A Review of the Zambia Teacher Education Reform: Policy Challenges and Influence of Bilateral Agencies

Kalisto Kalimaposo¹, Harrison Daka², Chidongo Phiri³, Lydia Mukuka Mulenga-Hagane⁴

^{1, 2, 3, 4} University of Zambia, School of Education, Lusaka, Zambia.

ABSTRACT: Donor agencies have provided aid for the education system in Zambia by introducing innovations that seek to improve the provision of education. However, it has been observed that many innovations are discontinued after donor funding is withdrawn. A case in point is the Zambia Teacher Education Reform Programme (ZATERP) later renamed the Zambia Teacher Education Course (ZATEC). ZATERP/ZATEC were funded by the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) between 1998 -2008.

In 2008 DANIDA withdrew support from ZATEC and the Ministry of Education through its Directorate of Teacher Education and Specialized Services (TESS) could not sustain the programme. The Ministry of Education failed to pay field allowances for students and lecturers including other logistical support for the programme. Consequently, some vital aspects of the programme were changed such as the school-based year which was discontinued. The old structure of teacher education was re-introduced where students were in college for two years and school experience was reduced to a single term.

KEYWORDS: Primary teacher education, ZATERP, ZATEC, DANIDA, College-based year, School-based year.

INTRODUCTION

There are many reasons that have been advanced to explain or suggest why aid has failed to bring about development and in some cases undermine it. For example, Roberts, Hite and Chorev (2014) argue that donors have a variety of motivations for providing aid, only some of which are directly related to economic development. One of the identified reasons is that in certain instances, aid is given with ulterior motives and that it addresses the interests of donors more than those of recipient countries (Alesina and Dollar, 2000; Asante, 1995, Riddell, 2007; Immanuel, 2011 and Manning, 2012). Some donor countries are more likely to be motivated by political and strategic considerations when giving aid to countries in need. Aid is quite often given on the basis or in pursuit of political influence, diplomatic approval, market expansion, foreign investment or cultural extension among others.

It is also argued that aid inhibits development because it creates a culture of dependency and laziness and prevents recipient economies from becoming self-sustaining (Immanuel, 2011; Manning, 2012). The dependence mentality that comes with aid is blamed for Africa’s developmental mess, as recipient governments tend to consider foreign aid to be a permanent development instrument and consistent source of income. The dependency on aid has also been blamed for instigating inferiority and loss of both the social and legal identity of the African people (Immanuel, 2011). Garrett (2007) concludes that some donors have taken advantage of the culture of dependency on aid to indirectly control recipient countries through a cycle of borrowing. This situation arises especially in situations where donors have provided aid which does not foster the continuation of benefits.

Moyo (2009) and Elumelu (2013) hold strong views on aid and heavily condemn the dependence syndrome that comes along with it. Their argument is that aid to Africa must be drastically reduced because for many years, it has neither helped to reduce poverty nor increase development. Their argument is that instead of giving out aid that only provides temporary relief, donors must foster self-sufficient sustainable development in developing countries by harnessing resources to create change in the private sector, improving terms of trade and encouraging foreign business investment and access to international capital markets.

Apart from breeding dependency, development aid has been criticized for hindering development because it has a tendency of increasing corruption and misappropriation of resources (Immanuel, 2011). Ohu (2013); Manning (2012) and Immanuel (2011) contend that corruption or the misappropriation of resources in matters of foreign aid occurs when influential local politicians corruptly use money meant for development (aid) for their personal gain. In such situations, aid is made ineffective because it does not benefit the people it is intended for who are the poor. On the other hand, the campaigners for aid have called for enhanced commitment to aid, pointing to substantial positive and impressive success stories that include improvement in access to health and education for example. Particularly in the education sector, it is argued that aid has had a positive impact on the development of education in Third World countries such as improvements in school enrolment, the teaching and learning materials as well as infrastructure to mention but a few (Ndikumana, 2012). In the case of Zambia, the National Policy on Education Document (MoE, 1996:169) summarizes the important role aid plays in the education system through the following statements:

The increase in the number of donors has brought increase in the resource flows for education and resulted in improvements in educational provision throughout the country. It is acknowledged that without donor aid, schools would be more decayed, ministry of education officials would be less mobile, teachers would receive less professional development, information on the system would be scarce and hopes for substantial improvement would be more remote (MoE, 1996: 169).

Other scholars in support of aid argue that the provision of aid must continue because some countries still need aid to develop because of limited alternatives (Flintoff, 2007). Kairu (2013) also adds that one of the positive sides of aid is that it has increased the structural transformation of many developing countries. This has been as a result of the demand by donor countries to implement certain policy reforms and promote good governance, efficiency, transparency and accountability. Kairu (2013), however, warns that on the negative side, some countries that have received a lot of aid on such conditions have ended up being controlled by donor countries.

Trends in Primary Teacher Education in Zambia

There have been several attempts by the Ministry of Education in Zambia to reform the initial primary teacher education curriculum so that it is relevant and of good quality. In spite of all the efforts made so far, the problem of primary teacher education curriculum seems to persist as some of the changes have been on experimental basis (Kalimaposo, 2022). In addition, some of the curriculum changes or innovations that have been undertaken in Zambia seem to have been initiated by international capital in the name of technical assistance. Ostensibly, the nature of technical assistance that has been given in the past is sometimes based on foreign experience without sufficient local participation. It has been observed that some of the sporadic shifts in the primary teacher education curriculum have been drawn and implemented in a haste without a solid philosophical foundation anchored in research (Kalimaposo, 2010).

Commonwealth of Learning (2005) posits that piecemeal reforms in pre-service primary teacher education in Zambia have not served the desired purposes as some of the changes look almost the same. In trying to establish a coherent primary teacher education curriculum, Zambia has been involved in major efforts to reform its entire basic education system. These efforts have been occasioned by a growing dissatisfaction in the way primary school teachers have been trained and the quality of learning in schools. Efforts by the Ministry of Education through its Directorate of Teacher Education and Specialised Services (TESS) to reform primary teacher training were popular from 1998 – 2008. Previously, primary teacher training programmes were generally held in low esteem because students preparing for primary teaching in Zambia were generally perceived as weak academically (Musonda, 2005). Issues surrounding these reforms are mainly two fold. One school of thought advocates for increasing the time for content or subject matter background during teacher training. The other school of thought lays emphasis on increasing the length of time for practical student teaching and field experiences. Therefore, the raging debate in primary teacher education has generally been between putting emphasis either on subject matter or pedagogy.

The Ministry of Education (MoE) conducted radical teacher education reforms in primary teacher education from 1998-2008. Though professional guidelines were produced to support the reforms, a coherent body of knowledge to guide the pedagogical reform was not provided. The international donor community has advocated a global agenda on education that has directly influenced education policy in Zambia. While the MoE and other international agencies praised the collaborative consultative process involved in developing the Zambia Teacher Education Reform Programme (ZATERP) strategy, it is argued that international partners and multilateral agencies have inhibited a local policy vision toward teacher education. With respect to ZATERP, the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) represents the most overt example of the influence of an international agenda on primary teacher education in Zambia. DANIDA’s contribution through the provision of international technical experts and direct project financing to the government of Zambia through the Ministry of Education has been the largest bilateral support to primary teacher education in Zambia since 1996. DANIDA supported the development of Zambia Teacher Education Course (ZATEC) for primary teacher education colleges training teachers at the lower and middle basic school levels, i.e. grades 1 through 7. The programme was piloted at three teacher education colleges in the northern parts of the country under the acronym ZATERP. After the pilot phase it was decided to rename the programme as Zambia Teacher Education Course (ZATEC) and to disseminate the programme to all public teacher education colleges in Zambia by January, 2000. Before the ZATEC programme, Zambia teacher education faced two major problems that strongly affected the quality of her basic schools. It was observed that the output of teachers from the teacher training colleges as they were called then was insufficient to meet the national demand consequently untrained teachers were deployed especially in rural areas. Secondly, the previous teacher education programmes such as the Zambia Primary Course (ZPC) and Zambia Basic Education Course (ZBEC) were criticized for their lack of concern for students’ professional competencies and for their teacher centred approach including fragmented subject matter knowledge. As a matter of fact, ZPC and ZBEC had 14 subjects on the curriculum. ZATERP was designed to address these problems which were to be tackled by proposing a two-year teacher education programme, of which the first year was to take place at the college and the second year at a practicing school. In the first year, the course covered six study areas, each of which integrated between two or five subjects previously taught at the college and all of which included methodological issues related to classroom teaching.

In the second year, students used to spend half of their working hours teaching at the school to which they were posted. This teaching obligation was carried out under the guidance of a mentor, an experienced teacher appointed at every host school. While on school experience, the students were expected to carry on with their studies with continued support from college lecturers and from the teachers’ resource centres. The rationale of ZATERP was to address the qualitative problem described above and by adopting a professional perspective on teachers’ competencies and to alleviate the quantitative problem by doubling the capacity of colleges of education as they would only accommodate first year students in colleges.

DESCRIPTION & ORGANISATION OF THE ZAMBIA TEACHER EDUCATION REFORM PROGRAMME (ZATERP)

In view of policies that have influenced the theory and practice of primary teacher education in Zambia, there are two major competing perspectives of teacher education that seem to have influenced planners of primary teacher education programmes in Zambia. These are the social market perspective and the platonic or rationalist perspective. The theoretical understanding of some of the principles underpinning teacher education systems are based on the assumption that the epistemological relationship between educational theory and professional knowledge are central in shaping teacher education paradigms.

The social market perspective is based on economic principles. Education is seen as a process which must supply consumers or learners with educational commodities, i.e., competencies and skills which may change in accordance with the educational needs of society. This, therefore, requires a teacher who keeps on learning in order to cope with such changes. This model sees the teacher as a facilitator and not an expert in full control. A teacher education programme modeled on this perspective puts emphasis on the following:

• Practice at the expense of theoretical foundation of learning and teaching
• Teacher as facilitator, guide, adviser rather than expert
• Learner-centred approach to teaching
• School-based training at the expense of college-based training
• Teacher as a lifelong learner
• Formative assessment rather than summative assessment.

The Field Based Teacher Training Approach (FIBATTA) and the Zambia Teacher Education Course (ZATEC) appear to have been modeled on this perspective of teacher education.

On the other hand, the platonic or rationalist perspective considers a teacher as a rational  individual who is in full control of his profession because he or she understands well the theoretical foundations of the profession as well as the subject knowledge. To have such a teacher, the college-based training is most crucial during which the individual is subjected to theories and principles of learning and their subject knowledge is enriched. But before graduation, the prospective teacher must be given chance to do school teaching practice to put the theories and teaching techniques learnt into practice. An individual who goes through this process is seen as an expert who do not only understand how to teach but also what to teach. A teacher education course modeled on this perspective puts emphasis on the following:

• Theory at the expense of practice;
• Teacher as an expert-teacher should be knowledgeable in the theories of teaching as well as subject content;
• College-based training at the expense of school-based training
• Summative assessment at the expense of formative assessment.

The Zambia Primary Course (ZPC), the Zambia Basic Education Course (ZBEC) were premised on this model. The current three year Primary Teachers Diploma Programme appears to be anchored in the rationalist perspective. The Ministry of Education introduced a new curriculum at school level which shows a shift from positivist to constructivist view of teaching. This change necessitated the need to review the teacher education curriculum. The revised curriculum for Primary Teachers Diploma provides trainee teachers with an opportunity to acquire the necessary key competencies, skills, values and positive attitudes that are useful in facilitating the learning of the young learners. The Primary Teachers Diploma is designed in such a way that its content and pedagogy is in harmony with the school curriculum at primary school level. This approach exposes trainee teachers to the school content and to the delivery of the material. In order to implement the Primary Teachers Diploma (PTD) course effectively, lecturers in Colleges of Education are expected to be familiar with the new primary school curriculum so that they are able to facilitate the transfer of necessary pedagogical knowledge and skills required for its effective implementation.

Similar to these two major philosophies or perspectives of teacher education are the three ideal types of teacher education paradigms presented by Stuart (1999) which she calls Sitting by Nellie; Ivory Towers and the reflective Practitioner. These nick names seem to be embedded in the actual theory-practice relationship these paradigms imply. For instance, Sitting by Nellie carries the criticism levelled at placing more emphasis on practice than theory. The opposite is true of the Ivory Tower paradigm which is criticized for imparting theories that have little relevance to practice. The reflective practitioner sounds like an ideal paradigm, balancing up theory with practice and producing teachers as independent thinkers.

CURRICULUM

Under the Zambia Teacher Education Reform Programme (ZATERP) and the Zambia Teacher Education Course (ZATEC), the college curriculum was re-packaged into six study areas comprising related or contributory subjects, viz.

• Education Studies: Sociology & Educational Psychology
• Literacy & Language Education: Local languages & English
• Mathematics & Science Education: Mathematics and Science subjects
• Expressive Arts: Art, Music, Dance & Physical Education
• Social, Moral & Religious Education: History, Geography, Civics, Religious Education
• Technology Studies: Design, Home Economics, Industrial Arts, Technology.

The time during which lecturers are in face-to-face contact with students during the college-based year (contact time) had been reduced to allow for non-contact time during which students  worked on their  own, but under the guidance of their lecturers. Therefore, the course placed a substantial responsibility on students for their own learning. The course assumed that students entering colleges of education after Grade 12 to train as teachers for Grade 1 – 7 had sufficient content knowledge, therefore, emphasis was placed on methodology or application of knowledge in the classroom rather than on subject knowledge.

METHODOLOGY

The course or programme emphasized learner-centred approaches which promotes teaching techniques that are practically-oriented, participative and that require enquiry and reflection. Since the different subjects taught in lower and middle stages of basic education had been collapsed into six study areas, the course had adopted team teaching and an integrated approach to teaching.

LOG BOOK

A Log Book was one of the instruments used for formative assessment both during the college-based year and school-based year. In the Log Book students and lecturers were expected to reflect on the experiences they encountered both in terms of their studies and practical teaching. The Log Book was envisaged as a tool for promoting reflective learning and teaching for both students and lecturers. At every contact session, lecturers would prompt students for reflections from their log books. This practice encouraged students and lecturers to ruminate over their learning experiences.

DISTANCE LEARNING AND LOGISTICS

During their school-based year, students continued their college studies through distance learning whereby study materials, assignments and feedback were made available to students at a distance through teacher resource centres or postal services. Given the fact that students were posted to rural schools where postal services were not efficient and in some cases non-existent, it was decided to use the Teachers’ Resource Centres as distribution and collection points. Under this arrangement, lecturers were supposed to deliver the study materials, assignments and feedback to the resource centres as they went to monitor students’ teaching or to pay students’ allowances (MoE/ZATEC, 1998).  Once the resource centre coordinators received these materials, they were expected to deliver them to students or students themselves were expected to take these to resource centres for collection by lecturers. It has been observed that this arrangements could not work due to numerous challenges such as Resource Centre Coordinator’s inability to distribute materials to students owing to lack of transport. This resulted in assignments for students remaining uncollected for long periods. Some host schools to which students were attached were very far from the resource centres making it difficult for students to take their completed assignments or to collect fresh ones. Under these circumstances, students employed various means of submitting their assignments to their lecturers, for example through individuals to the resource centres or directly to the college lecturers. Lecturers also employed various means to distribute assignments. Some assignments were taken to resource centres while others were distributed directly to students.

Students spent their second year of training at a host school for their school experience.  During the school experience year, students participated in practical teaching and continued with their teacher education studies through distance learning. Materials were prepared and made available to students in all the six study areas in form of modules. These study materials contained assignments and short tasks intended to connect academic content to real classroom situation. Students were expected to teach and study at the same time, therefore, the official policy regarding time allocation between these two activities was that students were expected to take up 50% of a teacher’s normal work load and set aside the remaining 50% of their weekly time to study the distance learning materials and prepare their assignments and lessons.

MONITORING, ASSIGNMENTS AND ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

Mentors played a major role in monitoring students during the school-based year especially in the teaching aspects. Mentors used to check the lesson plans before the student went to teach, and advised on many other aspects of teaching. Students were also helped in many other areas of the school. Students were required to take part in many activities at school level and in the community around the school. Apart from the mentor, the senior teacher and the head teacher were also responsible for monitoring students. Mentors in host schools were given these responsibilities without any incentives, this displeased mentors in some schools. Apart from mentors in schools, students were also monitored by college lecturers at least once every term.  Mentors were required to observe students in class at least eight times in a term. It was observed that some mentors had problems in interpreting the assessment instruments developed by the college. Apart from practical teaching, students were also assessed through short assignments in all study areas. It was observed that formative assignments were sometimes received very late, thereby giving very little time for students to work on them. Students complained about not receiving feedback from lecturers on time. Students were also required to submit two long summative pieces of work, a portfolio and a major assignment in a chosen study area (Area of Curriculum Strength). (MoE/ZATEC, 1998; GRZ/DANIDA, 1997).

AREA OF CURRICULUM STRENGTH

Towards the end of their college-based year, students were required to choose one area of curriculum strength from any of the six study areas. During the school-based year, students were advised to allocate adequate study time to develop specific knowledge and experience within their chosen area of curriculum strength of course not neglecting other study areas (MoE/ZATEC, 2000).

PORTFOLIO

This was one of the instruments used for summative assessment during the school-based year. Here students were expected to conduct action research and to document reflectively their achievements or failures. Students were expected to conduct research on any issue of interest identified, come up with solutions to identified challenges and write a report. It was observed that a number of students had challenges in writing a Portfolio due to their rudimentary research skills (MoE/ZATEC, 2001; GRZ/DANIDA, 1997).

ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

A system of assessment that is open, democratically negotiated and based mainly on the continuous work of students was adopted. Two types of assessment were used: Formative and Summative with emphasis on Formative Assessment. Since the ZATEC programme placed premium on the acquisition of competencies/skills, assessment instruments used were designed in such a way that they measured the expected outcomes or competencies.

Throughout the two years, students were given unspecified number of short tasks for their formative assessment and specified number of assignments for their summative assessment. Examinations in all study areas used to take place at the end of the college-based year and assessment of practical teaching during the school-based year. Assessment of practical teaching was the most important of this assessment system as the students’ certification largely depended on their performance in the actual classroom practice.

COURSE MANAGEMENT

The Teacher Education Department (TED), Ministry of Education Headquarters was responsible for the overall planning, management and implementation of the Zambia Teacher Education Course (ZATEC) as well as the formulation and interpretation of policies relating to teacher education such as designing teacher education programmes; monitoring ZATEC and other teacher education activities; production and delivery to colleges and resource centres materials for both students and lecturers; identification of training needs of lecturers and actual training; mobilization of resources including students’ allowances and appointment of ZATEC management teams in colleges of education.

In view of the new curriculum adopted by ZATEC, a new structure was created to manage the course at college level. Management along subject departmental lines was discarded. The new structure comprised the Course Leader with the overall responsibility for the management of the course and the six Study Area Coordinators led by the Curriculum Coordinator. The Curriculum Coordinator worked closely with the School Experience Coordinator who liaised with the schools and made all the necessary arrangements for the students’ school experience.

Policy issues influencing primary teacher education in Zambia

The attainment of independence in Zambia was followed by demands for changes in different institutions including education. Therefore, curriculum change was inevitable due to social, cultural, economic and political reasons. The first pre-service teacher education course for primary school teachers was the Zambia Primary Course (ZPC) introduced in 1967. The ZPC was an experimental curriculum based on the New Peak Course, an English Medium Programme in use that time in Kenya (Chishimba, 1979; Chivore, 1986; Kalimaposo, 2022; Kalimaposo, 2016). The New Peak Course, sometimes referred to as the New Primary Approach, embodied primary teaching methods such as learning through doing and group work, while using English as the medium of instruction.

The Zambia Primary Course (ZPC) was designed to offer a six-term course (two years). ZPC was aimed at preparing student teachers to teach all the primary school grades (Grade 1-7). Previously, primary school teachers were trained as either lower primary teachers or upper primary school teachers (Chishimba, 1996; Manchishi, 1996; Manchishi, 2007). This type of training posed a lot of problems in the deployment of teachers as teachers could not teach all the grades in the primary school. The second curriculum review which affected primary teacher education was from 1975 to 1977. This was part of a more comprehensive educational reform exercise aimed at improving the content and methodologies of the curriculum in order to reflect the needs of the changing society. The education reforms of 1977 regarded teacher education as one of the vehicles for social and economic transformation of the newly independent Zambian society (Lungwangwa, 1987; Kalimaposo, 2011; Musonda, 1999). The policy declared that the teacher was the key person in the entire educational system of a country. It was felt that the success of the educational reforms in Zambia depended on the commitment, competence and resourcefulness of teachers in the system (GRZ / MoE, 1977). A  careful reading of the Educational Reform: Proposals and Recommendations of 1977, makes it quite clear that the Reforms focused essentially on two issues: (a) the quantitative development of the formal education system and (b) the qualitative development of the education system, particularly in reference to teacher education and supply, evaluation and examinations, technical education and vocational training, continuing education, pre-school education, and the organization and management of the education system.

The Educational Reforms of 1977 acknowledged that teachers could not play their roles successfully from a position of mediocrity. It was argued that good teaching demands that the teacher should not only possess a correct attitude and adequate knowledge of the subjects taught but also keep abreast of developments in those subjects and in the objectives and methods of teaching. A teacher was also expected to have a deep understanding of the society in order to serve the communities effectively. In order to perform this role, teachers were required to develop themselves politically, academically and professionally (GRZ/MoE, 1977; Lungwangwa, 1987; Kalimaposo, 2023). Thus, the second curriculum review resulted in the Zambia Basic Education Course (ZBEC), this curriculum review placed emphasis on Science, Mathematics, Technology, Political Education and Production Units in schools and colleges. Under ZBEC, English was still the medium of instruction from Grade I, although one of the seven official Zambian languages understood by the majority of the pupils in the class was used in special circumstances.

The teacher education curriculum under ZBEC and organization of training still remained traditional and stereotype. Each subject was developed discrete without any element of integration. During the 1990’s, it was observed that the quality of education in the country had deteriorated. It was alleged that the curriculum was outdated and was producing people who were unable to perform according to expectations. This was enunciated in the second education reform policy called Focus on Learning, which was launched in 1992 (GRZ/MoE, 1992). The policy was founded on the premise that completed primary education should help alleviate poverty, ignorance and advances economic and social development. In this policy, the purpose of primary teacher education was to transform Grade 12 school leavers into professionals who would be masters of the subject knowledge appropriate at primary level, competent in teaching skills and imbued with a sense of professional commitment to educating beginners and the young (GRZ/MoE, 1992). Teacher training colleges were expected to focus their training on transforming students into competent and committed teachers. In order to accomplish this task, teacher training institutions were required to have sufficient expertise and autonomy to direct their efforts in the production of high quality teachers. Focus on Learning adopted a rationalist approach to teacher education, it reduced or narrowed teaching to technical competencies which students would be able to promote at appropriate levels in schools. It also called for adequate resources and autonomy for teacher training institutions. This policy position can be appreciated against the background that at this period in the Zambian history, there was too much political control and centralization of the education system and the college infrastructure were run down and under resourced (Musonda, 1999; Kalimaposo, 2022). The policy highlighted the role of adequate resources in ensuring quality teacher education. When Zambia changed its political system and ideology, it embraced liberal democracy. Consequently, a new educational policy, Educating Our Future (1996) was formulated, built on the values of liberal democracy. The aim of education was expected to be guided by the principles of liberalization, decentralization, equality, equity, partnership and accountability. Just like the Educational Reforms of 1977, this policy adopted a reconstructionist approach to education. However, more emphasis was placed on skills and competencies that were regarded as crucial in contemporary education.

On teacher education, Educating Our Future is concerned with the essential competencies required in every teacher such as the mastery of material to be taught and skill in communicating material to the pupils (GRZ/ MoE, 1996). In order to prepare and train teachers, the curriculum in pre-service primary colleges of education was not confined to what was taught in the lower and middle basic classrooms, the training made provision for the personal education and growth of the students (GRZ/MoE, 1996).

Educating Our Future established a radical departure in the way the curriculum was arranged at the lower and middle basic. The curriculum was not fragmented into rigid subject defined compartments because the child at this stage did not require the analytic capability of separating the world of experience. Educating Our Future lays emphasis on the skills and knowledge that are central to the productivity of the economy and that help in the establishment of a liberal economy, in which internal and external competition are central values. Following the 1996 National Educational Policy (Educating Our Future), the Ministry of Education took steps in reviewing and restructuring the teacher training curriculum.

Dynamics of Curriculum Change

Curriculum change invariably reflects change in the society at large and education in general. Hence most of what is dealt with in curriculum change with colleges of education addresses ways of implementing change effectively (Kalimaposo, 2010; Avalos, 2000; Eraut, 2000). A specific curriculum innovation may lead society in changing in a particular direction, but usually curriculum change reflects societal change. Consequently, when we consider curriculum change we need to include both the content of that change as well as the process by which that change comes about. By content, we mean the knowledge, skills, concepts, understandings, values and so forth associated with the material concerned, such as a new History Syllabus or a Primary Mathematics Syllabus. The change process refers to means by which teachers will be introduced to that content and how they will be convinced to adopt and implement it. This requires the use of appropriate change strategies to convince teachers of the need for the change, the value in participating in the change and importance of developing appropriate perceptions, beliefs and actions that accord with that change. An important beginning is for curriculum developers and all participants in the educational process, to be aware of the generic forces of curriculum change if they are to survive effectively.

As the fast pace of curriculum change continues unabated, driven by the increased politicization of curriculum, so those involved in developing and implementing curricula will need to know more about the nature of change and how to deal with it purposefully. Curriculum, being the essential heart of schooling, has experienced enormous swings with the pendulum of change. As curriculum is concerned with the what, how, when and so what question in teaching, it also has the scope for multidimensional change. However, before examining the nature of that change, it is useful to distinguish the significant terms employed in the literature. Change as we have noted is a generic term used in education to incorporate a number of associated concepts (innovation, adoption) in order to analyze and explain curricula phenomena. Change is, in effect, the process of transformation of phenomena in analyzing that transformation it is useful to consider the dimensions of rate (speed), scale (size), degree (thoroughness), significance (profoundness) and direction (orientation). It usually refers to a general concept which describes what has happened, particularly as the result of the dissemination of an innovation. Much of curriculum is concerned with planned change, which may be defined as a deliberate  and collaborative process involving a change agent and a client system which are brought together to solve a problem or, more generally, to plan and attain an improved state of functioning and applying valid knowledge.  Most of what is addressed in curriculum change is some form of planned change.

Curriculum change in schools reflects changes in society at large. Such changes are invariably indirect in nature and the association or linkage between societal and curriculum change is rarely a perfect match. Nevertheless, many societal changes may have significant impact upon the school curriculum. Skilbeck suggests that the school curriculum responds to changes in society which explicitly and deliberately enlist curriculum policy and practice as a means of achieving stated goals and ends. These include for example, attempts to encourage schools to show greater awareness of developmental issues, or problems of poor governance. In recent years the school curriculum in Australian schools has changed to accommodate such direct pressures as new standards of literacy, enhanced numeracy skills, environmental studies and peace studies. These examples demonstrate how deliberate changes have occurred in schools as a response to societal change. In the immediate future we shall witness substantial change to the post-compulsory curriculum in our schools and colleges as the curriculum and schools react to numerous societal changes. Finn (1991) and Mayer (1992).

Within education itself, changes occur which impinge or implicitly challenge existing curriculum practices and policies. While Musonda (1999) states that these are internally based, they obviously reflect aspects of the outside society. Nevertheless, internally instigated changes (those emanating from within education systems) can have a profound effect upon school or college curricula. Musonda (1999) and Kalimaposo (2022)suggests that changes may be made or sought in curriculum policy and practice to promote certain ends or achieve particular goals in the education system.

CONCLUSION

It has been observed that curriculum innovations in pre-service primary teacher education in Zambia have been rather rapid, especially from 1997 – 2008. In addition, it was noted that the curriculum should be allowed to run a considerable period of time before it was phased out. It was also observed that the curriculum change in pre-service primary teacher education appeared haphazard as there were too many programmes introduced within a short period. Some college lecturers and eminent retired educationists noted that the Ministry of Education had tried six curriculum innovations since independence most of which were on experimental basis. Some respondents complained that the curriculum changes were not linked to the school curriculum.

It was argued that some young teachers trained under ZATEC could not demonstrate the required skills and competencies as compared with teachers trained under different programmes. It was reported that there were some misunderstandings in schools among teachers due to different orientations in teacher education. Some respondents felt that generations of teachers churned out of colleges under different orientations in teacher education produced conflicting ideas in schools. It was noted that the dissonance between the school curriculum and teacher education curriculum resulted into problems among teachers. Some college lecturers interviewed expressed dissatisfaction with the frequent changes in pre-service primary teacher education curriculum. Some college lecturers complained that they did not have enough time to familiarize themselves with the ever changing curriculum in teacher education. It was noted that most of the teacher education programmes were on experimental basis and were never evaluated after donor pull-out.

REFERENCES

1. Alesina, G., and Dollar, D. (2000). ‘Who gives foreign aid to whom and why?’ Journal of Economic Growth, 5(1), 33-63.
2. Asante, S.K.B (1985). ‘International assistance and international capitalism: Supportive or counterproductive?’ In Carter, G., and O’Meara, P. (Eds.). African Independence: The first twenty-five years. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
3. Avalos, B. (2000) “Policies for Teacher Education in Developing Countries”. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, 457 – 474.
4. Calderhead, J. and Shorrock, S.B. (1997) Understanding Teacher Education: Case Studies in the Professional Development of Beginning Teachers.
5. Chishimba, C.P., (1979) “A Study of the Zambia Primary English Course.” D.Ed Thesis.
6. Chishimba, C.P., (1996) “A study to determine Strategies for Organising In-Service Education Programmes for Primary Teacher Educators in Zambia” Zambia Educational Research Network (ZERNET Journal) Vol.1 Nos 3-4, July –December,1996. pp34-42.
7. Chivore, B.R.S., (1986) “Teacher Education in Post-Independence Zimbabwe: Problems and Possible Solutions” Journal of Education for Teaching Vol. 12, No. 3. pp. 205-231.
8. Commonwealth of Learning (2005) Draft Report for Consultancy Services to develop and Review the Ministry of Education’s Teacher Education Strategy. Vancouver: COL.
9. Elumelu, T. (2013). Africa needs sustainable change, not aid dependency. Business Day. https//www.bdlive.bdlive.co.za/opnion/2013/Africa-needs-sustainable-change-not –aid-dependency.
10. Eraut, M. (Ed.) (2000) “Design of Initial Teacher Education”. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, Special Issue. Pp. 23-36.
11. Flintoff, C. (2007). ‘Is aid to Africa doing more harm than good?’ Intelligence debate. https//www.npr.org/2007/12/12/17095866
12. Garrett, L. (2007). The challenge of global health. Foreign affairs, 86(1) https//www.foreign affairs.org/20070101faessy 86103/laurie-garrett/ the-challenge-of-global-health.html.
13. GRZ / DANIDA (1997) “Zambia Teacher Education Reform Programme (ZATERP) Basic Teacher Education Course: A Guide for Tutors in the Teachers Colleges” (Experimental Version), Lusaka. MoE.
14. GRZ / DANIDA (1997) “Zambia Teacher Education Reform Programme (ZATERP): The Curriculum Framework and Course Outline for Basic Teacher Education.”
15. GRZ / MOE (1977) Educational Reform: Proposals and Recommendations. Lusaka: Government Printer.
16. GRZ / MOE (1992) Focus on Learning. Lusaka: Government Printer.
17. Immanuel, F.W. (2011). ‘Is western aid to Africa the solution to the embattled continental economy?’ International Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy in Africa, 11-17^th July, 2011.Institute of Cultural Diplomacy, Berlin, Germany.
18. Kairu, E.K. (2013). ‘Is foreign aid a necessary evil in developing Africa?’ Africa, Education: Development, Economy, Foreign Aid, Haiti, Human Capital, Natural Disasters. https://worldyouthalliance.wordcom/2013/03/04
19. Kalimaposo, K. (2010). ‘The Impact of Curriculum Innovations on Pre-service Primary Teacher Education in Zambia.’ University of Zambia. Unpublished PhD Thesis
20. Kalimaposo, K. (2011). The Politics of Curriculum Reforms in Pre-service Primary Teacher Education in Zambia. Zambia Journal of Education.
21. Kalimaposo, K. (2016). ‘The Politics of curriculum change in pre-service teacher education.’ AFTRA International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Africa. 3. No.1 pp: 111-116. ISSN: 0794-1412 www. Africateachingauthorities.org
22. Kalimaposo, K. (2022).Trajectories of curriculum change in initial primary teacher education in ’ International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS). Vol.    6. Issue 5, pp: 319-331.

DOI:https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS. ISSN: 2454-6186

23. Kalimaposo, K. (2023). Book Review: ‘The emergence of teacher education in Zambia’ by B. Carmody In: Zambian Journal of Contemporary Issues (ZANGO) . Vol. 35. Pp: 112-128. ISSN: 1028-3536.

https//journals.unza.zm/index.php/ZJOCI/article/ view/967

24. Lungwangwa, G., (1987) “Basic Education in Zambia: A study in Educational Policy Development.” Ph. D Thesis. University of Illinois.Lusaka: MoE.
25. Manchishi, P.C., (1996) “In-service Teacher Training in Zambia: An Evaluation of the Zambia Primary Course at the National In-Service Teachers College.” Zambia Educational Research Journal (ZERNET Journal) Vol.1 No. 3-4. July-December, 1996. pp12-22.
26. Manchishi, P.C., (2007) Teacher Education in Zambia: Past, Present and Future Prospects. Zambia Forty Years of Independence; 1964-2004. Lusaka: UNZA, Department of History.
27. Manning, R. (2012). Aid as a second-best solution: Seven problems of effectiveness and how to tackle them. Working paper No. 2012/24. Helsinki: UNU-WIDER.
28. Ministry of Education (1996). Educating Our Future: National Policy on Education. Lusaka: ZEPH
29. Ministry of Education/ ZATEC (1997). Guide for Students for the College-Based Year.
30. Ministry of Education/ ZATEC (1997). Guide Students for the School-Based Year.
31. Ministry of Education/ ZATEC (1999). Guide for Mentors in schools.
32. Ministry of Education/ZATEC (1998). Guide for Tutors in the Teacher’s College
33. Ministry of Education/ZATEC (1999). Guide for the School-Based Year.
34. Moyo, D. (2009). Dead Aid: Why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa. London: Allen Lane.
35. Musonda, L.W., (1999) “ Teacher Education Reform in Zambia: Is It a Case of a Square
36. Musonda, L.W., (2005) “The Theory and Practice in Teacher Education: A Case Study of Teacher Education and Training in Zambia. Lusaka: Unpublished.
37. Ndikumana, L. (2012). ‘Applying evaluation to development and aid: Can evaluation bridge the micro-macro gaps in aid effectiveness?’ Paper presented for the AFD-EDN Conference, 26^th March 2012, Paris, France. New York, Columbia University, Teachers College.
38. Ohu, E. (2013). Leadership transforms Africa, not aid. Harambee: A Mercatonet blog about Africa. https//www.mercatornet.com/harambee/viewleadership-transforms-africa-not- aid/11901.
39. Peg in a Round Hole?” Teaching and Teacher Education: International Journal of Research and Studies. Vol 15. No.2.
40. Riddeli, R. (2007). ‘Does foreign aid really work?’ Business and Economics. Oxford: University Press.
41. Roberts, J.T., Hite, A.B., and Chorev, N. (2014). ‘The globalization and development reader: Perspectives on development and global change.’ Political Science. West-Sussex: Wiley.
    3. 3. No.1. pp. 88-97. ISSN 1996-3645