Transforming teaching and learning in Asia and the Pacific: case studies from seven countries; 2015

(ff) #1

The core document of the EFA envisioned that by 2015 classrooms would
provide a stimulating learning environment, ensuring that each student
develops to their full potential (MOES, 2003). This recognized that children
learn in different ways at different rates and achieve different levels of
attainment. Furthermore, the emphasis was put on using assessments
to identify each student’s strengths and weaknesses, so as to cater to the
needs of students as individuals to improve each student’s learning. Thus,
assessment was to be used for learning.


Further conceptual development has continued under the SSRP, which
proposes to, ‘promote independent learning by students being educated
under diverse situations. ... Local curriculum, content and materials will be
developed ... A child’s mother tongue will be employed as the medium of
instruction up to grade three ... Flexible instructional arrangements will be
developed and employed...’ (MOES, 2009, pp. 13, 81 and 83).


Current pedagogical practices


While the vision and intention in Nepal has been to achieve child-centred
education, and all of the government projects and programmes have stated
a commitment to ‘quality primary education’ (College of Education, 1956;
MOE, 1971; MOE, 1997; MOES, 2003; MOE, 2009), the findings of studies
of pedagogical practices in the Nepalese classrooms are not encouraging
(CERID, 2002; National Center for Educational Development [NCED] 2010).
There is a long way to go before ‘child-centred education’ becomes a reality
in Nepalese classrooms.


Studies such as CERID (2002) and Room to Read (2014) found classroom
delivery to be teacher-dominated with an emphasis on rote learning. The
dominant approaches used by teachers include lecturing, paraphrasing,
drills, reading and repeating from the textbook, and memorizing questions
and answers. Single language, single session, same material (if used), same
method (usually lecture, paraphrase) were the general practices in the
classroom delivery. Researchers also noted that the classroom process, which
is envisioned to be child-centred, was generally one of ‘whole-class teaching’,
which left ‘weaker’ learners behind, and classes were teacher-dominated and
textbook-based.


Studies by CERID (2002 and 2003) indicate that teachers’ most common
classroom teaching-learning practice was to use the textbook. Teachers rarely
used the teacher’s guide or other curricular materials, even when these were

Free download pdf