Although my job is not to develop an entire curriculum for an African school, my research proposal has to be based on some form of objective analysis. To this end Hugh Hawes (1979) has provided a well documented assessment of curriculum development in Africa and the reality of teaching within the classroom. Within an historical context, Hawes describes the involvement of foriegn donors, particularly Americans in the development of a post independence curriculum during the 1960’s. The learning priorities were literacy, numeracy, science and social studies each spawning individual programmes to be rolled out in many African nations. The notable exclusion was Tanzania who were developing an Education for Reform programme based on the socialist principles of Julius Nyerere.
Whilst the programme represented an awkward balance of rote and progressive teaching approaches the main criticism was related to the following aspects of implementation. 1) absence of a clear link between curriculum aims and classroom practice. 2) currupt government practices particularly in relation to textbook publication. 3)implementation to broad and too rapid 4) programme was too ambitious with unrealistic timescales leading to fragmented success.
Hawes described the reality in the classroom as follows: 1) not enough time to achieve curriculum objectives. 2) Lessons are multi-linginual in order to save time. 3) The teacher is focused on the priorities (Maths and English) 4) classes are exam focused.
In order to bridge the gap between the formal curriculum and reality, Hawes suggests the following guidelines: 1)given the teacher a set of manageable and achievable objectives and goals 2) be flexible in order that the teacher is permitted to follow themes that engage the students 3)Include Agricultural themes in the curriculum.
In addition to specifying the mechanism for improving the process of curriculum development in the formal sector, Hawes provides a definition of basic education (a concept that I have seen referenced in numerous books) within the African context.
Basic Education is in essence, an attempt to find a compromise between formal (school) and informal (traditional) education. According to Hawes, the principal factors associated with Basic Education are listed as follows: 1) basic skills, knowledge and attitudes (life long learning) that enable learners to take charge of their lives. 2) Different paths to learning; different formats, contents, materials can be used. 3) Focused on attainment of goals (not time spent or ground covered) 4) Very basic; focused on minimal life skills. 4) not considered terminal and therefore not focussed on progression up the educational ladder. 5) Must be developed in the context of an educational partnership that includes the individual, the family, formal education and the surrounding community (should include adult education, art and agriculture). 5) Hawes recommends that context specific themes should be woven into/across the entire curriculum.
In this context, Hawes provides a concise description of a number of Basic Education programmes, sponsored by the UN that went into operation across Africa. This tag appears to represent the next line of enquiry.
The literature review appears to suggest the following pointers in relation to my own project:
1) Literacy and numeracy are legitimate priorities
2) Some form of skills based learning should be included in the curriculum i.e Agriculture, IT, Health care, development studies (Van Rensburg) depending on the contextual need.
3) Teaching methods should be grounded in indigenous tradition of observation and imitation
4) Lessons and materials should be related to context
Furthermore, should the research be successful, any form of expansion in terms of the schooling and the curriculum should involve community stakeholders as an integral part of the development process and consider adult education in order to fully integrate the format into the community.
Newsflash!
It seems were not alone afterall. While reviewing the tome, Principles and Practice in Education (Farrant, 1982), I came across a reference to a programme called IMPACT (Instructional Management by Parents, Communities and Teachers). The programme (implemented in Indonesea and the Phillipines) has been specifically designed to function in poor countries where resources are in short supply. Significantly, the classes (small groups of 5 students) are led by student-tutors as opposed to formal teachers and it would appear that the aims of the programme are very similar to those related to Basic Education described above. The programme was specified by SEAMEO (South East Asian Ministers of Education Organisation) as an effective alternative delivery system for mass primary education and funded by the International Development Research Centre of Canada. I have emailed SEAMEO in the hope that they will provide me with some relevant documentation in order that I may compare the aims, scope, curriculum etc with the cheap basic education requirement for Ghana.
Despite the length of time it has taken to reveal itself, Im not surprised that a detailed and structured contemporary programme of peer group learning currently exists and should it be readily transferrable to Ghana that would represent some very good news for Ken and the children. Where exactly that would leave my proposal however, remains to be seen.