Controversy still dogs the new primary curriculum

Volume two is a good idea. But the question of teachers and time come to mind. In a system where education is exam oriented, teachers will be hardpressed to follow it. Education Vision’s Anthony Mugeere reportsAs curriculum specialists prepare to start the review of the secondary school curriculum in two months’ time, major doubts still remain on the implementation of volume two of the primary school curriculum launched recently.Representatives of funding agencies and parents are still concerned about its relevance and cost implications. They think it might compound, rather than meet, the country’s education needs.“The curriculum introduces a lot of costs in teaching music, Integrated Production Skills and Agriculture, among other things,” says Mr. George Kalibbala, Education Advisor to the Royal Netherlands Embassy.“But more importantly,” he adds, “there is a shortage of teachers and high number of pupils countrywide. We advised government to concentrate on basic literacy and numeracy but it went ahead to produce an even a bigger volume in the form of a teachers’ guide.” A representative of one of the donor agencies who sought anonymity said there was no consensus between the donors and government on the curriculum as put by Education and Sports minister, Dr. Khiddu Makubuya during the launching ceremony. He said: “We still have major concerns about this curriculum. We wonder how the teachers will be trained and the learning materials organised for the millions of pupils in school. Government failed to assure us on how things will be done and we are just waiting to see what will happen.” This is now a typical wait-and-see storyline. Whereas all government-aided schools are entitled to free copies of the curriculum and teachers’ guide, not all bother to pick up their copies from the ministry. Only a few private schools are willing to part with the mandatory sh10,000 for a copy of the curriculum.A survey conducted by Education Vision in upcountry schools has revealed that some have not even acquired copies of volume one of the curriculum. They are still using the 1990 syllabus.“Teachers don’t want to refer to syllabi because they complicate their work. Very few of them actually follow the curriculum,” said one headteacher under anonymity. In a bid to promote the Local Language syllabus, government has a lot to do to convince parents that it is an essential policy. Most parents do not want to pay school fees for their children to learn a local language that is learnt and spoken at home. Some urban schools, particularly those in the urban areas, might need to hold a referendum to agree on the local language they will teach.“What local language will Kampala schools teach for instance?” asked Mr. Michael Ward, the Education Advisor to the Department For International Development (DFID).“Government needs to invest up to sh40m to promote Local Language policy and sensitise parents on its relevance. There remains a lot to be done before the language policy is adopted. Actually Luganda is the only local language that can be taught in schools because it has a dictionary and grammar,” Ward adds.Although the curriculum was developed by the country’s leading curriculum specialists, it was never tested on teachers and pupils it was launching. For that matter, educationists argue, government ignored the input of major stakeholders, which will affect its implementation.“Many teachers will find it difficult to operationalise this curriculum because they do not understand it. The document might be there in the schools but can the teachers utilise it?” asks Kalibbala.Some parents fear that the introduction of new subjects has created additional education costs. They single out the music syllabus that has, among other things, added costumes and music instruments to the list of teaching aids.“This cost will certainly be borne by (we) the parents,” says James Kato, a parent. “We shall have to buy costumes, flutes and drums; in effect, paying more money in fees.” On Agriculture, the curriculum not introduces the theoretical and practical teaching of the subject but also the formation of agricultural clubs in every class. This will create more demand for textbooks and farm tools.But under the Agricultural Education Component (AEC), government only provides such tools to six districts countrywide. The rest, will have to purchase them—a cost that will certainly be passed over to the parent.“We shall try to add another seventh district but our hope now is that the parents work together with the headteachers to provide these materials,” AEC National Co-ordinator, Christopher Acar, says. “Parents will need to pay more money but government had to introduce the subject to make agriculture a profession.” Analysts are also questioning why the curriculum is silent on peace education—a subject that was approved and launched by government two years ago. Developed by the Always Be Tolerant Organisation (ABETO), the syllabus introduces peace education at all levels of education.On its part, government is relieved that the primary education curriculum reform is over. But the donors, parents and pupils remain uncertain about its implications. Nobody can tell what impact it will have on the education system until 2008 when all the subjects in it are introduced.