The teaching–learning process in basic education in Nepal

• In Event: Public-Private Dynamics in Education: A South Asia Exchange

Proposal

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were introduced at the 2015 United Nations Sustainable Development Summit. One of the goals was “to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” Given the shift in education from “quantity” to “quality,” children’s movement seeking quality education is emerging in many developing countries, and children are increasingly transferring from public to private schools (Nishimura & Yamano 2013; James & Woodhead 2014).

One of the countries in which this phenomenon is observable is Nepal, a landlocked country located in South Asia. According to the 2010/11 National Living Standards Survey, the proportion of children enrolled in private schools has more than trebled from 7.5% in 1995 to 26.8% in 2010 (CBS, 2011). The primary reason is the qualitative disparity between public and private schools. For example, people focus on the results of nationally standardized examination administrated to tenth-grade students as an index of a school’s educational quality. However, the pass rate in 2015 is higher for private than public schools at 89.9% and 33.5%, respectively (DoE, 2015). Furthermore, although teaching in private schools is offered either solely in English (an international language) or a combination of Nepalese and English, teaching in public schools is generally delivered in Nepalese. Therefore, many parents are convinced that private schools offer better education than public schools and thus send their children to private schools (Subedi et al., 2013).

However, similar to many countries, Nepal does not have a special teacher training system for private schools, and private schools do not have its own teacher training system neither. Rather, the government or international cooperation agencies target public school teachers for teacher training. Moreover, many low-fee private schools provide worse teacher treatment than public schools and allow unqualified teachers to teach. Although teachers’ teaching skills and motivation to work are not the only factors that influence students’ academic achievement, why does academic achievement in private schools in the country remain very high despite the situation?

The teaching–learning process lies at the core of the formation of the “quality of education.” Although various studies were conducted in developed countries, the process has become a black box for developing countries (Scheerens, 2000). Specifically, no detailed research was conducted on the teaching–learning process in Nepal. With the movement seeking quality education and the issue of educational disparity between public and private schools becoming increasingly serious, focusing on the teaching–learning process in public and private schools and examining differences between them are urgent tasks. Therefore, the study sheds light on the teaching–learning process in the context of public and private schools in Nepal and examines the factors that contribute to high academic achievement.

The study analyzed mathematics classes for fifth and eighth grades in three schools with different pass rates in a nationally standardized examination. Two are private schools (Schools A and B with pass rates of 98.2% and 90.0%, respectively), and one is a public school (School C with a pass rate of 56.4%). Class videos, school records (i.e., basic information, registration books, and students’ attendance books), students’ notebooks, and interviews with principals and teachers were collected from each target school. Furthermore, quantitative metrics, such as students’ number of completed units, notebook pages, and solved problems, and qualitative metrics, which comprises students’ learning activities (i.e., active and passive learning and other activities) and teachers’ background including educational qualification and license, were analyzed.

The results confirmed differences especially in terms of quantitative metrics. The number of pages used by students and number of questions solved by them in specific units of School A, which displayed the highest pass rate in the nationally standardized examination, were overwhelmingly higher than those of Schools B and C in the fifth grade. Additionally, fifth-grade teachers in School A thoroughly grasped the learning situation of students. However, this tendency became weaker in the eighth grade.

In terms of qualitative metrics, the results illustrated no prominent difference in the students’ active and passive learning among the three schools for the fifth grade. However, a clear difference was observed for other activities (non-learning); School C students spent more time for other activities (non-learning) than those at Schools A and B. The finding implies that teachers at Schools A and B hold better control over classes than those at School C. In the eighth grade, active learning was mainly observed in School B, followed by Schools A and C. For passive learning and other activities, no significant difference was noted among the three schools.

In terms of teachers’ background, differences were noted between public and private schools. All teachers in School C hold a teaching license, and more than half specialize in Education. The school employs novice to veteran teachers in a balanced proportion, and more than half are regular employees. However, all teachers in Schools A and B are on contract, and many of them lack a teaching license. Furthermore, their average age and work experience are less than those of School C teachers.

The final assessment indicates that learning quantity in School A, which is a high-academic-achievement school, was higher than School C, which is a low-academic-achievement school. The results indicate that the educational settings emphasize quantity in a country that continues to foster memorization-type examinations. Although some differences were observed in qualitative metrics, the teachers’ educational qualifications or license did not exert a significant influence on the teaching–learning process. The reasons underlying this finding may be principal’s leadership, management, and employment system (i.e., teachers on contract should perform better to ensure tenure). Thus far, various efforts have been made to improve the schools’ academic performance. However, the results suggest that focus should be on school management than teacher training. The presentation will provide a detailed analysis of the results.

Authors

• Takeshi Sekiya, Kwansei Gakuin University

• Naruho Ezaki, Kwansei Gakuin University

• Shihomi Yasui, Kwansei Gakuin University

• Nana Okugawa, Kwansei Gakuin University

• Tomoka Azuma, Kwansei Gakuin University

• Erika Yamada, Kwansei Gakuin University