The body of research on what works to improve teaching and learning is growing rapidly, as evidenced by several useful (though sometimes contradictory) recent systematic reviews. However, for maximum usefulness to policy... [ view full abstract ]
The body of research on what works to improve teaching and learning is growing rapidly, as evidenced by several useful (though sometimes contradictory) recent systematic reviews. However, for maximum usefulness to policy makers looking for sustainable teacher support interventions on a large scale, it is crucial to understand where and why different types of support work. Contextual factors may well play a decisive role in whether a programme has any positive impact. This forms the basis of a common external validity critique of randomised experiments.
This paper reports on a randomised experiment conducted amongst low socio-economic status schools in South Africa, with three separate interventions all aimed at improving the teaching and learning of Home Language literacy in the early grades. Two interventions involved pedagogical support to teachers using structured lesson plans, but differed in the modality of training the teachers. A third intervention aimed to improve parent involvement in home literacy activities. All three interventions had large positive impacts on literacy outcomes in urban township settings, but all three had negligible effects in deep rural settings.
The paper explores the reasons for this dramatic difference in the impact of interventions using a variety of methods. This analysis investigates socio-economic and other differences between urban and rural areas, changes in intermediate outcomes including classroom practice, qualitative evidence from in-depth school case studies, monitoring data on the fidelity of programme implementation, and semi-structured interviews with those responsible for working with teachers in the project. Some of the emerging factors prohibiting impact in rural settings include long distances which prevent attendance at programme activities, teacher practices shifting in form but not in substance (perhaps due to adverse selection of teachers into rural schools), and lost teaching time (perhaps due to weaker accountability of schools to government and parents).
