Side effects in intakes of the schools

Because the two sample schools were situated near the city, and students could transfer easily to other schools within a commutable distance, the change in the pass rates brought changes in intakes of the schools. Transfer-out in grade 7 and 9 decreased in both schools. In terms of transfer-in, the

Itaru Shibuya, Kyoko Taniguchi and Yukiko Hirakawa

two schools took different stances; School A stopped transfer-in altogether and School B increased the transfer-in of students by establishing more classes. Whether the change of intakes brought a change in pass rates positively or negatively, and how much effect it had could not be clari ed.

(1) The decrease of transfer-out in grade 7 and 8 students

As pass rates improved, transfer-out decreased in higher grades. The PTA representatives and teachers in both schools contended that when the pass rate had been low, many students transferred to better schools in grade 7 and 8, but after the pass rate rose, more students stayed in those schools. The phenomenon was seen clearly in grade 7 students in School A. As shown in Table 8, after the students recognized that the pass rate of 2008 was 62.6%, the number of grade 7 students increased from 270 to 299 in 2009. More students chose to stay in the school rather than transfer-out. However, grade 8 students continued to transfer-out. Table 8 shows that the number of grade 8 students was much smaller than that of grade 7 every year. This is because many students transferred out to traditional public secondary schools and private secondary schools, which were attractive for their high achievement. Those who could pass the exams of those schools continued to transfer-out. In School B, there was also transfer-out taking place in grade 8, but the degree to which it took place was not clear from the numbers. This is because there was more transfer-in as explained in the next part.

Table 8: The transition of pass rates and the enrollment in grade 7 to 9

Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

School A Pass rates 20.3% 24.2% 47.2% 62.6% 58.2%

Grade 7 Number of students 241 264 272 270 299

Number of classes 5 5 5 5 5

Student Classroom Ratio 48.2 52.8 54.4 54.0 59.8

Grade 8 Number of students 110 100 91 82 100

Number of classes 2 2 2 2 2

Student Classroom Ratio 55.0 50.0 45.5 41.0 50.0

Grade 9 Number of students 125 138 120 104 107

Number of classes 2 2 2 2 2

Student Classroom Ratio 62.5 69.0 60.0 52.0 53.5

School B Pass rates 27.1% 37.3% 42.6% 53.7% 53.4%

Grade 7 Number of students 167 160 112 165 158

Number of classes 4 4 3 4 4

Student Classroom Ratio 41.8 40.0 37.3 41.3 39.5

Grade 8 Number of students 118 132 123 173 204

Number of classes 3 4 5 5 5

Student Classroom Ratio 39.3 33.0 24.6 34.6 40.8

Grade 9 Number of students 174 180 201 209 220

Number of classes 3 3 4 5 5

Student Classroom Ratio 58.0 60.0 50.3 52.3 44.0 Source: The authors extracted data from the Livingstone Education District Of ce

School improvement process of basic schools in Zambia

(2) The trend in transfer-in

For transfer-in, the reactions of the two schools were a clear contrast. School A stopped accepting transfer-in students. Until 2006, many students from other schools who could not pass the National Examination transferred into grade 9 of School A to take the exam again.

Their performance was low in general. In 2007, School A stopped accepting Grade 9 students from other schools. The head teacher explained that it was in order to secure the learning environment of the students in the school. The number of grade 9 students decreased from 138 in 2006 to 120 in 2007, and then to 104 in 2008. This might improve intakes of School A and affect the pass rate in the following years positively. The increase of the pass rates from 2007 to 2008 could be partly explained as its consequence.

In contrast, the head teacher in School B continued to accept students in grades 8 and 9 from other schools. The head teacher explained that he wanted to give more chances to low-performance students. Some teachers emphasized that grade 8 and 9 students paid more the PTA fees. Two classes were added to grade 8 and 9 each, while the number of classes was reduced in the lower and middle sections. As shown in Table 8, the number of students in grade 8 became larger than that of grade 7 beginning in 2007. The number of grade 9 students had always been much larger than that of grade 8 and increased from 180 in 2006 to 220 in 2009.

This trend might bring a negative effect on the pass rates. At the same time, the number of students per class was consistently decreasing, which might bring a positive effect on the pass rates. The situation was too complicated to make any assumption on the effects of change in intakes in School B.

(3) Effects of changes in intakes

It was clear that intakes in both schools were changed, but estimating its effects on the pass rates was not easy. However, it was clear that the change in intakes could not explain the stagnation starting from 2008. The increase of the PTA fees in 2009 could have brought some effects on parents’ decisions when choosing schools, and thus on the intakes of the schools.

However, the transition of the number of students in Table 8 indicates that the number of students increased in most grades after the fees were raised. This might support the words of the PTA representatives that the fees were a payable investment, if the pass rates were high enough.

5. 5. The reasons for stagnation in the pass rates from 2008 to 2009

The head teachers succeeded to a certain extent in improving teacher motivation, and persuading parents to participate and fund schools, but their effects on student outcomes were not seen. The change in teacher motivation and parents’ participation occurred after the pass rates had improved, but after the change in teacher motivation and parents’ participation, the pass rates went down as shown in Table 1. Speci cally, after the PTA fees were raised in 2009, the pass rates and the ranks declined in both schools.

One of the reasons was that after the increase of the PTA fees, teacher motivation was Itaru Shibuya, Kyoko Taniguchi and Yukiko Hirakawa

reduced, but the head teachers and many teachers thought that this was the happy end of a story.

Teachers and the PTA representatives recognized that the rise of the PTA fees in 2009 was very large and they could not expect a further increase. It meant that further efforts were unlikely to be rewarded. Also, it was almost impossible to decrease the fees again. It meant no punishment for misbehaviors. Teachers could not nd reasons for further efforts. The other possible reason, speci c for school B was the change in intakes. In order to provide children more opportunity for further study in secondary schools, the head teacher of School B started to accept more students in grade 8 and 9, starting in 2007. As mentioned the above, transfer-in students were generally low in performance. Increase of number of transfer-in students can explain the decrease of the pass rate from 2008 to 2009 to a certain extent.