 Challenges of School Improvement Program 0.78

Concerning the acceptability of Cronbach’s alpha results most authors suggested 0.67 or above
Kothari, (2004). More specifically, Cohen et al., (2007:506) suggested that, Cronbach’s alpha
can be used on the basis of the following guidelines: >0.90 = very high reliable; 0.80–0.90 =
highly reliable; 0.70–0.79 = reliable; 0.60– 0.69= marginally reliable; and <0.60= lowly reliable
or unacceptable. Accordingly, the calculated Cronbach’s alpha coefficient all items of the
questionnaire were found in between 0.64 and 0.79. Finally, the researcher used all questions for
final research.

3.10. Methods of Data Analysis

To analyze the data obtained from different sources, various methods of data analysis were
employed based on specific nature of the data. Therefore, the collected data was checked,
classified, arranged and organized according to their characteristics and specific objectives of the
study and prepared for analysis. In order to analyze and interpret the raw data, the quantitative
data was organized and processed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS V-25).
The analyses of quantitative data were made using descriptive statistics, like, meanand standard
deviations were employed to show briefly by comparingthe collected data. The results of
quantitative data were organized and presented in tables for analysis. Besides, the qualitative
data obtained through interview, open-ended questions of the questionnaire, FGD from
secondary sources (official documents) were discussed in combinationor concurrently parallelto
39
the analysis of the quantitative data. This helped the researcher as a supplementary data for
triangulation and validation purposes.

3.11 Ethical Consideration

The purpose of the study was explained to the participants and the researcher has asked their
permission to answer questions in the questionnaires or interview guide. He also informed the
participants that the information they provided was only for the study purpose. Accordingly, the
researcher used the information from his participants only for the study purpose. Taking this
reality in mind, any communication with the concerned bodies were accomplished at their
voluntarily consent without harming and threatening the personal and institutional wellbeing. In
addition, the researcher ensured confidentiality by making the participants unnamed.

40
 CHAPTER FOUR
4. DATAPRESENTATION, RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of data collected from Gondar city
Administration Secondary schools. The results of the research were presented and discussed the
following the research methodologies. This chapter is divided in to two parts. The first part
discusses the characteristics of the respondents while the second part deals with the analysis of
the data in order to recommend the main findings and discussions in line with answering the
research questions.

4.1. The backgrounnd information of the respondant

Table4.1 the characterstics of the repondant

Variables Teachers Principals SIP PTAS ED. Supervisors

Committee Experts
No % No % No % No % No % No %
Male 111 61 6 14.29 18 42.86 12 28.57 4 9’52 2 4.76
Sex

Female 71 39 - - - - - - - - - -
31-40 Years 20 - - - 6 33.33 - - - - - -
41-50Years 78 - 4 66.67 3 16.67 5 41.67 1 23 2 100
above 50 13 - 2 33.33 9 50.0 7 58.33 3 75
Age

Years
6-10 Years 6 5.41 - - - - - - - - - -
experience:

11-15 Years 17 15.32 - - 4 22.22 - - - - -

16-20 Years 36 32.43 - - 6 33.33 4 33.33 - - - -
Work

above 20 12 46.85 6 100 8 44.44 8 66.67 4 100 2 100

Years
Certificate - - - - - - 4 33.33 - - - -
Diploma - - - - 6 33.33 3 25 - - - -
Educ/ Status

Bachelor 70 63.06 - - 12 66.67 5 41.67 3 75 - -

Degree
Master’s 41 36.94 6 100 - - - - 1 25 2 100
Degree
Source (Survey Data, 2022)

As it is shown from table 2, the respondents were classified based on sex. Among 182 teachers,
18 school improvement committee, 6 principals, 12 PTAS and 2 sample supervisors who
participated in the study, only (70 or 31.25 percent) respondents were female. In contrast, all

41
supervisors, that is, (6 or 100 percent) were males. Besides that, (6 or 100 percent) principal
respondents were males. Moreover, (18 or 100 percent) of the school improvement committee
respondents and (4 or 100 percent) of Education expertise were males. Finally, on top of that,
(111 or 61 percent) teacher respondents were males.

From the table; thus, it can be deduced that the managerial positions of the Secondary Schools of
Gondar City in selected secondary schools were occupied by males. Since this is so, it is clear
that the participation rate of females in the School Improvement Program decision making
process and their participation in managerial and leadership positions in these schools was
nothing. This might be probably an indicator of less educational opportunity had been given to
females.

In referring to the age of the respondents; majority of principals (4 or 66.67 percent) and teachers
(78 or 70.27percent) consecutively were within the age group 41-to-50 years. On the other hand,
all supervisors and majority of the school improvement committee (9 or 50 percent), PTA (7 or
58.33 percent) were within the age group and education expertise (3 or 75 percent) were within
the age group above 50 years. Moreover, (13 or 11.71 percent) of teachers (2 or 33.33 percent)
school principals were within the age range of above 50 years, the remaining (20 or 18.20
percent) of teachers were within the age groups of 31-to-40 years and 6 or 33.33 percent of
School Improvement Committee were within the age groups of 31-to-40 yearshave participated
in FGD.In discussing the educational level of the respondents, while (12 or 66.67 percent) of the
school improvement committee had indicated that they had Bachelor Degree, the other majority
of the teachers; that is, (70 or 63.06 percent), (5 or 41.67) percent of PTAS and (3 or 75 percent
of the education experts) wereBachelor Degree holders. Besides that, (6 or 33.33 percent) of the
school improvement committee and (3 or 25 percent) of the PTAS were diplomaholders.
Furthermore, the analysis also indicated that all (6 or 100 percent) of the principals and (2 or 100
percent) of supervisors were Master’s Degree holders. Only (41 or 36.94percent) of the teachers
and (1or 25 percent) of education expertise) were Master’s Degree holders. The remaining (4 or
33.33 percent} of parent teacher association were certificate holders in the selected secondary
schools.

42
These data showed that the schools where this survey was undertaken were staffed with the
graduates of Bachelor degree. This is really a very good finding. Because, if the present set of
teachers, principals and school improvement committees at those secondary schools were
Bachelor degree holders, it meant that they had acquired the necessary teaching qualification and
competency for those educational levels, and probably this might also mean that they could
teach, manage and develop school improvement program up to the very required or expected
sandardt. Regarding to parents with in the school improvement committee, although the data
showed that the majority of them were within secondary school and degree graduates.

As far as the work experience of the respondents was concerned, (5 or 46.85 percent) of the
teachers, (5 or 100 percent) of principals, (8 or 44.44 percent) of the school improvement
committee and all (4 or 100.0 percent) of education expertise and (2 or 100 percent) of
supervisors had work experience more than20 years in the current secondary schools. Then, (36
or 32.43 percent) of the teachers, (6 or 33.33 percent) of school improvement committee and (4
or 33.33 percent) of the PTA members had work experience between 16-to-20 years. Next, (17
or 15.32 percent) of the teachers and only (4 or 22.22 percent) of school improvement committee
had work experience between 11-to-15 years. Finally, only (6or 5.41 percent) of the teachers
were reported as they had work experience between 6-to-10 years.

From these data, it might be concluded that, the majority of the respondents had adequate work
experiences in the current secondary schools. Since this was so, they might not lack necessary
power to influence, develop and implement school improvement program in their schools.

43
4.2. Research findings
Table 4.2: Teachers’ Response on the participations of stakeholders in school Improvement
Planning

Items Scales
SDA DA UD AG SA Mean SD
Strategic plan of the school was N 12 50 90 30 0
prepared based on self-evaluation 2.758 0.805
% 6.6 27.5 49.5 16.5 0.0

The trainings provided related to SIP N 62 74 33 8 5

planning for the whole staff. 2.011 0.974
% 34.1 40.7 18.1 4.4 2.7
The involvement of stakeholders N 51 96 14 17 4
(Teachers, students, and parents) 2.049 0.965
in developing sip plan % 28.0 52.7 7.7 9.3 2.2

Stakeholders participate in school N 63 83 15 10 11

improvement program 2.027 1.094
implementation very highly % 34.6 45.6 8.2 5.5 6.0
There is good r/ship with N 49 108 19 6 0
stakeholders (teachers, students, and % 26.9 59.3 10.4 3.3 0.0 1.901 0.706
parents sip implementation and
student result
Teachers schedule regular meetings N 39 91 30 11 11
to evaluate students results and % 21.4 50.0 16.5 6.0 6.0 2.252 1.052
balance with time table
Overall participations of stakeholders 2.164 0.932
Source (Survey Data,2022)

By GA Gobena · 2017 · Cited by 9 — Accordingly, If M = 1.00-1.50, it is strongly Disagree; if

M = 1.50-2.50, it is Disagree; if M = 2.50-3.50, it is Undecided if M= 3.50-4.50, it is Agree

Although the mean score for all six items of school improvement planning did not reach 5.0 for
maximum agree response, of school improvement planning in the school. For example, teachers
gave moderate response on one item that strategic plan of the school was prepared based on self-
evaluation with mean score of 2.758 and standard deviation of 0.805. As an illustration, teachers
expressed some disagreement with maximum occurrence of the trainings provided related to SIP
planning for the whole staff. With a mean score of 2.011 and standard deviation of 0.974. A
similar pattern was also found for the other four practices that comprised this dimension of
school improvement program planning practices. On closer examination; consequently, it

44
appeared that teachers were moderately confirming the existence of school improvement
program planning practices.

The two-character dimensions with a mean score of 2.049 and standard deviation of 0.965 and
another similar character with a mean score of 2.027 and standard deviation of 1.094 in teachers
‘responses were the lowest mean scores of the six-school improvement program planning
practices items. Next to this, teachers reported that teachers schedule regular meetings to
evaluate students results and balance with time table with a mean score of 1.901 and standard
deviation of 0.706. Besides that, teachers had also reported that stakeholders participate in school
improvement program implementation very high with a mean score of 2.252 and standard
deviation of 1.052.

These minimum mean scores of (2.758, 2.252, 2.049 and 2.027) respectively on the behaviors,
of the school was prepared strategic plan based on self-evaluation, teachers schedule regular
meetings to evaluate students results and balance with time table, The involvement of
stakeholders (teachers, students, and parents) in developing sip plan and Stakeholders
participate in school improvement program implementation very highly would indicate that
teachers minimally know about the practices of school improvement planning process in their
schools.

This joined with the lowest mean scores of 2.011and standard deviation of 0.974 and mean score
of 2.027 and standard deviation of 1.094 respectively on the behavior or practice, the school
provides trainings for the whole staff related to SIP planning and stakeholders participate in
school improvement program implementation very highly and teachers schedule regular
meetings to evaluate students results and balance with time table. This finding that teachers were
made less familiar with the school improvement program planning process was not in line with
Ministry of Education (2010) School Improvement Program Guideline. This guideline pointed
out that School Improvement Committee members are required to undertake classroom
observations for a number of classes across different subjects and grades. For this fact, it is
important for the person conducting the classroom observation to be experienced, ideally in
teaching. Drawing on the above analysis, one can understand that school improvement program
planning was not practiced according to the standard set in the schools where this study had been
taken. Through the interview conducted schoolprincipal was learned that schools made self-
45
evaluation and based on the specific problems they identified then they prepared their strategic
plan. In addition to this, school supervisors and school improvement committees were asked in
groups about school improvement program practices in their schools and their responses were
that schools prepared their strategic plan based on self-evaluation results. However,
schoolimprovement committee, and supervisors confirmed that schools ‘self-evaluations were
not made in accordance with the guideline and standards. In this regard, supervisors had this to
say:

The school principals made us to review the performance of schools without discussing the
school improvement program frameworks. This made all of us not to have a good understanding
of the SIP Framework. They have to correct it. in relation to this MoE, (2002:46) stated that
school principals are responsible to welcome, encourage and maintain healthy relationship with
stakeholders to take part in planning. From this discussion it can be concluded that involvement
of stakeholders in formulating school strategic plan was very low. Thus, it is possible to say that
the practices of planning SIP by participating key stakeholders were low in secondary schools
that affect SIP implementation.

The result of the interview showed that inadequacy of preparation and lack of readiness among
government secondary schools for SIP implementation in the city. The plan was not prepared
with the participation of all concerned bodies. The respective schools did not carry out self-
evaluation to prepare the plan. From the stake holders, only school directors prepare and present
for school board’s approval at the beginning of every academic year. On the contrary, the
participation level of students and parents were not reach at the required level.

Similarly, response of FGD indicatesthat participation of teachers, students and parents in school
planning development and implementation of SIP was low as most of the time they were
participate on meeting when school open and closed. This is due to lack of awareness about the
SIP implementation. However, to enhance community participation on SIP implementation it is
mostly school principals’ responsibility to aware and motivate the community actively to
participate in the issue of the school. From this we can concluded that inadequate involvement of
teachers, students and parents participate in school planning development and implementation of
SIP.In relation to thisStoll and Dean Fink (1996) described that if schools create a strong sense

46
partnership with parents, they contribute a lot to pupil’s success; they support schools by
providing their knowledge, skills and resources. From this evidence, stakeholders should support
schools in various aspects when school develops strong relationship between partner ships.
Kruger.A.G. (1996), indicated that parents to get involved in schools; helping children with
homework, fund raising; maintenance building and helping with extracurricular activities and
supporting school activities.

4.3 Results of the study based on domains of SIP Implimentation

Table 4.3Teachers’ Response on School Leadership and Management Domain

SCALE
Items SDA DA UD AG SA Mean Sta

School leadership communicates with the No 23 108 25 7 3 2.049 0.809

community and encourages higher % 21.4 59.3 13.7 3.8 1.6
participation in the school activities and
plan.
School leaders make conducive learning No 39 88 44 7 4 2.170 0.884
environment.
% 21.4 48.4 24.2 3.8 2.2
School leadership encourages teachers to No 33 107 29 7 6 2.153 0.878
participate in the preparation,
% 18.1 57.8 15.9 3.8 3.3
implementation and assessment process of
the school plan.
School leadership encourages community No 32 102 36 7 4 2.165 0.840
to have positive attitude towards students
‘educational achievements. % 17.6 56.0 19.8 3.8 2.2
School leaders direct and manage the No 20 108 45 6 3 2.252 0.759
activity of school improvement committee % 11.0 59.3 24.7 3.3 1.6
School leadership ensures and manages No 52 78 29 12 11 2.186 1.106
school budget to attain SIP goals % 28.6. 42.9 15.9 6.6 6.0
School leaders ensure whether all teachers No 34 107 26 9 6 2.153 0.897
and staff members have received
assistance through training. % 18.7 58.8 14.3 4.9 3.3
The School Leadership Domain 2.161 0.881
Source (Survey Data, 2022)

By GA Gobena · 2017 · Cited by 9 — Accordingly, If M = 1.00-1.50, it is strongly Disagree; if

M = 1.50-2.50, it is Disagree; if M = 2.50-3.50, it is Undecided if M= 3.50-4.50, it is Agree.

Though the mean score for all nine items of school leadership domain did not reach 5.to the
occurrence of effective school leadership in the schools. Take the cases of, School leaders direct
47
and manage the activity of school improvement committee. In these behaviors; first, teachers
showed with mean score of 2.049 and standard deviation of 0.809 that School leadership
moderately communicates with the community and encourages higher participation in the school
activities and plan. Next to this, teachers also confirmed with mean score of 2.153 and standard
deviation of 0.878 that School leaders direct and manage the activity of school improvement
committee.

Teachers; on the other hand, expressed minimum perception with mean scores of below 2.252 on
almost six (6) of the seven (7) behaviors. The behavior with the lowest mean score of (2.049)
and the lowest standard deviation of (0.809) was, "School leadership ensures and manages
school budget to attain SIP goals". Next to this, teachers also reported with a minimum mean
score of`2.153 and a minor standard deviation of 0.878 that School leadership encourages
community to have positive attitude towards students ‘educational achievements.

Another example of a behavior with a minimum mean score of (2.25) and a minor standard
deviation of 1.164 was, School leaders ensure whether all teachers and staff members have
received assistance through training. Similar minimum mean scores of 2.26, and minor standard
deviations of 1.219, indicating a minimum School leadership encourages teachers to participate
in the preparation, implementation and assessment process of the school plan. on school
leadership domain of, School leadership communicates with the community and encourages
higher participation in the school activities and plan, School leaders make conducive learning
environment, School leadership encourages teachers to participate in the preparation,
implementation and assessment process of the school plan, School leadership encourages
community to have positive attitude towards students ‘educational achievements, School leaders
direct and manage the activity of school improvement committee, School leadership ensures and
manages school budget to attain SIP goals and School leaders ensure whether all teachers and
staff members have received assistance through training would indicate that school leadership
did not create more effective school to leading higher levels of students achievement. According
to Arcaro, (2019 )states that, People are encouraged to be open, creative, and innovative in
finding new ways to work within the system enable everyone to achieve wide vision” leadership
is critical and essential in the process of generating capacity for school improvement. The
interview response from the school improvement committee and supervisors ‘perspective, the

48
school leaders were not actually significantly communicating the community to encourage their
participation in school improvement program implementation. One clustersschool’s supervisor in
interviewreported. Though the school managements are expected to foster communication with
the community to help them participate in the school improvement program management, in this
regard, achievements of the school leaders were not satisfactory.

Responses of the school improvement committee in focus group discussion similarly indicated
that while students ‘examination results were needed to be improved, both school improvement
committee and students did not perceive the school principals as adequately equipped to play a
significant role in leadership. The role of the school principals in improving instruction to enable
teachers to teach at their best and students to learn to their utmost, as well as principal behavior
of cultivating leadership in others so that teachers and other adults will assume their parts in
realizing the school vision was therefore insignificant.

Table 4.4: Teachers’ Response on Community Participation.

Items SCALE Mean Sta

SDA DA UD AG SA
Parents involve in decision making No 26 74 43 28 11 2.582 1.098
process about their children ‘s % 14.3 40.7 23.6 15.4 6.0
education
Parents assist students to learn at No 24 67 48 34 9 2.653 1.080
home. % 13.2 26.8 26.4 18.7 4.9
Parents involve in school No 26 72 43 30 11 2.604 1.106
programs and students’ progress. % 14.3 39.6 23.6 16.5 6.0
The community participation on No 22 82 38 29 11 2.587 1.082
SIP plan is outlining goals that
help to improve standards and % 12.1 45.1 20.9 15.9 6.0
future interests.
Parents have information about No 23 82 43 23 11 2.544 1.059
school self-evaluation process. % 12.6 45.1 23.6 12.6 6.0

Community Involvement domain 2.594 1.085

Source (Survey Data,2022)

By GA Gobena · 2017 · Cited by 9 — Accordingly, If M = 1.00-1.50, it is strongly Disagree; if

M = 1.50-2.50, it is Disagree; if M = 2.50-3.50, it is Undecided if M= 3.50-4.50, it is Agree.
49
As it was indicated in the table, the average score for all five dimensions of perceived
community involvement did not reach 5.0 for maximum response. The existed data; therefore,
needed to be examined. In fact, it appeared that the average score on this aspect of school
improvement program practices was confined to one level of agreement; that is, minimum
agreement. As an illustration, teachers reported that parents involve in decision making process
about their children ‘s education for a mean score of 2.582 and standard deviation of 1.098.
When teachers reported their perception on this school improvement program practice with this
mean score of 2.594, by observing all the other mean scores, it would be easy to say that this was
a maximum mean score of all. A similar pattern was also found for the other four behaviors that
comprised this dimension of school improvement program practices. On closer examination;
consequently, it appeared that teachers were minimally accepting the existence of community
involvement in the current practices of school improvement program.

The character dimension with a mean score of 2.653 and standard deviation of 1.080 in teachers
‘report was the lowest of the fiveinvolvements of the parents assist students to learn at home.
These minimum mean scores; that is, 2.604 in teachers ‘response as the maximum mean and
2.587in teachers ‘response respectively on the behavior, the community participation on SIP plan
is outlining goals that help to improve standards and future interests as the minimum mean
would indicate that principals very minimally involved community members in school
improvement program. This joined with the other low mean scores on the behaviors, Parents are
involved in decision making process about their children‘s education , Parents are involved in
school programs and students’ progress, Community participates on SIP plan outlining goals
those help to improve standards and future interests, and Parents have information about school
self-evaluation process could lead to a situation where teachers are in the dark regarding what
principals really think about what is happening in their school setting. Not only that; from these
respondents ‘responses, one can also conclude that principals were not focusing more on
removing obstacles that prevent community from involvement.

In addition to the information gathered through the questionnaire from teachers, interview and
focused group discussion were also conducted with school principals, supervisors, and students;
their response was not far from the information gathered through the questionnaires.

50
The result was that although it was stated that community should be involved in the
development and management of the school improvement program system that provide their
children with quality education, parents ‘involvement in the school decision making process and
their participation in the school improvement program development, management and
monitoring and evaluation was very minimal. Moreover, principals added that there is a very low
level of parents ‘participation rate in all other school improvement programs. Kruger.A.G.
(1996), has also indicated that parents to get involved in schools; helping children with
homework, fund raising; maintenance building and grounds. Further investigation through
focused group discussion with supervisors showed that community involvement in designing
education responses did not occur at very much point. In this regard, one supervisor said that
mostly, it is in the days that schools are opening and closing that parents come and participate in
the school activities. It is only written on the paper that parents are participating in their children
school matters. The preceding paragraph confirmed what was reported earlier in this paper
regarding the involvement of community in school management improvement program. In other
words, most of the respondents said that community involvement in the school management
improvement was absent.

51
Table 4.5: Teachers’ Response on the Teaching-Learning Domain

Items Scales Mean Stand

SDA DA UD AG SA ard
dv
The teaching process meets the N0 23 76 41 31 11
general needs of students and % 12.6 41.8 22.5 17.0 6,0 2.620 1.094
curriculum standards.
Teachers know their student. N0 24 52 41 54 11 2.868 1.158
% 13.2 28,6 22.5 29.7 6.0
The suitability and appropriateness N0 24 63 41 48 6
of the evaluation in respect to 2.719 1.094
% 13.2 34.6 22.5 26.4 3.3
planning the lesson and supervising
students’ progress is very high
The quality of teaching and teachers N0 26 53 39 49 15 2.857 1.203
‘professional progress is very high. % 14.3 29.1 21.4 26.9 8.2
Student-centered method of teaching N0 24 64 39 46 9 2.736 1.125
is practiced in the school. % 13.2 35.2 21.4 25.3 4.9
Tutorial support is given to the N0 22 58 34 54 14 2.890 1.184
students by the teachers % 12.1 31.9 18.7 29.7 7.7
Laboratory service is provided to the N0 22 50 37 60 13 2.956 1.174
students % 12.1 27.5 20.3 33.0 7.1
Teachers use different techniques to N0 24 57 39 47 15 2.846 1.188
motivate students. % 13.2 31.3 21.4 25.8 8.2
Library service is available to the N0 22 57 39 50 14 2.873 1.170
school community % 12.1 31.3 21.4 27.5 7.7
Students ‘achievement is usually N0 25 62 36 42 17 2.802 1.209
checked % 13.7 34.1 19.8 23.1 9.3
Teaching-Learning Domain 2.816 1.159
Source (Survey Data,2022

By GA Gobena · 2017 · Cited by 9 — Accordingly, If M = 1.00-1.50, it is strongly Disagree;

if M = 1.50-2.50, it is Disagree; if M = 2.50-3.50, it is Undecided if M= 3.50-4.50, it
is Agree.

52
The researcher now briefly analyzing the respondents ‘responses regarding to the teaching
learning domain. Consequently, while the average score for all thirteen dimensions of teaching-
learning did not reach 5.00 for very maximum agree response, on its practices. On close analysis;
thus, it appeared that the average score on this aspect of teaching-learning domain practices is
somewhat distorted by the minimum perception teachers themselves have on this aspect of
teaching-learning domain.

For example, teachers reported moderately not equally on two behaviors that they did not know
their students and they did not give tutorial support to the students for mean scores of 2.868 &
2.890and standard deviations of 1.158 &1.184 respectively. When teachers reported their
perception on this teaching-learning domain; however, they expressed some minimum agreement
with teachers use the teaching process meets the general needs of students and the suitability and
appropriateness of the evaluation in respect to planning the lesson and supervising students’
progress is very high are not equally with mean scores of 2.620 &2.719 and standard deviations
of 1.094 & 1.094 respectively. Again, on two more different behaviors; that is, the teachers use
different techniques to motivate students with a mean score of 2.846 and standard deviation of
1.188 on the behavior, The quality of teaching and teachers ‘professional progress is very high.;
mean score of 2.857and standard deviation of 1.203 on the behavior, Library service is available
to the school community; mean score of 2.873 and standard deviation of 1.170 on the behavior,
Student-centered method of teaching is not properly practiced as higher than the character
dimension with a mean score of 2.736 and standard deviation of 1.125 on the behavior, there is
no quality of teaching and teacher’s’ professional progress. On closer examination;
consequently, it appeared that teachers moderately believed that teaching learning process was
not carried out in their schools.

The character dimension with a mean score of 2.956 and standard deviation of 1.174 in teachers
‘report on the behavior, Laboratory service is provided to the students was not properly
implemented as higher than the character dimension with a mean score of 2.802 and standard
deviation of 1.209 in teachers ‘response on the behavior, Students ‘achievement is usually
checked. Interview with school principals revealed that teaching-learning domain was improved.

53
They all shared the perception that principals, as the schools ‘main source of everything, were
involved in checking the appropriateness of the evaluation in respect to planning the lesson and
supervising students ‘progress. On the other hands, the school improvement committee said that
there wereno proper practices of following up to check the appropriateness of the lesson planning
evaluation. In addition to the above descriptions, PSTAin focused group discussion reported that
there were no activities that could motivate students to learn. Fulan ( 1992 )in Harris, A.
(2000)have stated that school improvement research highlights the center of teaching learning in
the purist of sustained school improvement.

Table 4.6: Teachers’ Response on Conducive Learning Environment Domain

Scale
8 Items SDA DA UD AG SA Mea’ Sta
Students learning desire has been No 16 59 33 61 13 2.978 1.141
improved % 8.8 32.4 18.1 33.5 7.1
Assistance is given to the students No 22 51 30 64 15 2.994 1.205
to help them develop self-
confidence and responsible % 12.1 28.0 16.5 35.2 8.2

School environment is safe, No 22 55 27 60 18 2.983 1.232

suitable, supportive and appealing
for students. % 12.1 30.2 14.8 33.0 9.9
students are free from bullying andNo 19 84 36 35 8 2.609 1.049
fear of stigma. % 10.4 46.2 19.8 19.2 4.4
Adequate latrine is allocated for No 22 50 30 67 13 2.994 1.191
girls and boy students. % 12.1 27.5 16.5 36.8 7.1
There is health relationship among No 13 61 26 69 14 3.044 1.136
school community % 7.1 33.5 14.3 37.9 7.1
Class-rooms are suitable for No 20 63 28 60 11 2.884 1.162
teaching-learning % 11.0 34.6 15.4 33.0 6.0
School compound has become No 22 58 34 54 14 2.890 1.184
attractive % 12.1 31.9 18.7 29.7 7.7
Learning Environment Domain 2.922 1.162
Source (Survey Data, 2022)
By GA Gobena · 2017 · Cited by 9 — Accordingly, If M = 1.00-1.50, it is strongly Disagree;
if M = 1.50-2.50, it is Disagree; if M = 2.50-3.50, it is Undecided if M= 3.50-4.50, it
is Agree.

.
54
.

In considering the learning environment domain as one component of the current practices of
school improvement program, while the average score for all nine items of learning environment
did not reach 5.00 for very maximum agreement with a safe, orderly school climate described,
there was moderate agreement on its presence. On close analysis; therefore, it appeared that the
average score on this aspect of school improvement program practices is somewhat distorted by
the minimal perception teachers have on this aspect of school improvement program practice.
One example of this is that teachers reported that there is health relationship among school
community for a mean score of 3.044 and standard deviation of 1.136. When teachers reported
their perception on this school improvement program practice; however, they expressed some
disagreement with minimum distribution of results for this behavior with a mean score of 2.884
and standard deviation of 1.162. A similar pattern was also found for the other seven behaviors
that comprised this dimension of school improvement program practice. On closer examination;
thus, it appeared that teachers were moderately agreed with no presence of positive school
environment where all students feel comfortable, wanted, valued, accepted, and secured in the
environment.

The perceived learning environment dimension with mean score of 2.609 and standard deviation
of 1.049 in teachers‘ response on the behavior, The students are not free from harassment and
fear of stigma ; mean scores of 2.994 and standard deviations of 1.191 on the behaviors,
Adequate latrine is allocated for both girl students and boy students respectively as well as the
perceived learning environment with mean score of 2.983 and standard deviation of 1.232 on the
behavior, Assistance is given to the students to help them develop self-confidence and
responsible. Thus, teachers are not moderately committed to work as a team to ensure a safe and
respectful, nurturing, and invigorating environment where learning is moderately a shared
responsibility.

On the other hand, minimum mean score of 2.609 and standard deviation of 1.049on the
behavior, students are free from harassment and fear of stigma.as well as mean scores of 2.884&
2.890and standard deviations of 1.162&1.84 respectively on the behaviors, the classrooms are
suitable for teaching-learning and School compound has become attractive. As a result, it could

55
be said that a number of teachers have indicated that respect, safety, security and positive
learning environment is minimally not prioritized in their schools.

But a good learning environment is usually of great interest to students, parents, supervisors,
teachers and principals especially in schools where school improvement program is implemented
as those of Ethiopians. School improvement committees were asked to comment on the learning
environments of the schools. In a focused group discussion, one committee reported.

There is high drop-out and high number of repeating students. The teaching learning process is
not run very well. There is no support given to the students to help them develop self-confidence
and responsible. Responses of the other interviewees similarly indicated that learning-
environment needed to be not improved. The overall role principals, teachers, supervisors, school
improvement committees and other school stakeholders played in improving this domain was
therefore minimal. Learning-environment, in terms of school facilities and materials resources,
was ascribed to the school principals.

Past study by (Brendtro, Brokenleg& Van Bockern, , 1990)shows that a positive school and
classroom climate can have a major effect on the achievement and behavior of students.
Moreover, these authors stressed that it is not always an easy task to create a school or classroom
that focuses on a positive learning environment conducive to learning. So, making it happen will
always require the community, school teachers, parents, and students working together, a
commitment from all stakeholders, and a major shift in thinking.

56
Table 4.7 Teachers’ Response on School Improvement Program Monitoring and
Evaluation

Items Scales Mea’ Sta

No SDA DA UD AG SA
The school improvement committee No 35 68 18 47 14
has fixed meeting time 2.653 1.264
% 19.2 37.4 9.9 25.8 7.7
City administration educational No 28 59 24 64 7
experts and supervisors have fixed 2.796 1.188
schedules for their school visits. % 15.4 32.4 13.2 35.2 3.8
The school gives support for internal No 18 66 28 59 11
supervisors 2.884 1.148
% 9.9 36.3 15.4 32.4 6.0
The students always receive regular No 20 65 25 61 11
feedback about what they need to do 2.879 1.168
% 11.0 35.7 13.7 33.5 6.0
and to improve.

Teachers usually receive regular No 19 62 34 53 14

feedback on how they are doing 2.895 1.163
things. % 10.4 34.1 18.7 29.1 7.7
All staffs work towards SIP goals. No 17 59 28 67 11
% 9.3 32.4 15.4 36.8 6.0 2.978 1.146
Overall Monitoring and Evaluation. 2.847 1.179
Source (Survey Data,2022)

By GA Gobena · 2017 · Cited by 9 — Accordingly, If M = 1.00-1.50, it is strongly Disagree; if

M = 1.50-2.50, it is Disagree; if M = 2.50-3.50, it is Undecided if M= 3.50-4.50, it is Agree,

Regarding to the school improvement program monitoring and evaluation as one component of
the current practices of school improvement program, while the average score for all six items of
school improvement program monitoring and evaluation did not reach 5.00 for very maximum
agreement with learning and feeding-back of the schools. On close analysis; therefore, it
appeared that the average score on this aspect of school improvement program practices is
somewhat distorted by the minimal perception teachers have on this aspect of school
improvement program practice. One example of that teachers reported that school improvement
committees have not fixed meeting time to judge if their work has been going in the right
direction for a mean score of 2.653and standard deviation of 1.264.

57
In addition, that, teachers claimed that City administration educational experts and supervisors
did not have fixed schedules for their school visits for a mean score of 2.796 and standard
deviation of 1.188. When teachers reported their perception on this school improvement program
practice; however, they expressed some disagreement with minimum distribution of results for
this behavior with a mean score of 2.653and standard deviation of 1.264. A similar pattern was
also found for the other three behaviors that comprised this dimension of school improvement
program practice. On closer examination; however, it appeared that teachers were minimally
agreed with the presence of monitoring and evaluation system which establishes clear links
between past, present and future initiatives and development results.

The perceived monitoring and evaluation dimension with mean score of 2.884 and standard
deviation of 1.148 in teachers ‘response on the behavior, there is support given for internal
supervisors as well as the perceived monitoring and evaluation with mean scores of 2.879 and
standard deviations of 1.168 on the behaviors, the students always receive regular feedback
about what they need to do and to improve do offer very minimum hope that the schools place
attention on monitoring and evaluation of the school improvement program. Thus, teachers are
inclined to very minimally stay on their tracks. Moreover, problems were not often detected
earlier. As a result, there is a likelihood of having major cost overruns or time delays in the
schools. Questionnaire responses showed that minor (2.847 mean score) of the surveyed teachers
perceived minimum school improvement program monitoring and evaluation at the schools. In
the same manner, the majority of school improvement committees in focused group discussion
reported that there was no more school improvement program monitoring and evaluation. One
member of the school improvement committee explained: Government leaves this to the school
and it is the responsibility of the school principals, teachers, supervisors, school improvement
committees and students to monitor and evaluate the school improvement program
implementation.

But we are not even aware of the ways how the schools are conducting the follow up. In each
school, principals served as leaders of the school improvement committees. However, most of
them felt that they were adequately monitoring and evaluating school improvement programs
together with other members of the committees. The results of the study showed that the school
improvement plan in secondary schools were not adequately monitoring and evaluating school

58
improvement programs together with other members of the committees. In relation to this Dereje
(2012) stated that even though there is internal supervision in schools to support, and direct
teaching learning process, the supervision provided to teachers and students were not sufficient.
It was conducted at the beginning of the academic year, middle of the semester and at the end of
the year.

One of them commented: Throughout the school year, each of us is expected to monitor the
operation of school improvement program. Accordingly, all of the school improvement
committees are monitoring and evaluating the performance of the school and with the assistance
of other stakeholders, we could revise the school improvement program as necessary. On the
other hands, interview with supervisors showed that to them, constant review on the
implementation of school improvement program constituted the very minimal of their business
as stakeholder of the schools. One Supervisor reported that, our major roles as the internal school
evaluators are to give advice or to provide support in planning and self-reviewing at school level.
But I do not think that we are producing better results. Because, working together with teachers
and principals in preparing and implementing school projects that serve as the basis for
continuous self-assessment and school improvement is very difficult. Teachers and principals see
it in a negative way.

In addition to this, participants of FGD researcher has conducted interview with PTA heads and
SIC and they revealed that “the school conducts parent-teachers meeting three times a year that
is at the beginning, middle semester and at the end of the academic year; during these meetings
they discuss about planning the school program, evaluate the implementation, financial aspect,
teaching-learning process, student’s result, promotion policy, building issue and communicate
with different school issues.” This indicated that PTA heads and SIC members do not have fixed
schedule to involve sufficiently in monitoring and evaluation timely, because PTAs and SIC
meeting time occurs differently, since meeting as only three times a year.

However, Earl et al. (2003)describes that evaluation process allows us to investigate the path of
change in a particular school improvement program as it has developed over more than a decade.
We have been fortunate to be able to adopt a contextually rich longitudinal approach by
following schools over a period of year as they have engaged in school improvement initiatives,
because the evaluation team has been closely involved in from the beginning, we have been able
59
to watch the various stages that the schools go through in implementing major changes to them
.”This indicates the importance of evaluation is the ongoing implementation of school
improvement program as it also serves as a means to check how improvement and/or change
have adopted in school.

4.4. Teachers’ perception on the SIP

Table 4.8: Teachers’ Responses on the Perception of School Improvement Program.

9 Items Scales Mea’ Sta

SD DA UD AG SA
A
School improvement is about putting in No 3 9 7 101 62 4.153 .839
place a set of well-tested processes for
identifying the developmental needs of each % 1.6 4.9 3.8 55.5 34.1
school
School improvement programs should focus No 22 62 34 50 14 2.846 1.179
on how schools improve student
achievements % 12.1 34.1 18.7 27.5 7.7
Creating an appropriate structure, No 4 9 10 85 74 4.186 .909
developing a sound plan and designing a
well-established system of communication % 2.2 4.9 5.5 46.7 40.7
are the major areas of preparation and
readiness to implement a SIP successfully
For success of SIP, understandings of the No 19 50 34 55 24 3.082 1.234
features of each phase of the program by all
stakeholders are always indispensable % 10.4 27.5 18.7 30.2 13.2
In school improvement doings the No 5 20 14 72 71 4.011 1.077
involvement of parents/community in
school governance and decision-making
% 2.7 11.0 7.7 39.6 39.0
should be considered as success factor.
Well trained and committed teachers are No 6 13 16 85 62 4.011 1.008
always required for successful
implementation of SIP at any school levels % 3.3 7.1 8.8 46.7 34.1
The core intention of school improvement No 22 62 34 50 14 2.846 1.179
program is student achievements in terms of
learning outcomes % 12.1 34.1 18.7 27.5 7.7
Successful implementation of SIP No 4 20 7 57 94 4.192 1.077
constantly needs competent, committed and
informed school leaders at the frontline % 2.2 11.0 3.8 31.3 51.6

Overall Perceptions 3.258 0.944

Source (Survey Data,2022)

60
Concerning perception about school improvement programs the teachers were asked the
questionnaire to indicate their level of agreement using eight items listed above.Accordingly, the
data illustrated in the table show that, the teacher’s level of agreement was found at higher level
(M=.258, SD=0.944). Besides, the mean score calculated for teachers’ responses illustrated in
the table shows better understanding of them about the concepts of school improvement program
for all eight items.

However, among the eight items of perception, the were rated item number two, that stated about
school improvement programs should focuses on how schools improve student achievements
(M=4.153, SD=0.839); item number one and six, school improvement is about putting in place a
set of well-tested processes for identifying the developmental needs of each school and well
trained and committed teachers are always required for successful implementation of SIP at any
school levels. Item number three, "Creating an appropriate structure, developing a sound plan
and designing a well-established system of communication are the major areas of preparation
and readiness to implement a SIP successfully should be considered as success factor" (M=4.16,
SD=0.898); and item number five, "In school improvement doings the involvement of
parents/community in school governance and decision-making should be considered as success
factor. " (M=4.17, SD=.939) from first to forth level in ranking orders.

Next to the above four items, the teachers perceived that, "successful implementation of SIP
constantly needs competent, committed and informed school leaders at the frontline"(M=4.192,
SD=.1.077) as 5th levels respectively.

Moreover, item number three and item number two, four and seven were rated 6th, 7thand 8th
respectively. Accordingly, teachers perceived that; "school improvement programs should focus
on how schools improve student achievements ‟ (M=2.846, SD=1.179); and "for success of SIP,
understandings of the features of each phase of the program by all stakeholders are always
indispensable (M=3.082, SD=1.234), "the core intention of school improvement program is
student achievements in terms of learning outcomes ‟ (M=2.846, SD=1.179).

In general, the overall results of the table clearly indicated that secondary schools’ teachers in the
study area have better theoretical knowledge and understanding about school improvement
61
program. However, MOE, (2007), stated that most of the school principal who are in the leading
position are not effective in leading the schools. Due to this reason, they lack the interests and
perceptions towards implementations of SIP in school.

4.5. Major challenges the SIP implementation encountered

Teachers ‘responses to items written to investigate the key challenges schools encountered in
implementing of SIP were indicated below:

Table 4.9: Teachers’ Responses on the Challenges of School Improvement Program

Items Scales Mean Sta

SDA DA UD AG SA ’
Lack of leadership capacity No 4 9 10 93 66 4.142 0.892
% 2.2 4.9 5.5 51.1 36.3
Shortage of qualified teachers No 4 16 10 88 64 4.054 0.978
% 2.2 8.8 5.5 48.4 35.2
Lack of supplies and resources required No 4 17 10 85 66 4.054 0.995
for SIP implementation % 2.2 9.3 5.5 46.7 36.3
Different organs of the school; not No 4 4 10 85 79 4.269 0.843
properly understanding their role in SIP % 2.2 2.2 5.5 46.7 43.4
Frequent change made in assigning No 3 20 10 87 62 4.016 0.994
school leaderships % 1.6 11.0 5.5 47.8 34.1
Lack of proper understanding of SIP at No 4 9 10 85 74 4.186 0.909
school level
% 2.2 4.9 5.5 46.7 40.7
Shortage of budget and low financial No 4 32 10 76 60 3.857 1.127
support % 2.2 17.6 5.5 41.8 33.0.
Lack of sufficient stakeholders’ No 4 25 10 55 88 4.087 1.133
involvement in SIP % 2.2 13.7 5.5 30.2 48.4
Insufficiency of support from the local No 3 62 9 58 50 3.494 1.260
education authorities % 1.6 34.1 4.9 31.9 27.5
Unfavorable nature and context of No 4 59 9 65 45 3.483 1.238
school neighboring % 2.2 32.4 4.9 35.7 24.7
Giving less attention for SIP No 1 32 9 77 63 1.072
% 0.5 17.6 4.9 42.3 34.6 3.928
Weak monitoring and evaluation system No 4 16 5 104 53 4.322 0.934
of SIP % 2.2 8.8 2.7 57.1 29.1
Lack having properly prepared plan for No 4 5 10 81 82 4.274 0.861
SIP implementations % 2.2 2.7 5.5 44.5 45.1
Absence of induction programs for No 4 4 10 81 83 4.291 0.846
newly employed teachers % 2.2 2.2 5.5 44.5 45.6

62
Resistance to change among some No 4 24 10 78 66 1.071
teachers and others % 2.2 13.2 5.5 42.9 36.3 3.978
Overall challenges 4.029 1.010
Source (Survey Data, 2022)
Although the mean score for all fifteen items of key challenges of school improvement program
did not reach 5.00 for very maximum agree response, there was some considerable high
agreement on the presence of school improvement program challenges on some items.

These major and agree &strongly agree mean scores for example, teachers gave considerable
high response on the item that there were weak monitoring and evaluation system of SIP and
lack having properly prepared plan for SIP implementations with mean score of 4.322 and
standard deviation of 0.934. A similar pattern was also found for the other three behaviors that
comprised this dimension of school improvement program challenge.

Similarly, teachers have high agreement on absence of induction programs for newly employed
teachers with the mean score of 4.291 and standard deviation 0.846; Lack having properly
prepared plan for SIP implementations, in adaption different organs of the school, lack of proper
understanding of SIP at school level, lack of leadership capacity and Lack of sufficient
stakeholders’ involvement in SIP and Shortage of qualified teachers and Lack of supplies and
resources required for SIP implementationwith the mean score of 4.186, 4.269,4.142,4.087,4.054
and 4.054 and standard deviation 0.909, 0.843, 0,892.1.133,0.978and 0.995 respectively. From
this the researcher understand that weak monitoring and evaluation system of SIP and Lack
having properly prepared plan for SIP implementations, lack of sufficient stakeholders’
involvement in SIP, different organs of the school; not properly understanding their role in SIP,
lack of proper understanding of SIP at school level, lack of leadership capacity and absence of
induction programs for newly employed teachers and lack of supplies and resources required for
SIP implementation are the major challenges that affects the implementations SIP in secondary
schools in the study area.

Similarly, this study supported by Khosa (2009) and stated that; many schools are dysfunctional,
and are not transforming time, teaching, physical and financial resources in learning outcomes.
Next curriculum delivery is poor; teachers do not complete the curriculum, and pitch their
teaching at levels than those demanded by the curriculum. In addition, education office support

63
and monitoring functions are inadequate and in effective. Last but not least, community support
of schools is low. To incoming (1999) the major problem that challenge school improvement
initiatives include; lacking of providing performance standards for pupils, teachers and staff
develop a standard guide system to assess the schools, establish incentive systems, encourage
self and peer monitoring and evaluation, and promote advocacy and social for quality education.

In addition, as school improvement manual MOE, (2007) states about the obstacles of SIP
implementation Includes lack of commitment to depart from traditional practices, absence of
responsible organized effort at all levels which could direct and monitor the program
implementation ,shortage of training ,lack of initiative and good look on the part of some
teachers and school leaders, absence of awareness creations among stake holders and absence of
clearly stated role about the participation level of each stake holders .Similarly, Harris in
Hopkins (2002) has noted difficult to change school management arrangement and working
culture as challenge to SIP in developing countries. In our case too, school improvement was
challenged by lack of necessary input, lack of commitment, low level of motivation, poor
leadership and the like are expected challenges in the implementation of school improvement
program.

The implementation of SIP might be challenged due to various reasons in this respect, Fullan
(2001) has noted that when a new initiative is introduced undoubtedly, it will create difficult to
both individuals and institutions. Thus, for success of the program it needs to consider
challenging factors prior to the implementation of the program. As to Anderson (1992) among
others reluctant to change happens due to lack of awareness on the purpose of the intended
change, lack of knowledge and skills needed to make the change, and the belief that the changes
will not make any difference to their students.

In addition to this some of the problems identified by Khosa (2009) include; many schools are
difunctional, and are not transforming time, teaching, physical and financial resources in learning
outcomes, next curriculum delivery is poor; teachers do not complete the curriculum, and pitch
their teaching on their level of interest than those demanded by the curriculum. Besides, woreda
educational officials support and monitoring processes are inadequate and not effective.

64
On the other hand, data collected from school principals and secondary school supervisors
through interview reported that shortage of finical resources are the most determinant factors that
affect SIP implementation; since the school grant budget allocated for schools was not enough to
keep effective schools improvement process. Besides, the respondents reported that lack of
commitment of teachers is the critical one that negatively affects SIP implementation.
Supporting this ideas, Stoll and Fink (1996:55) indicates lack of commitment or reluctant to
change as the major challenges to success of SIP. The character dimension with a mean score of
3.483 and standard deviation of 1.238 in teachers ‘response was the lowest mean score of the
fifteen challenges of SIP implement, unfavorable nature and context of school neighboring was
affected SIP implementation. Next to this, teachers reported that Insufficiency of support from
the local education authorities with a mean score of 3.494 and standard deviation of 1.260.
Besides that, teachers had also reported Giving less attention for SIP’ involvement in SIP and
resistance to change among some teachers and othersas existed with a mean score of 3.928,
3.987 and standard deviation of 1.072 and 1.071 respectively.

Table 4.10 Grand mean and standard deviation of each variable

Variables N/Responden Grand Mean Grand
t Std.Dviation
Teachers Statistic Statistic
Participation of stake holders 182 2.164 0.932
Perception 182 3.258 0.944
Challenges 182 4.029 1.010
Teaching &Learning 182 2.816 1.159
Learning environment 182 2.922 1.162
Communityparticpation Domains 182 2.594 1.085
Leadership and Management 182 2.161 0.881
Monitoring &Evaluation 182 2.847 1.179

This finding that SIP encountered with the challenges of insufficient school facilities, lack of
training on SIP implementation strategies, low level of stakeholder’s participation and low level
of supervisors monitoring and evaluation mechanisms was related with what the researcher has

65
got from the other participants such as principals, parents and supervisors themselves in
interviewsiad FGD. These respondents added that teachers ‘and parents ‘attitude was also
affecting the implementation of SIP. Supervisors on their own strengthened the points rose by
the school principals and said that lack of commitment was the major challenge. The SIC
members; moreover, focused on the school leader’s inability to motivate and mobilize the school
community as the major problem they observed. Drawing on the above analysis, one can
understand that SIP has been met with many problems in the schools where this study has been
conducive.

66
 CHAPTER FIVE

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusions
From the result of the study, it was implied that successful school improvement is related to
systematically planning, monitoring and evaluation process which could be achieved through
collective efforts of all stakeholders. They should encourage to have active participation in SIP
planning and implementation by continuously creating awareness among them. The extent of
providing monitoring and evaluation by concerned bodies and school leadership capacity
determine the extent of stakeholders‟ participation in planning and implementing SIP. Therefore,
based on the findings of the study the following conclusions were drawn.

In this study, it is found that overall process of SIP practices lacks having properly prepared plan
for SIP implementations; understanding of SIP at school level, weak monitoring and evaluation
system; lack of leadership capacity; different organs of the school not had proper understanding
of their role in SIP; lack of sufficient stakeholders’ involvement in SIP and giving less attention
for SIP implementation. This implies that low involvement of key stake holders in planning and
implementing SIP was the most challenge that affecting its success in secondary schools found
of the city. Majority of schools implement SIP at moderate level of performance with respect to
four domains of SIP. However, the practice of SIP with regards to community participation was
relatively better. Whereas, the practices of SIP activities concerning leadership and management
domain showed unsatisfactory level of performance at the school’s understudy. This indicated
that, the practices of SIP were better regarding school relationship with community; but weak
with regards to managing and leading the program to be successfully implemented in the study
schools. According to the findings of this study, majority of school organs had not properly
familiar with their roles on SIP implementation. That is, they could not be able to contribute to
SIP implementation starting from planning to monitoring and evaluation of the program. Thus,
without conducting self-evaluation and identifying specific problem areas of SIP and issues
related to major domains of SIP, it is difficult to properly implement the plan and obtain efficient
results expected from the program.

67
On the other hand, lower level of involvement among stakeholders in SIP implementation,
inadequate planning of SIP process, lack of training on SIP implementation, lack of leadership
commitment to implement SIP, lack of understanding of stakeholders at school level on SIP
implementation were reported to be the challenges of SIP implementation at present. These
unsatisfactory results confirmed inadequate attention given to the importance of school
improvement program among school leaders and other stakeholders.

5.2. Recommendations

On the bases of findings obtained and the conclusion drawn, the following recommendations
were forwarded to improve the practice of SIP implementation in secondary schools.

➢ The finding of the study indicates that conducting self-evaluation and prioritizing
problems to develop strategic plan of SIP was weak. Therefore, the school leadership
have to give attention to participatory planning.
➢ The central focus of SIP was improving students’ achievements. In order to improve
academic achievements of students, the schools should implement school
improvement program properly by making awareness among stakeholders.
➢ The study indicates that SIP plan was developed by individual school leaders or a few
individuals. So, to improve the challenges related to planning even implementation,
all stakeholders should be involved in planning process. To do so, school leaders are
expected to organize stakeholders to actively participate in planning of SIP in their
respective schools.
➢ The findings of this study showed that the allocation of budget for implementation of
SIP seems insufficient. Therefore, the government should allocate additional budget
to the school grant for successful implementation of SIP. Moreover, in order to solve
challenges of finance and material resource, the schools should design income-
generating mechanisms by taking in to account the available school facilities and
technical experts to make involvement of all stakeholders of the school.
➢ Monitoring and evaluation on the SIP were not under taken properly. Therefore,
Educational Officers and schools should give attention for monitoring and evaluation
mechanisms for the success of SIP.

68
➢ The study indicated that community participation is low; this implies that school
principals put in less effort to enhance their participation in implementation of SIP.
Therefore, the researcher felt to recommend that the principals to implement teaching
learning process in line with the standard set in the SIP frame work, the school
principals discuss with all stakeholders (School community, parents, teachers,
student, governmental organization and NGO‟s) regularly on implementation of
school improvement program and should get more community participation for the
implementation SIP.
➢ It is necessary that the City Education Offices better be responsible to assign the
competent and skilled professionals‟ as secondary school principals, because it is
important that the assigned principals should be continuously monitored, guided and
motivated by more competent and committed bodies.
➢ It is also advised that, City Education Offices in collaboration with regional
Education Bureau need to identify the gap and give sustainable training that can
improve school principals‟ capacity.
➢ Finally, Secondary school leaders should make great effort to solve or minimize these
challenges by evaluating themselves and through feedbacks given to them on their
day-to-day activities.

69
 REFERENCE

Abeya Geleta and Tamiru Jot (2009). The Practices of School Improvement Program Planning
and Implementation in Selected Government Schools of West Arsi Zone— Oromia
Regional State .

ACT. (2009). School Improvement Framework: Better School Better Futures Raising Quality
and Achievement Excellence in ACT Public Schools, Retrieved on Nov.11, 2010From w
w w.det.act.gov.et.

Admass, C. m. (2002). Ethiopian Education and Training Policy. Addis Ababa: St. George
Printing Press.

Arcaro, Jerome J. . ( 2019). Quality in Education an Implication Handbooks New Delhi,

vanityBooks International New Delhi

Ararso (2014) create feelings of readines for change in secondary schools W.H.Z

Ayalew. S (1991). Approaches to Educational Organization and Management(I). Addis Ababa:

AAU Printing Press.

Barnes. (2004). The Implementation and Challenges of SIP in Government Secondary Schools of
Oromia Special Zone Surrounding Finfinnee. .

Best and Kahan . (1998). Manitoba School Improvement. Retrieved on Oct.29, 2010, http://www
pace Work org.

Born. M. et.al (2000). An Assessment of the Progress of SIP in Gullelie Sub-city Government
Primary Schools.

Carlson, V. (1996). Reframing and Reform Perspectives on Organization, Leadership and School
change. New York: Longman Publishers.

Chalitu (2015) practice and challenges of school improvement program in S.S

Cohen, L.; Manion, L.; and Morrison, K. . ( 1992). Research Methods in Education (6th Edition).
London: Routledge - The Taylor & Francis Group.

Dea and Basha . (2014). Educational Administration Concept and Practices. New York: Wads
Worths,

Daniel Muijes (2005) improving school through teachrs Leadership. London.

70
Fink. (2011). School improvement planning: A hand book for principals, teachers, and school
councils. Retrieved from https://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/ on September/2015.

Fullan. (1992). The New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers College Pres.

Fullan, M. ( 2001). The New Meaning of Educational change: London Cassell.

Fullan, M. (2011). The New Meaning of Educational change: London Cassell.

Gay, et. al. (2009). Program of school improvement. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ascd.org/on

30/09/2015.

Gravity. (2011). The quality of primary education: A Case study of Madurai &Villupuram
Districts in Tamilnadu. Retrieved from www. earth institute. calumniated.

Good, L. (1996). Managing Effective Schools: SBM experience. Retrieved on October.26,2015

from www.link pdf.com.

Harris Alma and Linda Lambert . (2003). Building Leader ship Capacity for Improvement.
Phladelphia: Open University Press.

Harris, A. ( 2002). Successful School Improvement in United States of America.

Harris, A. and Daniel Muijes 2005. (n.d.). Improving School through Teacher Leader Ship:
London: Ope University Press.

Hopkins, D. ( 1996). Improving the quality of education for all: A hand book of staff
development activities. .

Hopkins, D. (2001). School Improvement for Real. London: Rutledge falmer.

Hopkins, D. (2004). Improving the Quality of Education for All: A Handbook of Staff
Development Activities (2nd edition). London: David Fulton publishers Ltd.

Husen (2016) effectivenes of leadership in school improvement program implementation.

Khosa. ( 2009). Strategic and school improvement planning. Addis Ababa University.
(unpublished).

Kothari, C. (2004). Research Methodology (2nd Ed.). New Delhi: New Age International
Limited Publishers.

Kruger.A.G. (1996). School Management: Internal and External environment. Pretoria

University of South Africa.
71
Lovis and Miles (1990) in Harris and Daniel Muijes (2005). successful changes Leaders
articulate a vision for their schools.

Makango. (2013). School distraction leadership that works Leadership on student achievement.

Makango. (2013). School Evaluation for Quality Improvement. Paris: II.

Mengistu (2017) has deloped general quality education pakage.

Marzano, R. ( 2003). Translating Research in to Action. Alexandria, VA: ASCW.

MoE. ( 1994). Education and Training Policy: Federal Democratic Republic Government of
Ethiopia. Addis Ababa. St. George Printing Press.

MOE. ( 2006). School Improvement Program Implementation Guide Lines. (August,2006) (0)
MOE blue Print.

MOE (2007b) and ACT Government (2004). school improvement helps that welcome all
Learners.

MOE. (2007b). School Improvement Frame work. Addis Ababa EMPD.

MoE. (2008). General Education Quality Improvement Package (GEQIP). Addis Ababa.

MoE. (2010). School Improvement Program Guidelines. Addis Ababa:

MoE. (2012). School Improvement Program (SIP): Implementation, Challenges and Policy
Implications: Monitoring, Evaluation, Research and Analysis Report. Addis Ababa:
USAID/IQPEP in Ethiopia.

MULU (2018) practice and challenges of school improvement program in S.S

Ornstein. ( 2009). Primary School Leader ship Context: leading small, medium and Large Sized
Schools. London, Rutledge Farmer.

Plan-International. ( 2004). The School Improvement Program.

POLIT etal ( 2001:467) pilot stduy is the pretesting for the main stduy.

Reynolds, D. (1996). Failure free education the past, present and future of school effectiveness
and school improvement. London: Rutledge.

Reynolds. et.al (1996). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the
differential effects of leadership types.

72
Robbins. (2003). Essentials of Organizational Behavior(7thed.). New Jersey: Presentic Hall .

Sathyabalan, et.al (2004). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the
differential effects of leadership types.

Schmuck, V., and Runkels r, F. . (1985). School improvement program retrieved

fromhttp://www.eird.org/herramientas/eng/documents on 30/09/2015.

Sergiovanni, T. ( 2001). The principalship: A Reflective practice perspective New York: A

Pearson Education Company.

Sergiovanni, T. (2005). The virtues of leadership”. The Educational Forum 69(2), 112 – 123.

South Worth, G. (2004). Primary School Leader ship Context: leading small, medium and Large
Sized Schools. London, Rutledge Farmer.

Telford, H. (1996). Transforming School Through Collaborative Leadership. London,

Washington DC: The Falmer Press.

Tigistu (2012) conducted a case study on the perception of leadership in effectiveness of school
improvement program.

UNICEF. ( 2000). Defining Quality in Education. Retrieved fromhttp://www.unicef.org/educaon

September/2015.

Van Schalkwyk, C. P.(1990) In Kruger, A. G. (1996) . . Schools for the Twenty First Century:
Leadership Imperatives for Educational Reform. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass Publishers.

Vidyarth, K. ( 2015). Top 15 Reasons Why Education is extremely important. Retrieved from
http://listsurge.com/top-15-reasons-education-important on October 2014.

73
 APPENDICE፡ A
ANRS Management Institute
Department of Public policy and Leadership
From Amhara Management Institute
Teachers Questioner
Dear Teachers / Respondents;
I would like to express my appreciation for your time and cooperation, to fill these
questionnaires. The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect information
concerning“Implementation of School Improvement of Program in Gondar City Government
Secondary Schools with particular emphasis on Perception, Practices and Challenges”.
This study is purely for academic purpose and in no way affects you personally or
organizationally. So, your genuine, frank and timely response are quite vital to determine the
success of this study. Therefore, I friendly request your cooperation in filling the questionnaires
honestly and responsibly.
General Direction:
• No need of writing your name on any parts of the questionnaire
• The information you give will be kept confidentially and used in the study
• There is nothing “right or wrong” answer here and there what is required is to show the
level of your personal opinion to each item.

• Please, for each item by putting tick mark “√” in space provided under the rating scales.

Thank you so much

Part I: Background information of the respondents

1. Name of your School _________________________________________________

2. Sex: A, Male B. Female

3. Age: A. Less than 20 Years B. 21-30 Years C. 31-40 Years
D. 41-50Years E. above 50 Years
4. Work experience:
A. Up to 5 Years B. 6-10 Years C. 11-15 Years D. 16-20 Years
E. above 20 Years
5. Educational Status: A. Diploma B. Bachelor Degree C. Master’s Degree
E. Others
74
6. Your responsibility in the school:
. A. Principal B. Vice Principal C. School Improvement Committee
D. Member of PTA E. School Level Supervisor F. Teacher
G. Other (Specify)
8. Work experience as school Principal/Vice Principal_________ year/s

Part II. Items Related to Participation

1.The involvement of stakeholders (teachers, students, and parents) in implementation of sip
plan. Please, tick (√) one box for each statement below to show how much you agree or disagree
with it. Please tick one box only on each line
Strongly agree = 5, agree = 4, undecided = 3, disagree =2, strongly disagree = 1
No Items Scales
1 2 3 4 5 Mean SD
1 Strategic plan of the school was prepared based on N
self-evaluation %
2 The trainings provided related to SIP planning for
the whole staff.
3 The involvement of stakeholders (teachers,
students, and parents) in developing sip plan
4 Stakeholders participate in school improvement
program implementation very highly
5 There is good r/ship with stakeholders (teachers,
students, and parents about sip implementation and
student result
6 Teachers schedule regular meetings to evaluate
students results and balance with time table
School leadership Domain
1 School leadership communicates with the
community and encourages higher participation in
the school activities and plan.
2 School leaders make conducive learning
environment.
3 School leadership encourages teachers to
participate in the preparation, implementation and
assessment process of the school plan.
4 School leadership encourages community to have
positive attitude towards students ‘educational
achievements.
5 School leaders direct and manage the activity of
school improvement committee
6 School leadership ensures and manages school
budget to attain SIP goals
7 School leaders ensure whether all teachers and staff
75
 members have received assistance through training.
Community Involvement Domain.
1 Parents involve in decision making process about
their children ‘s education
2 Parents assist students to learn at home.
3 Parents involve in school programs and students’
progress.
4 The community participation on SIP plan is
outlining goals that help to improve standards and
future interests.
5 Parents have information about school self-
evaluation process.
Teaching Learning Domain
1 The teaching process meets the general needs of
students and curriculum standards.
2 Teachers know their student.
3 The suitability and appropriateness of the
evaluation in respect to planning the lesson and
supervising students’ progress is very high
4 The quality of teaching and teachers ‘professional
progress is very high.
5 Student-centered method of teaching is practiced in
the school.
6 Tutorial support is given to the students by the
teachers
7 Laboratory service is provided to the students
8 Teachers use different techniques to motivate
students.
9 Library service is available to the school
community
10 Students ‘achievement is usually checked
School Learning Environment Domain
1 Students learning desire has been improved
2 Assistance is given to the students to help them
develop self-confidence and responsible
3 School environment is safe, suitable,
supportive and appealing for students.
4 students are free from bullying and fear of
stigma.
5 Adequate latrine is allocated for girls and boy
students.
6 There is health relationship among school
community
7 Class-rooms are suitable for teaching-learning
8 School compound has become attractive

76
9. What are the major challenges in your school that hinder community participation in the
implementation of SIP?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
10. What solutions do you suggest for the challenges you face in question No 11? -----------
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………...………………………………
Part III: Items Related to Monitoring and Evaluation of the Practices of SIP

7. What type of problems were observed based on the improvements of students

‘achievement after SIP has been applied?
………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. What solution do you suggest for question No 7?

………………………………………………………………………………………………
Part IV: Items Related to Perception
1. How do you express your understanding of SIP and its objectives? Please, write them briefly.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________
2. Please, show your level of agreement or disagreement for the following statements using the scales;
1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, and 5=Strongly Agree

No Items Scales
5 4 3 2 1

1 The school improvement committee has fixed meeting time

2 Woreda educational experts and supervisors have fixed schedules for
their school visits.
3 The school gives support for internal supervisors
4 The students always receive regular feedback about what they need to
do and to improve.
5 Teachers usually receive regular feedback on how they are doing things.
6 All staffs work towards SIP goals.

77
No Items Scales
1 2 3 4 5
1 School improvement is about putting in place a set of well-tested processes for
identifying the developmental needs of each school
2 School improvement programs should focus on how schools improve student
achievements
3 Creating an appropriate structure, developing a sound plan and designing a well-
established system of communication are the major areas of preparation and
readiness to implement a SIP successfully
4 For success of SIP, understandings of the features of each phases of the program
by all stakeholders are always indispensable
5 In school improvement doings the involvement of parents/community in school
governance and decision-making should be considered as success factor.
6 Well trained and committed teachers are always required for successful
implementation of SIP at any school levels
7 The core intention of school improvement program is student achievements in
terms of learning outcomes
8 Successful implementation of SIP constantly needs competent, committed and
informed school leaders at the frontline

78
Part V: Items Related to Challenges of SIP Implementation
What kinds of problems were observed concerning the improvements of students ‘achievement
after SIP has been applied? (Please use the scale below)
Please, show your level of agreement or disagreement for the following statements using the
scales; 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, and 5=Strongly Agree

Expected Challenges Scale

No 5 4 3 2 1
1 Lack of leadership capacity
2 Shortage of qualified teachers
3 Lack of supplies and resources required for SIP implementation
4 Different organs of the school; not properly understanding their role in SIP
5 Frequent change made in assigning school leaderships
6 Lack of proper understanding of SIP at school level
7 Shortage of budget and low financial support
8 Lack of sufficient stakeholders’ involvement in SIP
9 Insufficiency of support from the local education authorities
10 Unfavorable nature and context of school neighboring
11 Giving less attention for SIP
12 Weak monitoring and evaluation system of SIP
13 Lack having properly prepared plan for SIP implementations
14 Absence of induction programs for newly employed teachers
15 Resistance to change among some teachers and others

16. If there are any other challenges, other than listed in the above table (if any), Please state
them ______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

17. What did you recommend for the improvements of SIP implementation in your school
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
___________________

79
 APPENDIX B
Principals Interview

ANRS MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLICPOLICY AND LEADERSHIP

FROM AMHARAMANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

Interview Guide Questions for Gondar city AdministrationselectedSecondary Schools
Principals Dear Principals / Respondents, I am a graduate student of public policy and
leadership
at ANRS management institute
The main objective of this interview is to collect data for the study on the assessment of School
Improvement program implementation practices, challenges and opportunities in Gondar City
secondary schools. You are; therefore, kindly requested to provide necessary information on
different issues related to the study. It is very important that you provide honest responses as
frankly as possible.

PART ONE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Sex: A/ Male B/ Female

1.2 Age: ----------------------------

1.3 Level of Education…………………………………………………

1.4 Experience: As a teacher------------------- Other-----------------

1.5 Current Position………………………………………………………………………………

PARTTWO: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PLANNING AND

IMPLEMENTATION RELATED INFORMATION

1. How do you communicate with school improvement committee? How did you
conduct self-evaluation during the preparation of the strategic plan?
2. Could you mention the stake holders who involved in the preparation of three
years of strategic plan?
3. How do SCEO and supervisors take monitoring and evaluation, provide technical
80
 support for SIP planning and implementation in your school?
4. What major successes are there in the implementation of SIP?
1.1 In creating conducive learning environment:
1.2 In forming conducive learning-teaching environment:
1.3 In supporting school leadership and management:
1.4 By promoting community participation:
2. What about community participation in supporting your school?
3. Have you ever been providing training on SIP for school community?
4. Is your school well furnished?
5. How do you see the overall students’ achievement after SIP had been implemented in
your school?
6. Would you mind mentioning the contribution of school grant to SIP implementation?
7. Could you mention major challenges encountered when SIP was implemented?
8. What solutions do you suggest for the problems raised above?

81
 APPENDIX C
Supervisors’ Interview
ANRS MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLICPOLICY AND LEADERSHIP

FROM AMHARAMANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

Interview Guide Questions for Gondarcity Administration Secondary Schools Supervisors
Dear Supervisors / Respondents, I am a graduate student in public policy and Leadership at
ANRS management institute
The main objective of this interview is to collect data for the study on the assessment of School
Improvement program implementation practiceand challengesin Gondar City secondary schools.
You are; therefore, kindly requested to provide necessary information on different issues related
to the study. It is very important that you provide honest responses as honestly as possible.

PART I: Background Information

1.1 Sex: A/ Male B/ Female
1.2 Age: ----------------------------
1.3 Level of Education…………………………………………………
1.4 Experience: As a teacher------------------- Other -----------------
1.5 Current Position………………………………………………………………………………
part II: School improvement program planning and implementation related information

1. Is school principal competent enough to lead and coordinate SIP implementation?

2. Did you provide training for school communities and parents on SIP implementation?
3. How does Woreda education office take monitoring and evaluation, technical support for
SIP planning and implementation in schools?
4. How do you evaluate stakeholder participation in implementing SIP?
5. What about the fulfillments of necessary material like text book, computer and other
school facilities?
6. Is there any incentive for principals who achieve SIP successfully?
7. How do you evaluate the overall student’s achievement after SIP launched?
8. Could you mention challenges that affect the effectiveness of SIP?
9. What solution do you suggest for problems raised above?

82
 Thank you for your kind cooperation

83
 APPENDIX E

City Administration education office Head interview

Interview Guide Questions for Secondary School Woreda education office Head interview

Dear City Administration education office Head / Respondents, I am a graduate student of public policy
and Leadership at ANRS Management Institute.The main objective of this interview is to collect data for
the study on the assessment of School Improvement program implementation practices, challenges and
prospects in Gondar city secondary school. You are; therefore, kindly requested to provide necessary
information on different issues related to the study. It is very important that you provide honest responses
as frankly as possible.
PART I: Background Information

1.1 Sex: A/ Male B/ Female

1.2 Age: ----------------------------

1.3 Level of Education…………………………………………………

1.4 Experience: As a teacher------------------- Other -----------------

1.5 Current Position………………………………………………………………………………

PART II: School improvement program planning and implementation related information
1. Is school principal and supervisors competent enough to lead and coordinate SIP implementation?
2. Did you provide training for school communities and parents on SIP implementation?
3. How does Woreda education office take monitoring and evaluation, technical support for SIP
planning and implementation in schools?
4. How do you evaluate stakeholder participation in implementing SIP?
5. What about the fulfillments of necessary material like text book, computer and other school
facilities?
6. Is there any incentive for principals who achieve SIP successfully?
7. Is there good relationship among principals, teacher, student and all staff in the school?
8. Could you mention challenges that affect the effectiveness of SIP?
9. What solution do you suggest for problems raised above?

Thank you for your kind cooperation!

84
 APPENDIX E
School Improvement Committee FGD Questions
ANRS Management Institute Graduate
Department of public policy and leadership
Focused Group Discussion Questions for Gondar city School Improvement Program
Committees
Dear Committees / Respondents, I am a graduate student of public policy and leadership
atANRS Management Institute The main objective of this discussion is to collect data for
the study on the assessment of School Improvement program implementation practices,
challenges and prospects in Gondar city secondary school. You are; therefore, kindly
requested to provide necessary information on different issues related to the study. It is
very important that you provide honest responses as frankly as possible.

FGD Questions for School Improvement Program Committee. Do you have functional
school improvement committee?
1. Have you ever participated on school improvement program planning and check the
appropriateness of the lesson planning evaluation?
2. Have you ever participated on school improvement program implementation?
3. Have you ever participated on formulation?
4. What do you suggest for the problems mention above?

Thank you for your kind

cooperation

85
 APPENDIX F

PSTA FGD Questions

ANRS Management Institute Graduate School of Education Department of public policy and
leadership Focused Group Discussion Questions for Gondar city secondary School PSTA Dear
Parent Student Teacher Association / Respondents, I am a graduate student of public policy and
leadership atANRS Management Institute. The main objective of this discussion is to collect data
for the study on the assessment of School Improvement program implementation practices,
challenges and opportunities in Gondar city secondary school. You are; therefore, kindly
requested to provide necessary information on different issues related to the study. It is very
important that you provide honest responses as frankly as possible. FGD Questions for PSTA

1. Do you know about the school improvement program?

2. Have you ever been participated on school self-evaluation?
3. Have you ever been given training on SIP?
4. What are stakeholders (teachers, students and parents) participation in developing SIP
plan, implementation and evaluation?
5. Did you participate in decision making process in your schools and students are
motivated to learn?

Thank you for your kind cooperation!

86
 አባሪሀ
የብክመስራአመራርኢንስቲትዩት
የመንግስትፖሊሲእናአመራርየትምህርትክፍል

ከአማራብሄራዊክልላዊመንግስትስራአመራርኢንስቲትዩት
ይህ መጠይቅ ትምህርት ቤት መምህራን የሚሞላ ነው፡፡
ውድመምህራን፣
በመጀመሪያ ይህንን መጠይቅ በታማኝነት እና በኃላፊነት ስለተቀበሉት ልባዊ አድናቆት እና አክብሮት
ላቀርብልዎ እፈልጋለሁ። እኔ የብክመ ስራ አመራር ኢንስቲትዩት የ2ኛ ድግሪ ተማሪ ስሆን በአማራ
ክልልላዊ መንግስት በማዕከላዊ ጎንደር ዞን በጎንደር ከተማ አስተዳደር ሁለተኛ ደረጃ ትምህርት ቤቶች
የት/ቤት ማሻሻያ መርሃግብር አፈፃፀምን ለመገምገም የሚያስችል ጥናት እያካሄድኩ ነው። ስለዚህ
እርስዎ ለዚህ ጥናት ምላሽ ሰጪ እንዲሆኑ በአክብሮት ተመርጠዋል። መጠይቁን በቅንነት እና
በኃላፊነት በመሙላት የበኩላችሁን አስተዋጾ እንድትወጡ እመኛለሁ። እባኮትን የመረጡትን አማራጭ
የ ( √) ምልክት በማድረግ መልስዎን በተዘጋጀው ባዶ ቦታ ላይ ይፃፉ። በመጨረሻም፣በዚህመጠይቅ
ውስጥ የሚያቀርቧቸው መረጃዎች በሙሉ ሚስጥራዊ ሆነው ለዚህ የምርምር ዓላማ ብቻ እንደሚውሉ
ላረጋግጥላችሁ እወዳለሁ።
ስለትብብርዎበጣምእናመሰግናለን፡፡
አጠቃላይ መረጃ
በመልስ መስጫ ወረቀቱ ላይ ስም መፃፍ አያስፈልግም
የሚሰጡት ምላሽ በሚስጥር የሚጠበቅና ለምርምር ተግባር ብቻ የሚውል መሆኑን ላረጋጥላችሁ
እፈልጋለሁ
እያንዳንዱን መጠይቅ በጥንቃቄ አንብባችሁ በመልስ መስጫው ላይ በቀረቡት አማራጮች ፍትለፊትየ“ ”
ምልክትበማድረግምላሽሥጡ፡፡በተጨማሪምግልጽምላሽለሚፈልጉጥያቄዎችአጭርምላሽይፃፉ።

87
ክፍልአንድ፡የዳራመረጃ
የትምህርትቤቱስም-------------------------------------
ፆታ፡ሀ/ ወንድለ/ ሴት
እድሜ፡ሀ/ ከ20 ዓመትበታችለ/ ከ21-30 ዓመትሐ/ከ31-40 ዓመትመ/ ከ41-50 ዓመትሠ/ ከ51
ዓመትበላይ
የአገልግሎትዘመን፡ሀ/ እስከ 5 ዓመትበታችለ/ ከ6-10 ዓመትሐ/ ከ11-15 ዓመትመ/ ከ16-20 ዓመትሠ/
ከ20 ዓመትበላይ
የትምህርትደረጃ፡ሀ/ዲፕሎማለ/ የመጀመሪያዲግሪሐ/ 2ኛዲግሪመ/ ሌላካለይጥቀሱ
ያለዎትኃላፊነት: ሀ/ ርእሰመምህርለ/ ም/ር/መምህር
ሐ/ የትምህርትቤትማሻሻያኮሚቴመ/የወላጅመምርህብረት
ሠ/ የጉድትኝትሱፐርቫይዘርረ/ መምህርሰ/ ሌላይግልፁ-----
የትምህርትማሻሻያፕሮግራምበተመለከተስልጠናአግኝተውያውቃሉ?
ሀ/ አዎለ/ የለም
ለጥያቄቁጥር 6 መልስዎአዎከሆነመችስልጠናእንደወሰዱናስልጠናየተሰጠዎትንርእሰጉዳይይግለፁ-----------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------

ክፍልሁለት፡የባለድርሻአካላትተሳትፎንየሚመለከቱመጠይቆች
በት/ቤትመሻሻልእቅድአተገባበርዙሪያየባለድርሻአካላት (የመምህራን፣የተማሪዎችናየወላጆች)
ተሳትፎበሚመለከትለቀረቡትመጠይቆችያለዎትንየስምምነትመጠንከዚህበታችከቀረቡትአማራጮችመካከልእ
ርሰዎየሚስማማዎትንምርጫከፊትለፊቱከተሰጡትየመልስመስጫዎችመካከል “ ”
ምልክትበማድረግምላሽይስጡ።

አማራጮች፡ (1= በጣምአልስማማም፣ 2= አልስማማም፣ 3=ለመወሰንእቸገራለሁ፣4= እስማማለሁ፣ 5=

በጣምእስማማለሁ

ተ. መጠይቆች አማራጮች
ቁ 1 2 3 4 5
1 የትምህርትቤቱእስትራቴጅክእቅድየተዘጋጀውበራስግምገማላይተመስርቶነው
2 ስለትምህርትቤቱመሻሻልእቅድአስተቃቀድለትምህርትቤቱአጠቃላይሰራተኞችተሰ
ጧል
3 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድሁሉንምባለድርሻአካላት
(መምህራን፣ተማሪዎችንእናወላጆችን) ያሳተፈነው
4 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድሁሉንምባለድርሻአካላትተሳትፎከፍተኛነው
5 በትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድአተገባበርበተማሪዎችውጤትላይየሁሉንምባለድርሻአ
ካላት (መምህራንን፣ተማሪዎችንእናወላጆችን) ግንኙነትጥሩነው
6 መምህራንየተማዊዎችንውጤትለመገምገምቋሚየሆነጊዜ(ፕሮግራም) አላቸው
የት/ቤትአመራርእናአስተዳድር
1 የትምህርትቤቱአመራርማህበረሰቡንበማሳተፍየህብረተሰቡንእንቅስቃሴናተሳትፎያ

88
 በረታታል
2 የትምህርትቤትአመራሩምቹየትምህርትቤትአካባንያመቻቻል/ይፈጥራል
3 የትምህርትቤትአመራሮችበትምህርትቤትእቅድዝግጅት፣ትግበራናግምገማሂደትላ
ይመምህራንእንዲሳተፉያበረታታሉ
4 የትምህርትቤትአመራሮችማህበረሰቡለተማሪዎችየትምህርትስኬትአዎንታዊአመለ
ካከትእንዲኖረውያደረጋሉ
5 የትምህርትቤትአመራሮችየትምህርትቤትኮሚቴዎችንእንቅስቃሴበአግባቡይመራሉ
ያስተዳደርራሉ
6 የትምህርትቤትአመራሮችየትምሀርትግቦችንለማሳካትበጀትይበጅታሉይመራሉ
7 የትምህርቤትመሪዎችሁሉምመምህራንናየአስተዳደርሰራተኞችየስልጠናድጋፍማግ
ኘታቸውንያረጋግጣሉ
የማህበረሰብተሳትፎ
1 ወላጆችበልጆቻቸውትምህርትላይበውሳኔአሰጣጥላይይሳተፋሉ
2 ወላጆችተማሪዎችበቤትውስጥእንዲማሩያግዟቸዋል
3 ዎላጆችበትምህርትቤትእቅድናበልጆቻቸውለውጥላይይሳተፋሉ
4 ደረጃዎችንእናየወደፊትፍላጎቶችንለማሻሻልየሚረዱግቦችንበመግለፅበትምህርትቤ
ትማሻሻያእቅድላይየማህበረሰቡተሰትፎአጋዥነው
5 ዎላጆችበትምህርትቤትመሻሻልነእቅድበልጆቻቸውውጤትላይይሳተላይበቂመረጃአ
ላቸው
መማርማስተማር
1 የማስተማሩሂደቱየተማሪዎችንአጠቃላይፍላጎትናየስርዓተትምህርትደረጃዎችንያ
ሟላነው
2 መምህራንተማሪዎቻቸውንበሚገባያውቋቸዋል
3 በትምህርትቤቱትምህርቱንለማቀድናየተማሪዎችንቁጥጥርበተመለከተተገቢየሆነየ
ግምገማስርአትአለ
4 የማስተማርጥራትናየመምህራንሙያዊብቃትከፍተኛነው
5 ተማሪተኮርየማስተማርዘዴበትምህርትቤቱተግባራዊይደረጋል
6 በትምህርትቤቱለተማሪዎችየማጠናከሪያትምህርትበመምህራንይሰጣል
7 በትምህርትቤቱየተማሪዎችትምህርትበቤተሙከራየታገዘነው
8 በመማርማስተማሩሂደትመምህራንተማሪዎችንበተለያዩዘዴዎችንበመጠቀምያነቃ
ቃሉ
9 የቤተመጻሀፍትአገልግትለተምህርትቤቱማህበረሰብበአግባቡአግልግሎትይሰጣል
10 የተማሪዎችስኬትሁልጊዜይረጋገጣል

ምቹእናጤናማየት/ቤትአካባቢ

1 የተማሪዎችየመማርፍላጎትተሸሽለዋል
2 የተማሪዎችበራስመተማመንእናየሃላፊነትስሜትለማሳደግድጋፍይደረጋል
3 የትምህርትቤቱአካባቢደህንነቱየተጠበቀና፣የሚደግፍእናለተማሪዎችሳቢናማራኪነ
ው
89
4 ተማሪዎችከጉልበተኝነትናከገለልተኛነትነፃናቸው
5 በትምህርትቤቱለወንዶችናለሴቶችየተለያየሽንትቤትአላቸው
6 ጤናየሆነትምህርትቤትማህበረሰብግንኙነትአለ
7 የመማሪያክፍሎችለመማርማስተማሩሂደትምቹናቸው
8 ትምህርትቤትግቢውሳቢናማራኪነው

እንደ እርስዎ አስተያየት፣በትምህርትቤትዎ ውስጥ የ SIP

ትግበራንሲያጋጥሙትየነበሩተግዳሮቶችምንምን ናቸው ብለው ያስባሉ?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
በትምህርትቤትዎውስጥSIPንተግባራዊለማድረግየሚያጋጥሙችግሮችንለመፍታትያገለገሉየሚሏቸውዋናዋ
ናስልቶችምንድንናቸው?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………...………………………
በትምህርትቤትዎውስጥSIPንተግባራዊለማድረግየሚያጋጥሙችግሮችንለመፍታትአለ
ብለውየሚስቡትመልካምአጋጣሚምንድንነው?
………………………………………………………………………………………… ክፍልሦስት፡-
ክትትልናግምገማየሚመለከቱመጠይቆች

የት/ቤትመሻሻያፕሮግራምትግበራ ለውጡን ተግባራዊ ለማድረግ ተገቢ የሆነ

ክትትልናግምገማአስፈላጊነው. ፡፡የሚከተለው ሠንጠረዥ የት/ቤት መሻሻያ ፕሮግራም/ SIP/ን
ተግባራዊነት በተመለከተ ክትትልናግምገማየሚመለከቱመጠይቆችቀርበዋል፡፡ ከእርስዎ ልምድ እና
ከተግባራዊ ምልከታ፣የት/ቤት መሻሻያ ፕሮግራም /SIP/ን ለመከታተልና ለመገምገም ያስችላሉ ብለዎ
ከቀረቡት መጠይቆች በማንበብ ስምምነትዎን ፊት ለፊት በተቀመጠው አማራጮችበመጠቀምየ “ ”
ምልክትበማድረግምላሽይስጡ።
አማራጮች፡ (1= በጣምአልስማማም፣ 2= አልስማማም፣ 3=ለመወሰንእቸገራለሁ፣4= እስማማለሁ፣ 5=
በጣምእስማማለሁ

ተ.ቁ መጠይቆች አማራጮች

5 4 3 2 1
1 የትምህርትቤትማሻሻያኮሚቴየራሱየሆነቋሚየስብሰባ/የውይይትጊዜአለው

2 የትምህርትባለሙያዎች፣የጉድኝትማዕከልሱፐርቫይዘሮችየራሳቸውየሆነቋ
ሚየትምህርትቤትየጉብኝትፕሮግራማአላቸው

3 ት/ምህርትቤቶችየክፍልውስጥምልከታድጋፍያደርጋሉ፡፡

4 ሁልጊዜተማሪዎችምንእንደሚፈልጉናሊሻሻልላቸውየሚገቡነገሮችንበተከ
ታታይይጠቁማሉ፡፡
5 መምህራንአብዛኛውንጊዜእንዴትእናምንመስራትእንደለባቸውግብረመልስ
ይቀበላሉ

90
6 ሁሉምየትምህርትቤቱሰራተኛለትምህርትቤትመሻሻያዓላማይሰራሉ፡፡
የሲፕእቅድመተግበርከጀመረጀምሮበተማሪዎችአጠቃላይውጤትላይየእርስዎአስተያየትምንድንነው? ሀ.
በጣምከፍተኛለ/ ከፍተኛሐ/ መጠነኛመ/ ዝቅተኛሠ/ በጣምዝቅተኛ
የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድመተግበርከጀመረጀምሮበተማሪዎችውጤትመሻሻልዙሪያየተመለከተቱትችግር
ምንድንነው?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
የችግሩመፍትሄምንሊሆንይገባልብለውያስባሉ?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
ክፍልአራት፡አመለካከትንየሚመለከቱጥያቄዎች
የትምህርትቤትማሻያንበሚመለከትያለዎትአረዳድ/ግንዛቤእናዓላማምንድንነው? ግልጽማብራሪያይስጡ

ተ.ቁ መጠይቆች አማራጮች

5 4 3 2 1

መምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድ
1
አፈጻጸምውሳኔአሰጣጥላይይሳተፋሉ
2 መምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናየወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድላይችግርልየታላይይሳተፋሉ
3 መምህራን፣የተማሪዎችናየወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድአተገባበርይሳተፋሉ
4 ለትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድመምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናየወላጆችየገንዘብናየቁሳቁስ/
የግብአትድጋፍያደርጋሉ
5 የመምሀራን፣የተማሪዎችናየወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድ
መሳተፍምቹየትምህርትቤትአካባቢንይፈጥራል
6 ትምህርትቤቶችመምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናዎላጆችበትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድላይእንዲ
ሳተፉግልጽየሆነእቅድአላቸወ
7 ትምህርትቤቶችስለትምሀርትቤትማሻሻያእቅድአተገባበርለመምህራነ፣ለተማሪዎችናለወ
ላጆችበተለያዩየትምህርትቤቱስብሰባዎችበግልፅያሳዉቃል፡፡
8 በትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድቁጥጥርናግምገማየመምሀራን፣የተማሪዎችናየወላጆችተሳትፎ
ከፍተኛነው
9 መምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድ
አፈጻጸምውሳኔአሰጣጥላይይሳተፋሉ
10 መምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድመሳተፋቸውየባለቤትነትናየኔ
ነትስሜትእንዲኖራቸውአድርጓል
11 በትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድመምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናወላጆችመሳተፋቸውፍታሀዊናተደራሽ
እንዲሆንአግዟል
12 ወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድመሳተፋቸውመምህራንንስለበልጆቻቸውመሻሻልናድ
ክመታቸውንእንዲወያዩአግዟል፡፡
13 ትምህርትቤቱመምህራን፣ለተማሪዎችናለወላጆችበትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድየሚጠበ
ቅባቸውንተግባርናሀላፊነትያሳውቃል
14 ትምህርትቤቱስለትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድአፈጻጸምቋሚየሆነየማህበረሰብየውይይት
ፕሮግራምአለው
91
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
____________________
2. በትምህርትቤትማሻሻያእቅድውስጥየህብረተሰቡን (የመምህራን፣የተማሪዎችእናየወላጆች)
ተሳትፎመጠንምንያክልእንደሆነየሚጠቁሙየተለያዩአመላካችጥያቄዎችቀርበዋል፡፡ለቀረቡትመጠይቆችያለዎ
ትንየመስማማትወይምአለመስማትደረጃከዚህበታችየቀረቡትንአማራጮችበመጠቀምየ
“ ”ምልክትበማድረግምላሽስጡ
1= በጣምአልስማማም 2= አልስማማም 3= ለመወሰንአልችልም 4= እስማማለሁ
5= በጣምእስማማለሁ

15.
መምህራን፣ተማሪዎችናወላጆችበትምህርትመሻሻልእቅድአስተቃቀድናተገባርላይስለተግባርናሀላፊነታቸውስ
ልጠናአግኝተውያውቃሉ? መልስዎአዎከሆነከስልጠናውበኃላየመረጡትንለውጥአለ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ክፍልምስት፡ከግንዛቤጋርተያያዥነትያላቸውመጠይቆች(Items Related to Perception)
የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድምንነትናዓላማእንዴትይረዱታል? ያለዎትንአስተያየትአብራርተውይፃፉ
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
____________

92
ከዚህበታችለቀረቡትመጠይቆችያለዎትንየመስማማትወይምአለመስማትደረጃከዚህበታችየቀረቡትንአማራጮ
ችበመጠቀምምላሽስጡ
1= በጣምአልስማማም2= አልስማማም 3= መወሰንአልችልም 4= እስማማለሁ
5= በጣምእስማማለሁ

የማስተማር ተግባር/ልምምድ 5 4 3 2 1
1 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልየትምህርትቤቶችንየእድገትፍላጎቶችንለመለየትየሚያስችሉ
ሂደቶችንማስቀመጥነው
2 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልየሚያተኩረውትምህርትቤቶችእንዴትየተማሪዎችንውጤት
መሻሻልላይነው
3 ትክክለኛአደረጃጀትመፍጠር፣ውጤታማእቅድለማቀድናእናየግንኙነትስርአቶችንመ
ፍጠርዋናዋናየትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድመገለጫዎችናቸው
4 ለትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድስኬትሁሉምባለድርሻአካላትበሚገባማስረዳትያስፈልጋ
ል
5 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልስራዎችየወ፤ጆች/የማህበረሰቡበትምህርትቤትአስተዳደርእና
ውሳኔአሰጣጥላይያላቸውተሳትፎእንደስኬትሊቆጠርይገባል
6 በሁሉምየትምህርትቤትደረጃበትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድበተሳካሁኔታለመተግበር
የሰለጠናቁርጠኛመምህር፣ተማሪናወላጅያስፈልጋል
7 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልመርሀግብርዋናዓላማየተማሪዎችንመማርማመቻቸትእናው
ጤትማሳካትነው
8 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድበተሳካሁኔታመተግበርብቁ፣ቁርጠኛናበመረጃየተደገፈ
ግንባርቀደምየትምህርትቤትአመራርያስፈልጉታል

ክፍልስድስት፡በ ት/ቤትማሻሻያፕሮገራም/ SIP/ትግበራላይያጋጠሙተግዳሮቶች

የት/ቤትመሻሻያፕሮግራምትግበራለውጡንተግባራዊለማድረግበትምህርትቤቶችአቅምላይየተመሰረተነው፡፡
የሚከተለውሠንጠረዥየት/ቤመሻሻያፕሮግራም/
SIP/ንተግባራዊለማድረግበት/ቤትደረጃአቅምላይያተኩራል።ከእርስዎልምድእናከተግባራዊምልከታ፣የት/ቤት
መሻሻያፕሮግራም/SIP/ለመተግበርየት/ቤቶችንአቅምእንዴትይገመግማሉ? እባኮትን ከዚህ በታች
የቀረቡትንአማራጮችበመጠቀምየ “ ”ምልክትበማድረግምላሽይስጡ።

93
 አማራጮች፡ (1= በጣም አልስማማም፣ 2= አልስማማም፣ 3=ገለልተኛ/ያልታወቀ፣4= እስማማለሁ፣ 5=
በጣም እስማማለሁ
15. ከተገለፁት ችግሮች በተጨማሪ ሌሎች ችግሮች ካሉ ይግለፁ

መጠይቆች አማራጮች
5 4 3 2 1
1 የትምህርትቤትአመራርብቃትማነስ
2 በሙያውየሰለጠነመምህራንእጥረት
3 የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድንለመተግበርየአቅርቦትናግብአትእጥረትመኖር
4 የተለያዩባለድርሻአካላትበትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድንላይያላቸውንሚናአለ
መረዳት
5 የርእሳነመምህራንመቀያር
6 በትምህርትቤትደረጃበትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድንበአግባቡአለመረዳት
7 የበጀትእጥረትእናየገዘብድጋፉዝቅተኛመሆን
8 በትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድላይየባለድርሻአካላትተሳትፎአናሳመሆን
9 ከትምህርትመምሪያሙያተኞችድጋፍአናሳመሆን
10 ለትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድንየሚሰጠውትኩረትአናሳመሆን
11 ደካማየሆነየክትትልናየግምገማስርአትመኖር
12 በትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድንለማስተግበርየሚውልበአግባቡየተዘጋጀእቅድአ
ለመኖር
13 ለአዳዲስመምህራንየማስተዋወቂያፕሮግራምአለመኖሩ
14 ከመምህራንናከሌሎችአካላትመካከልለውጥንያለመቀበልሁኔታመኖር
__________________________________________________________________________
____
16. በትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድንአተገባበርንለማሻሻልምንአስተያየትአለዎት?
__________________________________________________________________________
አባሪለ
የብክመስራአመራርኢንስቲትዩት
የመንግስትፖሊሲእናአመራርየትምህርትክፍል
ይህጥናትክፍልየትምህርትቤትማሻሻያማዕቀፍንየሚመለከትመረጃማሰባሰቢያመጠይቅበተማሪዎችየሚሞላነ
ው፡፡
ውድተማሪዎች
ይህመጠይቅየተዘጋጀውበሁለተኛደረጃት/ቤቶችያለውንየትምህርትቤትማሻሻያማዕቀፍመርሃግብርአተገባበር፣
ተግዳሮቶችንእና‹ተማሪዎችውጤትመሻሻልያለውአስተዋፅኦመረጃንለማስባሰብነው፡፡በመሆኑምይህመጠይቅዋ
ጋየሚኖረውመጠይቁትክክለኛመረጃለማሰባሰብያስቻለ
ከሆነብቻነው፡፡በመሆኑምመጠይቁንበጥንቃቄእንድትሞለልኝበታላቅአክብሮትእጠይቃለሁ፡፡
የሚሰበሰበውመረጃለትምህርትዓላማብቻየሚውልናበሚስጥርነትየሚጠበቅመሆኑንከወዱሁእገለፃለሁ፡፡
ማስታወሻ፡-
1. ስምመፃፍአይጠበቅባችሁም

94
 2. መልሱንበተሰጠውስፍራላይይህንምልክት“√”ተጠቀሙ
3. መልሱንመቀየርከተፈለገየመጀመሪያውንመልስሰርዙት
ክፍልአንድ፡አጠቃላይመረጃ
1.1. የትምህርትቤቱስም----------------------------------------------------
1.2. ጾታ፡ሀ/ ወንድለ/ ሴት
1.3. እድሜ--------------------------
1.4. ክፍል--------------------------
ክፍልሁለት፡የባለድርሻአካላትግንዛቤ
የሚከተለትመጠይቆችየትምህርትቤትማሻሻያማዕቀፍኮሚቴአባላትስለፕሮግራምያላቸውንውንግንዛቤየሚሚ
መለከቱናቸው፡፡መልሳችሁንከዚህበታችበተገለፀውመለኪያዎችበመመልከትይህን“√”ምልክትበመጠቀምአመል
ክቱ፡፡
1.1.
የትምህርትቤትማሻሻያማእቀፍፕሮግራምለባለድርሻአካላትማለትምለመምህራነ፣ለተማሪዎች፣ለወላጅስልጠና
ተሰጥቷሌ፡፡ሀ/ አዎለ/ አይደለም
1.2. በስልጠናውለመሳተፍያላቻለባለድርሻአካላትጥቀሱ
5=በጣምእስማማለሁ፣4=አስማማለሁ፣3=አልወሰንኩም፣2=አልስማማም፣ 1=በጣምአልስማማም
ክፍልሦስት፡የባለድርሻአካላትተሳትፎ

መጠይቆች አማራጮች
5 4 3 2 1
1 ለተማሪዎችየትምህርትማሻሻያፕሮግራሙንአስመልክቶየተሰጠውግንዛቤበቂነ
ው
2 ተማሪዎችፕሮግራሙንአስመልክቶያላቸውንሃላፊነትያውቃሉ
3 ተማሪዎችስለፕሮግራሙአተገባበርሂደትእናግቦችበቂግንዛቤ
አላቸው

95
ባለድርሻአካላትበእቅድአተገባበርላይየነበራቸውተሳትፎ፡፡መልሳችሁንከዚህበታችበተገለፀውመለኪያይህን“√”ም
ልክትበመጠቀምአስቀምጡ፡፡
5=በጣምእስማማለሁ፣4=አስማማለሁ፣3=አልወሰንኩም፣2=አልስማማም፣1=በጣምአልስማማም

መጠይቆች አማራጮች
5 4 3 2 1
1 ተማሪዎችስለፕሮግራሙውጤታማነትከት/ቤቱአመራሮችጋርበተደጋጋሚውይ
ይትአድርገዋል፡
2 ተማሪዎችየማስተባበር፣የመቆጣጠርእናለመገምገምሃላፊነቱንበብቃትተወጥተ
ዋል፡፡
3 ባለድርሻአካላትስለተማሪዎችውጤትናስለመማርማስተማርሂደቱበተደጋጋሚተ
ወያይተዋል
4 ርዕሰመምህራኑየት/ቤትመሻሻልመርሃግብርከተማሪዎችውጤትጋርአስተሳስረ
ውበንቃትተንቀሳቅሰዋል፡፡
5 በፕሮግራሙአፈፃፀምእናበተማሪዎችውጤትከባለድርሻአካላትመካከልጠንካራየ
ሆነትስስርአለ፡፡
ክፍልአራት፡የመማሪያአካባቢ
የመማሪያአካባቢመልሳችሁንከዚህበታችበተገለፀውመለኪያይህን“√”ምልክትበመጠቀምአስቀምጡ፡፡
5=በጣምእስማማለሁ፣4=አስማማለሁ፣3=አልወሰንኩም፣2=አልስማማም፣1=በጣምአልስማማም

መጠይቆች አማራጮች
5 4 3 2 1
1 ተማሪዎችንየሚገዙበጋራስምምነትፀድቀውበግልፅየተቀመጡግንቦችአለ
2 ጠንካራየመምህርተማሪግንኙነትአለ
3 የት/ቤቱቅጥርግቢለተማሪዎችናመምህራንየተመቸነው
4 የት/ቤቱፖሉሲዎችናት/ቤቱከባለድርሻዎችየሚጠበቅባቸውነገሮችበግልፅየ
ተቀመጡናባለድርሻዎችበቅጡየተረዷቸውናቸው፡፡
5 የተማሪዎች
(የውሃአቅርቦት፣የመፀዳጃቤት፣ቤተመፅሀፍ፣ላብራቶሪ፣ቅንጫፍማእከል)
የተሟሉናቸው
6 የመማሪያክፍሎችላመማርማስተማርሂደትምቹእናየልዩፍላጎትተማሪዎች
ንያካተተነው፡፡
7 ለሁለምተማሪበቂመፅሀፍአለ
8 መፅሀፍቱበቃላትአጠቃቀምናሰወሰዋዊባህሪወጥነትአላቸው

96
ክፍልአምስት፡የትምህርትቤቱማህረሰብተሳትፎንበሚመለከት
መልሳችሁንከዚህበታችበተገለፀውመለኪያይህን “√”ምልክትበመጠቀምአስቀምጡ
5=በጣምእስማማለሁ፣4=አስማማለሁ፣3=አልወሰንኩም፣2=አልስማማም፣1=በጣምአልስማማም

ክፍልስድስት፡ለትምህርትማሻሻያፕሮግራምሂደትአተገባበርእንቅፋትየሆኑምክንያቶች
መጠይቆች አማራጮች
5 4 3 2 1
1 ትምህርትነክጉዳዮችንለመደገፍወላጆችያደረጉትአስተዋፅኦበቂነው
2 ወላጆችየልጆቻቸውየትምህርትውጤትእንዲሻሻልያደረጉትክትትልናድጋፍ
በቂነው
3 ወላጆችከትምህርትቤቱአመራርጋርየት/ቤትመሻሻልመርሃግብርከተማሪው
ጤትጋርበማስተሳሰርያደረጉትውይይትበቂነው
4 ወላጆችየቤትስራስትሰራ/ሪ/ ጥያቄዎችንበመስራትያግዙሃል/ሻል/
መልሳችሁንከዚህበታችበተገለፀውመለኪያይህን“√”ምልክትበመጠቀምአስቀምጡ
5=በጣምእስማማለሁ፣4=አስማማለሁ፣3=አልወሰንኩም፣2=አልስማማም፣1=በጣምአልስማማም
(6) የት/ቤትመሻሻልመርሃግብርፕሮግራምለመተግበርያጋጠሙዋናዋናችግሮችምንድንናቸው ----------------

መጠይቆች አማራጮች
5 4 3 2 1
1 የአመራሩቁርጠኝነትአናሳመሆን
2 በበቂሁኔታየባለግርሻ አካላትድጋፍአለመኖር
3 የገንዘብየቁሳቁስእጥረትመኖር
4 የፕሮግራሙንስኬታማነትለማወቅአመታዊግምገማአለማካሄድ
5 የት/ቤትመሻሻልመርሃግብርፕሮግራምከተማሪውጤትጋርትስስርመኖሩንያለመገን
ዘብ
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(7) ከላይየተገለፁትንችግሮችየመፍትሄሀሳቦችይሆናሉየምትለትንበአጭሩግለፁ ---------------------------------
---------------------
(8) የት/ቤትመሻሻልመርሃግብርፕሮግራምንበመተግበርየሚጠበቅተስፋምንድንነውብላችሁታስባላችሁ ------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
ስላደረጋችሁትትብብርአመሰግናለሁ!

97
አባሪሐ
የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልኮሚቴአባላትየቡድንተኮርውይይትመጠይቅ
በጎንደርከተማአስተዳደርየትምህርትቤትመሻልኮሚቴአባላትየቡድንተኮርውይይትየተዘጋጀየተከበራችሁየኮሚ
ቴአባላትበብክመስራአመራርኢንስቲትዩትየመንግስትፖሊሲእናአመራርየትምህርትክፍልየድህረምረቃትምህ
ርትት/ቤትተመራቂተማሪነኝ፡፡የዚህውይይትአላማበጎንደርከተማአስተዳርበሁለተኛደረጃት/ቤቶችያለውንየትም
ህርትቤትማሻሻያማእቀፍመርሃግብርአተገባበርእናተግዳሮቶችንመረጃንለማስባሰብእናጥናትለማድረግነው፡፡በ
መሆኑምይህመጠይቅዋጋየሚኖረውመጠይቁትክክለኛመረጃለማሰባሰብያስቻለ
ከሆነብቻነው፡፡በመሆኑምመጠይቁንበጥንቃቄእንድትሞሉልኝስልበአክብሮትእጠይቃለሁ፡፡የሚሰበሰበውመረጃ
ለትምህርትዓላማብቻየሚውልናበሚስጥርነትየሚጠበቅመሆኑንከወዱሁእገልፃለሁ፡፡የቡድንተኮርውይይትለ
ሚያደርጉየትምህርትቤትመሻሻልኮሚቴአባላትየተዘጋጀመጠይቅ
1. ተግባርላይያለ የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልኮሚቴአለ ?--------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
2.የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልእቅድእናተከታታይነትያለውትምህርትእቅድግምገማላይተሳትፎታደርጋላችሁ ?---
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
3. የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልፕሮግራምአተገባበርላይተሳትፎታደርጋላችሁ? --------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
4. የትምህርትቤቱየ3 አመትስትራቴጅክእቅድበማዘጋጀትላይተሳትፎታደርጋላችሁ? --------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
5. ከላይበተዘረዘሩትላይችግርካለ በዝርዝርይግለፁ? ----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ስላደረጋችሁትትብብርአመሰግናለሁ!!

98
አባሪመ
የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልለወላጅተማሪመምህርህብረትአባላትየቡድንተኮርውይይትመጠይቅ
በጎንደርከተማአስተዳደርየትምህርትቤትመሻልኮሚቴአባላትየቡድንተኮርውይይትየተዘጋጀየተከበራችሁየኮሚ
ቴአባላትበብክመስራአመራርኢንስቲትዩትየመንግስትፖሊሲእናአመራርየትምህርትክፍልየድህረምረቃትምህ
ርትት/ቤትተመራቂተማሪነኝ፡፡የዚህውይይትአላማበጎንደርከተማአስተዳርበሁለተኛደረጃት/ቤቶችያለውንየትም
ህርትቤትማሻሻያማዕቀፍመርሃግብርአተገባበርእናተግዳሮቶችንመረጃንለማስባሰብእናጥናትለማድረግነው፡፡በ
መሆኑምይህመጠይቅዋጋየሚኖረውመጠይቁትክክለኛመረጃለማሰባሰብያስቻለ ከሆነብቻነው፡፡
በመሆኑምመጠይቁንበጥንቃቄእንድትሞሉልኝስልበአክብሮትእጠይቃለሁ፡፡የሚሰበሰበውመረጃለትምህርትዓላ
ማብቻየሚውልናበሚስጥርነትየሚጠበቅመሆኑንከወዱሁእገልፃለሁ፡፡
የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልፕሮግራምላይምንያህልታውቃላችሁ? -----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
በትምህርትቤትግለ ግምገማላይተሳትፎታደርጋላችሁእናተማሪዎችለትምህርትየተነቃቁናቸው ?-------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
የትምህርትቤትመሻሻልፕሮግራምበተመለከተስልጠናአለወይ ?----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
የትምህርትቤቱመሻሻልፕሮግራምእቅድ፣አተገባበርእናግምገማላይባለድርሻአካላትማለትምየወላጅተማሪእናመ
ምህራንተሳትፎታደርጋላችሁወይ ?-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
በትምህርትቤቱየውሳኔአሰጣጥሂደትላይተሳትፎታደርጋላችሁወይ ?-------------------------------------- -------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ስላደረጋችሁትትብብርአመሰግናለሁ!!

99