INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3040
www.rsisinternational.org
Challenges Faced by Academic Masters/Mistress in Monitoring
Teaching and Learning among Public Primary Schools in Tanzania:
The Case of Mbeya City Council
Neema Meshack Njavike., Tuli Kassimoto
Department of DVCAA, Teofilo Kisanji University
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000244
Received: 18 October 2025; Accepted: 24 October 2025; Published: 08 November 2025
ABSTRACT
Several studied have assessed the factors affecting monitoring of teaching and learning processes in schools.
This study examined the challenges faced by heads of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs in
monitoring teaching and learning among public primary schools in Tanzania with a case of Mbeya city
council. The study involved 88 respondents who were of primary schools, school academic masters/mistress,
teachers and ward education officers. Quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis techniques were
used and the data was presented and analysed through descriptive statistics. The findings indicated that heads
of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs were not performing effective various teaching and learning
monitoring activities. It was revealed that there are various challenges facing the monitoring of of teaching and
learning exercise such as poor school arrangement of the school related infrastructures, poor preparation of
necessary documents and other teaching and learning resources, poor classroom conditions, shortage of time to
carry out the exercise, poor communication among school stakeholders such as teachers, pupils and parents,
lack of cooperation teachers, pupils and parents, poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment
and lastly high tension among teachers and pupils. In order to ensure effective monitoring of teaching and
learning in public primary schools, it is recommended to the head of schools, academic masters/mistress and
WEOs should be trained on specific school arrangement mechanisms for effective monitoring of teaching and
learning activities. It is also recommended that the same should maintain cooperation among stakeholders;
students, teachers, administrators, policy makers and academicians. Relevant data and monitoring feedback
should be always taken into consideration while dealing with issues related to school monitoring.
Key words: Monitoring, Monitoring of teaching & learning
INTRODUCTION
The attainment of quality education depends on, among other factors, the process of monitoring the teaching
and learning processes (Nimes & Sharali, 2015). Every educational establishment has a responsibility to
monitor the effectiveness of the service being provided for its children and young people. Monitoring is an
activity that involves continuous and systematic checking and observing of a programme or a project. It
involves comparing the present situation with the past in order to find out the extent to which the laid down
objectives have been achieved (Ndungu et al, 2015). Monitoring is done in the education sector to monitor the
quality of education, thus, strong monitoring of education programs pave the way for quality education.
The World Education Forum (WEF) in Dakar Senegal of 2000 implicitly and explicitly calls all countries to
improve all aspects of the quality of education provided in the society. The argument rests on the belief that
high quality schooling is likely to improve economic potential of a particular society (UNESCO, 2004). This is
due to the fact that there is a strong relationship between education provided and the level of development of a
particular nation (Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 2004; Galabawa, 2005).
The Tanzania Development vision of 2025 envisaged the total elimination of poverty by 2025. In this vision,
education sector was considered to play the decisive role in bringing the social and economic transformation
and for the creation of the well-educated nation sufficiently equipped with knowledge highly required to solve
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3041
www.rsisinternational.org
an assortment of development challenges that face the nation. Other attributes include; high quality livelihood,
peace, stability and unity, good governance, and a well-educated and learning society; and competitive
economy capable of producing sustainable growth and shared benefits (URT, 2010).
The school quality control officers in Tanzania have been urged to make sure that all schools comply with the
Education Policy and Acts (URT, 2016). This should be done via daily monitoring of teaching and learning
appropriate recommendations should also be provided to school headmaster or headmistress. The use of the
school inspection was later changed to school quality assurance in 2015 and which since then the later is
officially used to carry out all the functions formally undertaken by school inspectors (URT, 2014). In this aim,
the inspectors (here referred to as school quality control officers) which comprise of the school quality control
department, education officers at different levels, school boards and committees, parents and community at
large are important stakeholders who must be involved in controlling the quality of education through
monitoring of teaching and learning (URT, 2014). The policy further reveal that in the government system
quality control is a day to day activity to be carried out by school administration, Ward education Officers and
the quality control officers. These are supposed to monitor teaching and learning issues by doing the
followings:
i. To monitor all teaching and learning activities in schools and write a report with the purpose of
advising the chief education officer on matters which require decision making for further improvement.
ii. To monitor, educate and advise owners, managers, school boards or committee and teachers on the best
implementation of teaching and learning.
iii. To disseminate the monitoring reports for the purpose of improving the teaching and learning standards
in schools.
iv. To pursue personal, professional and academic development of teachers and students
v. To carry out supervisory school visits to improve quality of teaching and learning in schools (URT,
2001).
From the analysis of these roles, one can say that school inspectors have three major roles. These are:
inspection role, advisory role and development role. In the quality control role, the school quality control
officers play the following activities; monitoring, assessing and evaluating the quality of school instruction,
school organization and management and school environment. With regards to an advisory role, the school
inspectors are expected to disseminate information on accepted practices and innovation, curriculum
implementation and reviews (Wilcox, 2000). School monitoring reports have to reach all the respective
stakeholders in two weeks after the inspection date (MoEC, 2000; URT, 2001a). This is done to allow a quick
response for the burning issues or felt needs such as lack or breakage of the toilets or any other problem like
that of excessive shortage of teachers and allow the inspection findings to be acted upon by the respective
authorities.
Despite of the well-illustrated primary school monitoring system in Tanzania, reports such as URT (2014) and
Rakesh (2003) reveal that the communities and the news from the media tend to blame the school teachers,
head of schools, quality control and political leaders on the decline of the quality of education in schools.
When pupils fail in the national examination results, the society blames the school such actors suggesting that
they did not do their job properly or that too long a period has lapsed between quality control visits
(Mwananchi, 2009). On the other hand, when many pupils pass in the national examination results, all the
praises have been directed towards the head teacher and the teachers that they are competent in the key areas
(Lopez, 2007).
Studies have contended that school monitoring is a mechanism that press unnecessary additional burden upon
the teachers while, teachers themselves know what to do in their career and that emphasis has been on
accountability at the expense of professional growth (Chapman, 2001b). Some studies have further argued that
monitoring teaching and learning especially through inspection brings about tension and fear to teachers and it
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3042
www.rsisinternational.org
diverts their concentration from teaching as their core role to record keeping in order to impress their
supervisors/superiors (Ndungu, et al, 2015). This study however, stresses the need to examine the factors
affecting the monitoring of teaching and learning a done by school administration as well as Ward Education
Officers (WEO). As such, questions arise over the availability of effective teaching and learning as there have
been so many problems that face the education sector including poor quality of teaching and learning, poor
learning environments (classrooms), and poor enrolment of children in schools until recently where there seem
to have been some improvements in classroom construction and improved enrolment rates under Primary
Education Development Plan (PEDP) as indicated by Nkumbi, Warioba and Komba (2006), Rajan (2003) and
TEN/MET (2007).
Statement of the Problem
Monitoring the teaching and learning in primary schools in Tanzania is done by head teachers, head or primary
school departments, teachers, pupils, parents, school inspectors as well as ward education coordinators
(Ndungu et al, 2015). It has been evident that, the task of improving teaching and learning cannot be
effectively achieved given the fact that numbers of schools and learners in Tanzania have been increasing each
year (URT, 2014). Similarly, studies on classroom teaching indicate that, school administrators such as head
teachers, head of sections as well as WEOs in Tanzania felt constrained a lot of daily administrative tasks apart
from monitoring of teaching and learning (Basic Education Statistics in Tanzania (URT, 2014).
On the other hand it appears that head of schools, departments, WEOs and teachers have are also required to
attend some school matters to other bodies such as those of the higher hierarchy as well as community
meetings (Nemes and Sharali, 2015; Mollel, 2015). Thus, as explained in the philosophy of UNESCO (2006),
quality of education in schools is questionable despite the functions performed by various monitoring and
quality assurance teams. It was therefore necessary to assess what challenges affect the monitoring of teaching
and learning process in public primary schools as done by school administrators, teachers and WEOs in Mbeya
city and suggest on how the quality education can be monitored in those schools.
Objectives of the study
General objective
To examine the challenges faced by heads of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs in monitoring
teaching and learning among public primary schools in Tanzania with a case of Mbeya city council.
Specific objectives
i. To identify challenges faced by heads of schools in monitoring teaching and learning among public
primary schools.
ii. To identify challenges faced by academic masters/mistress in undertaking monitoring teaching and
learning in primary schools.
iii. To identify challenges faced by Ward Education Officers in undertaking monitoring teaching and
learning in primary schools.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Factors affecting school monitoring
Effective teaching is considered as a mystery by some authors (Goldhaber, 2002). Effective teachers are clear
about their instructional goals, are knowledgeable about the content, communicate well, monitor students’
understanding, are thoughtful and respectful about their teaching practices. On another note, in a study on
conceptions of effective teaching, Saroyan et al (2009) found out that students expressed four ideas about
effective teaching.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3043
www.rsisinternational.org
Effective teachers have knowledge, prepare and manage instruction, promote learning and help students grow
so they can learn independently. Fuhrman et al (2010) carried out a study on effective teaching and found that
effective teachers exhibit passion for their subjects, are knowledgeable about and care for students, use a
variety of teaching strategies and help students appreciate the relevance of information to their own context.
Sprinkle (2009) studied students’ perceptions of effective teaching and found out that students considered
effective teachers as those who employ a variety of teaching styles and make real world applications. Effective
teachers exhibit humor, enthusiasm, compassion, empathy and are interested in and concerned for students’
outside the classroom. Pietrzak, Duncan and Korcuska (2008) found effective teachers to possess a degree of
knowledge, effective delivery style, organisation and known for the amount of assigned homework.
The socio-economic background of students plays a major impact on their performance at school. Literature
argues that material factors such as income play a part in determining levels of education. The lower social
classes may lack the money to provide their children with same educational opportunities as middle and upper
class parents. This then means that some pupils from low status families fail to perform effectively despite the
fact that schools are adequately equipped with resources (Hill, 2014).
Chingos and West (2010) are of the view that the level of education and occupational positions of parents are
important determinants of pupils’ achievement. Some pupils from lowly educated parents do not perform well
at school because they lack motivation and parental support that even if teachers are qualified still those pupils
fail. Delvin, Kift and Nelson, 2012) also add that ineffectiveness on the part of pupils are higher from families
of low socio-economic status no matter which particular factors are used to measure socio-economic status.
This should indicate that inadequate materials such as textbooks within the home background and lowly
educated parents should not be regarded as a total effect in pupils’ poor performance in rural primary schools.
The diverse individual aptitude of pupils should also be taken into consideration. Within the poor background
may be born a genius. In addition it is not always only the performers from low income families who tend to
be ineffective as far as academic achievement is concerned (Mmbando and Hongoke, 2010). Some children
from even rich families may also perform academically poor due to other factors though poor performers
among children from well to do families are rare.
Theoretical underpinning
Critical Theory
Critical theory advocates freedom and emancipation process. It also gives more voice to teachers as the key
players and implementers of the curriculum. Critical theory is used to refer to the work of a group of socio-
political analysts emanated from the Frankfurt School. Some of the members of this group include Adorno,
Marcuse and more recently, Habermas who is regarded as the father of Critical theory (Tripp, 1992; Maclsaac,
1996).
When natural science mode is employed in the study of social phenomena, it is referred to as positivism.
Positivism is an epistemological position that employs the natural sciences to the study of social reality
(Bryman, 2004). Critical theory rejects the positivists‟ view of rationality, objectivity and truth (Carr and
Kemmis, 1986). It calls the educational theory to accept the need to employ interpretative categories in
different phenomena. It also identifies and exposes theoretical accounts to make members of the society aware
of how they may eliminate or overcome their problems (Carr and Kemmis, 1986). While Positivists consider
human beings to be value free, Interpretivists as an alternative to positivists contend that there should be a
respect and difference between people and the objects of the natural science (Bryman, 2004). Critical theory is
featured by the claim that educational status should be monitored by the ways it relates to practice (Carr and
Kemmis, 1986).
Moreover, Critical Theory is regarded as an emancipatory knowledge since it identifies self-knowledge or self-
reflection (Carr and Kemmis, 1986; Tripp, 1992; Maclsaac, 1992). Critical theory is emancipatory process in a
sense that, it creates self-awareness for one to recognise the correct reasons for her/his problem Knowledge is
socially constructed rather than accumulation of subjectively neutral objective facts (Maclsaac, 1992).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3044
www.rsisinternational.org
Knowledge gained by self-awareness through reflection lead to a transformed consciousness and hence, not
knowledge for knowledge’s sake (Tripp, 1992). This also involves the process whereby one sees her/his roles
and the societal expectations form her/him. According to Maclsaac (1996) social knowledge is governed by
binding consensual norms which defines reciprocal expectations about behaviour between individuals.
In the school monitoring system, teachers are regarded as people with free will and with total freedom
(Maclsaac, 1996; Tripp, 1992). They are considered to be conscious about their strengths and weaknesses
(Druker, 1991). When school inspectors (monitoring team) recognise that teachers are free entities with their
own thinking, their role as school inspectors is to facilitate the teaching and learning process and not dictate
what should be done by the teacher. Teachers are to be encouraged to reflect on their teaching and learning
practice in order to discern their areas of weaknesses and try to find the solutions of the problems that face
them in teaching and learning (Tripp, 1992).
Critical theory aims at understanding peoples‟ values and uses the meaning they make rather than super-
imposed solutions to the problems (Maclsaac, 1992). By understanding that there is no readymade solution to
the problems makes teachers more creative and imaginative which can enhance high achievement of the pupils
in schools (Carr and Kemmis, 1986). This reciprocal relationship between teachers and school inspectors is
what creates mutual understanding for the betterment of the pupils and facilitation of their academic
Excellencies in schools (Maclsaac, 1996; Leew, 2002). Hence in this study the theory depicts o understand
challenges that affect the monitoring of teaching and learning faced by teachers, head of schools and WEOs.
However, Critical theory faces the shortcomings that individual freedom has limitations. Human beings cannot
be left free without some degrees of control. Some individuals as human beings tend to misuse the freedom
they have. As Scientific Management theory puts forward, a teacher cannot be left free to do whatever she/he
wishes to do. Some rules and regulations are to be applicable with a mixture of humanity (Sergiovanni and
Starrat, 2007) if the national goals and objectives to be achieve.
Conditions of learning theory by Robert Gagne
The theory on conditions of learning was propounded by Robert Gagne and the theory stipulates that there are
several different types or levels of learning which are fostered by monitoring. It emphasises the significance of
the classifications in that each different type of monitoring of teaching and learning requires different types of
instruction. Gagne identifies five major categories of monitoring teaching and learning which include among
others, verbal information, intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, motor skills and attitudes. The theory
advances that different internal and external conditional factors are necessary for each type of teaching and
learning. For instance, for cognitive strategies to be learned, there must be a chance to monitor practices in
developing new solutions to problems; to learners’ attitudes, the learner must be exposed to a credible role
model or persuasive arguments (Gagne, 1985, Gagne, 1987, Gagne and Driscoll, 1988).
This study is guided by the conditions of learning as proposed by Gagne. It dwells on the fact that, the five
major categories of monitoring teaching and learning which include among others, verbal information,
intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, motor skills and attitudes are vital aspects that must be monitoring for
effective teaching and learning. It is also recognized that, monitoring teaching and learning tasks for
intellectual skills can be organised in a hierarchy according to complexity: stimulus recognition, response
generation, procedure following, use of terminology, discriminations, concept formation, rule application, and
problem solving. The primary significance of the hierarchy is to identify prerequisites that should be
completed to facilitate teaching and learning at each level. Prerequisites are identified by doing a task analysis
of a learning/training task. Learning hierarchies provide a basis for the sequencing of instruction (Gagne,
1987).
In addition, the theory outlines nine instructional events and corresponding cognitive processes which in this
study sets variable factors in monitoring teaching and learning: process starts by; 1. gaining attention where its
cognitive process is reception; 2. informing learners of the objective (expectancy), 3. Stimulating recall of
prior learning (retrieval): 4. Presenting the stimulus (selective perception): 5. Providing learning guidance
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3045
www.rsisinternational.org
(semantic encoding): 6. Eliciting performance (responding): 7. Providing feedback (reinforcement): 8.
Assessing performance (retrieval) and 9. Enhancing retention and transfer (generalisation) (Gagne, 1987).
These events should satisfy or provide the necessary conditions for learning and serve as the basis for
designing instruction and selecting appropriate media (Gagne, Briggs and Wager, 1992). This theory is
relevant for this study since it advances that different internal and external conditions are necessary for
effective learning in schools.
Conceptual framework
Effective teaching and learning is difficult to define. It is argued that effective teaching and learning is
important for raising student achievement (Hande, Kamath and D’Souza, 2014). Lorin (2004) suggested that
there are various challenges affecting effective monitoring of teaching and learning especially among academic
masters/mistresses of secondary schools. This study conceptualizes that the dependent variable which is
effective monitoring of teaching and learning is affected by independent variables which are challenges and
measures which together are controlled by intervening variables as shown in figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Conceptual Framework
Source: Adapted from Lezotte, L. W. (2010). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning the correlates.
Indianapolis, IN: Solution Tree.
METHODOLOGY
This section explained the methods used to achieve the objective of this study. This study essentially used both
quantitative qualitative and approaches to data collection and analysis. The main reason for choosing a
qualitative approach was that it was useful in exploring the views of teachers with regard to how they perceive
school monitoring in relation to their work performance. Qualitative research which is exploratory in nature
also enabled the researcher to enter into the field with an open mind (Patton, 2002) as it is holistic and it
provides a contextual understanding of the lived experience from the participants.
The descriptive survey design was used in this research to obtain the research data. Descriptive survey is a
method of collecting information by interviewing or administering a questionnaire to a sample of individuals
(Orodho, 2003). A descriptive survey fitted this study because the study aimed at obtaining opinions and
remarks about the existence of factors affecting monitoring of teaching and learning in primary schools. Using
questionnaires and documentary review ensured a descriptive design fit this study. For this reason, purposive
sampling was used to select all the Ward Education Officers, head teachers and academic masters/mistress in
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3046
www.rsisinternational.org
the study schools whereas the wards and schools to be used in the study were selected via simple random
sampling.
Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics which involved the use of means,
frequencies and percentages in data analysis and presentation. Qualitative data were analyzed qualitatively
using content analysis based on analysis of meanings and implications emanating from respondent information
and comparing responses to documented data on factors affecting monitoring of teaching and learning in
public primary schools. The qualitative data was presented thematically in line with the objectives of the study.
Consequently, the sample size for the study comprised of 4 WEOs, 4 of schools, 4 academic masters/mistress
and 76 teachers drawn from 4 public primary schools in Mbeya city namely Ijombe, Uyole, Meta, Maendeleo.
These constituted 5% of the total 1891 teacher and WEOs population in Mbeya city. According to Kothari
(2004) a sample of 5% is adequate for the targeted population under descriptive survey research. Thus, a total
of 88 respondents constituted the sample for this study.
The validity of this study was measured through the help of the research supervisor and colleagues. The
research tools were refined to ascertain its relevance, coverage and consistency before the researcher applying
them in real field situations. Reliability of this study instruments was ascertained by pre- testing the
instruments before going to the field.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Based on the specific objectives of this study. The question was: What do you think are the challenges faced
by head of schools, Ward Education Officers as well as school academic masters/mistresses in undertaking
monitoring teaching and learning in your school? The findings are as presented in the following subsections.
Challenges faced by heads of schools in monitoring teaching and learning among public primary schools
The study examined the challenges faced by head of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs in
monitoring teaching and learning among public primary schools. The data are presented in Table 1
Table 1: Teachers’ responses on the Challenges faced by heads of schools in undertaking monitoring teaching
and learning in primary schools
Problem 1 2 3 4
F % F % F % F %
Poor school arrangement and the school and related
infrastructures
50 62.5 17 21.2 11 13.8 2 2.4
Poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy
assessment
18 22.5 41 51.2 16 20.0 5 6.2
High tension among teachers and pupils 25 31.2 32 40.0 13 16.2 10 12.5
Poor communication 30 37.5 33 41.2 12 15.0 5 6.2
Poor preparation of necessary documents and other
resources
32 40.0 33 41.2 15 18.8
- -
Poor classroom conditions 30 37.5 35 43.8 12 15.0 3 3.8
Lack of cooperation 25 31.2 37 46.2 13 16.2 5 6.2
Shortage of time to carry out the exercise 36 45.0 27 33.8 14 17.5 3 3.8
Source: Field data, 2019
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3047
www.rsisinternational.org
The findings (Table 1) show that the majority of teacher respondents 67 (84%) felt that heads of schools were
mostly challenged by poor school arrangement and the school related infrastructures. Few teachers 13 (16%)
said this challenge was nonexistent. The findings of this study could be an indication that most primary schools
have the problem of poor school arrangement and the school related infrastructures which in turn affects
effective monitoring of teaching and learning activities.
In addition, 65 (81%) teachers supported that there was a challenge of poor preparation of necessary
documents and other resources needed for successful conduction of the teaching and learning monitoring
exercise. However, the minority 15 (19%) teacher respondents doubt the existence of such as challenge. The
results imply that most heads of schools are unable to effectively monitor the teaching and learning since
participants in the exercise are unable to prepare adequate and all documentary the exercise fruitful.
The findings revealed that among 65 (81%) teachers knew that head of schools were affected by poor
classroom conditions when conducting the monitoring exercise. The classroom conditions referred included
lack of flooring, overcrowded classes as well as poor ventilation. However, 15 (19%) teacher respondents felt
that this problem could not hinder effective conduction of the monitoring exercise. It could however be
summed that poor classroom conditions are also among the major challenges hindering effective monitoring of
teaching and learning.
On top of that some heads of schools could not effectively monitor the teaching and learning activities due to
shortage of time to carry out the exercise. It was found out that 64 (79%) teacher respondents support that
shortage of time to carry out the monitoring exercise centered among the challenges. However, 16 (21%)
teachers said such a problem did not affect monitoring of teaching and learning done by the education leaders
under study It could therefore be ascertained that head of schools normally have fewer time to undertake
monitoring of teaching and learning activities as they are confronted with other school administrative duties.
This stance leads to ineffective monitoring of teaching and learning in primary schools.
On top of that the existence of poor communication during the monitoring of the programmes was revealed by
63 (79%) teachers while only 17 (21%) of them claimed that the problem was nonexistent. This implies that
most heads of schools are confronted with poor communication when undertaking teaching and learning
monitoring activities.
Furthermore, the findings show that, 62 (77%) teachers revealed that monitoring of teaching and learning in
primary schools was hindered by the lack of cooperation between all involved parties such as teachers, school
administration, WEOs as well as parents. However, 18 (23%) teacher respondents felt that such a challenge
did not affect teaching and learning monitoring exercise. It was therefore concluded that lack of cooperation
among the monitoring officers and all involved parties was among the major problems hindering head of
schools in performing such as duty.
The findings further indicate that, 59 (74%) teachers said that monitoring of teaching and learning activities
was retarded by poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment. On the other hand 21 (26%)
teachers claimed that the challenge was not hindering teaching and learning monitoring activities. The data
entail that heads of schools are often confronted by poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy
assessment of the teaching and learning activities conducted in the schools.
On the other hand, findings show that 57 (71%) respondents said that there was a challenge of high tension
among teachers and pupils when monitoring of teaching and learning activities are conducted by heads of
schools. But, 23 (29%) teacher respondents indicated that this rule is not a serious problem. The findings
therefore imply that the monitoring of teaching and learning activities in primary schools might be conducted
ineffectively due to high tension exerted by both teachers and pupils during the physical monitoring exercise
which normally is referred to as assessment.
In the interviews it was noted that head teachers are occupied with a lot of administrative roles apart from
monitoring the teaching and learning programmes. As such sometimes they not effectively conduct the
monitoring of teaching and learning programmes. One head of school said;
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3048
www.rsisinternational.org
Referring to my position description, am the overall in-charge of all school programmes, that being the case, I
am always running shortage of time, confronted with poor cooperation and communication to effectively
monitor the teaching and learning progresses (Interviewee; 2019).
Matete (2009) discovered that most head teachers as school monitoring officers did not seem to be satisfied
with their work conditions. First, they did not have a good means of transport. Even though they received some
amount of fuel from the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, it was very little to cover school
inspection activities. In most cases they depended upon the mercy of the district education officer. They also
faced problems with lack of field allowances and some claimed that they visited schools only to demonstrate to
their superiors that they were not idle and to avoid the criticisms. These findings again confirm what Grauwe
(2001) found in his study on challenges and reforms in supervision in four African countries (Botswana,
Namibia, Tanzania and Zimbabwe) where in all four countries, there was a continuous lack of satisfaction both
for head teachers and other school monitoring officers with the impact of supervision on classroom. There
were more concern on lack of resources, especially vehicles and funds that impeded travel to visit schools and
the small number of school inspectors to cope with an increased number of schools.
Ehren and Visscher (2006) argued that despite the fact that school inspectors do not have direct control over
the teaching and learning process, they provide potential information that can be employed in improving
education delivery. If the recommendations and the school inspection reports are not worked upon then it is
useless to visit schools, and indeed it demoralises the school inspectors upon their work performance. It has
also been argued by Earley (1998) it might make the school inspectors lose their credibility and respect from
the teachers as in most cases teachers may not be in a position to make changes that school inspectors
recommend.
Challenges faced by academic masters/mistress in undertaking monitoring teaching and learning in
primary schools
The study also examined the challenges faced by academic masters/mistress in undertaking monitoring
teaching and learning in primary schools. The findings are presented in Table 2.
Table 2: Teachers’ responses on the challenges faced by academic masters/mistress in undertaking monitoring
teaching and learning in primary schools
Problem 1 2 3 4
F % F % F % F %
Poor school arrangement and the school and related
infrastructures
40 50.0 17 21.2 11 13.8 12 15.0
Poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy
assessment
11 22.5 41 51.2 16 20.0 12 15.8
High tension among teachers and pupils 15 18.7 25 31.2 20 25.0 20 25.0
Poor communication 20 25.0 23 28.7 22 27.5 15 18.7
Poor preparation of necessary documents and other
resources
26 32.5 33 41.2 15 18.8
6 7.5
Lack of cooperation 15 18.7 37 46.2 13 16.2 15 18.7
Shortage of time to carry out the exercise 20 25.0 27 33.8 14 17.5 19 23.7
Source: Field data, 2019
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3049
www.rsisinternational.org
The findings also reveal that 59 (74%) teachers support that there exist a challenge of poor preparation of
necessary documents and other resources needed for successful conduction of the teaching and learning
monitoring exercise. However, 21 (26%) teachers doubt the existence of such as challenge. The results imply
that most masters/mistress are unable to effectively monitor the teaching and learning since participants in the
exercise are unable to prepare adequate and all documentary the exercise fruitful.
The findings also indicate that, 58 (73%) teacher participants said that monitoring of teaching and learning
activities was retarded by poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment. On the other hand 22
(27%) teachers said such a challenge was not available. The data entail that academic masters/mistress are
often confronted by poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment of the teaching and learning
activities conducted in the schools. Findings also show that 40 (50%) of teachers said that there exist high
tension among teachers and pupils when monitoring of teaching and learning activities are conducted by
academic masters/mistress hence making the exercise less effective. On contrary, 40 (50%) teachers indicated
that this high tension was not a serious problem. The findings therefore imply that the monitoring of teaching
and learning activities in primary schools might be conducted ineffectively due to high tension exerted by both
teachers and pupils during the physical monitoring exercise which normally is referred to as assessment.
Findings (Table 2) show that the majority of the teacher 57 (71%) felt that school academic masters/mistress
were mostly challenged by poor school arrangement and the school related infrastructures. The lowest 73
(29%) teachers claimed that was not a serious problem affecting monitoring of teaching and learning. The
findings of this study could be an indication that most primary schools have the problem of poor school
arrangement and the school related infrastructures which in turn affects effective monitoring of teaching and
learning activities.
In addition, 52 (65%) respondents revealed that monitoring of teaching and learning in primary schools by
academic masters/mistress was hindered by the lack of cooperation between all involved parties such as
teachers, school administration, WEOs as well as parents. However, 28 (35%) respondents felt that such a
challenge did not affect teaching and learning monitoring exercise. It was therefore concluded that lack of
cooperation among the monitoring officers and all involved parties was among the major problems hindering
masters/mistress in performing such as duty.
Finally, 47 (54%) teachers revealed that shortage of time to carry out the monitoring exercise centered among
the challenges hindering academic masters/mistress to monitor teaching and learning activities. However, 33
(26%) felt that wasn’t existence of such a problem. It could therefore be ascertained that academic
masters/mistress normally have fewer time to undertake monitoring of teaching and learning activities as they
are confronted with other school administrative duties. This stance leads to ineffective monitoring of teaching
and learning in primary schools.
It was further revealed that 43 (54%) teacher respondents appreciated that the academic masters/mistress
monitoring of teaching and learning in primary schools faced a challenge of poor communication between
head of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs while 37 (46%) claimed that the problem was far from
being existing. This implies that most academic masters/mistress are confronted with poor communication
when undertaking teaching and learning monitoring activities.
One WEO lamented that:
The employer is not offering enough motivation to teachers of which some of them are appointed to be
academic masters/mistress. As such most academic officers fail to effectively monitor teaching and learning
due to lack of cooperation from fellow teachers. There is also poor preparation of necessary documents
needed in monitoring and other resources by teachers as well as poor organization of pupils and teachers for
easy assessment (Interviewee, 2019).
The findings suggest that the academic masters are not only a challenged by lack of adequate teaching and
learning resources but also other work reacted challenges such as poor organization of pupils and teachers for
easy assessment. The study by Ololube, and Major (2014) in Nigeria also confirmed the same challenges such
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3050
www.rsisinternational.org
as poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment and poor school arrangement and the school
and related infrastructures.
Challenges faced by Ward Education Officers in undertaking monitoring teaching and learning in
primary schools
The challenges faced by WEOs in conducting the monitoring of teaching and learning in primary schools were
examined. The findings are presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Teachers’ responses on the challenges faced by Ward Education Officers in undertaking monitoring
teaching and learning in primary schools
Problem 1 2 3 4
F % F % F % F %
Poor school arrangement and the school and related
infrastructures
11 13.8 10 12.5 50 62.5 9 11.2
Poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy
assessment
18 22.5 41 51.2 16 20.0 5 6.2
High tension among teachers and pupils 25 31.2 40 50.0 13 16.2 2 2.5
Poor communication 10 12.5 33 41.2 12 15.0 25 31.2
Poor preparation of necessary documents and other
resources
35 43.7 33 41.2 10 12.5
2 2.5
Lack of cooperation 25 31.2 37 46.2 13 16.2 5 6.2
Shortage of time to carry out the exercise 3 3.8 27 33.8 14 17.5 36 45.0
Source: Field data, 2019
Poor preparation of necessary documents and other resources was revealed to be challenges by 68 (87%)
teacher respondents while the minority 12 (13%) teachers doubts the existence of such as challenge. The
results imply that most WEOs are unable to effectively monitor the teaching and learning since participants in
the exercise are unable to prepare adequate and all documentary the exercise fruitful.
Sixty five (65) (81%) teachers disclosed that high tension among teachers and pupils when monitoring of
teaching and learning activities affected WEOs. But, 15 (19%) teacher respondents indicated that this rule is
not a serious problem. The findings therefore imply that the monitoring of teaching and learning activities in
primary schools might be conducted ineffectively due to high tension exerted by both teachers and pupils
during the physical monitoring exercise which normally is referred to as assessment.
Based on the findings, 62 (77%) teacher respondents revealed that monitoring of teaching and learning in
primary schools by WEOs was hindered by the lack of cooperation between all involved parties such as
teachers, school administration, WEOs as well as parents. However, though 18 (23%) teachers felt that such a
challenge did not affect teaching and learning monitoring exercise. It was therefore concluded that lack of
cooperation among the monitoring officers and all involved parties was among the major problems hindering
WEOs in performing such as duty.
Similarly, 59 (74%) teacher respondents said that monitoring of teaching and learning activities among WEOs
was retarded by poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment. On the other hand 21 (26%)
said such a challenge was not available. The data entail that WEOs are often confronted by poor organization
of pupils and teachers for easy assessment of the teaching and learning activities conducted in the schools.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3051
www.rsisinternational.org
It has also been revealed that 43 (54%) teacher respondents appreciated that the monitoring of teaching and
learning in primary schools is affected by poor communication between head of schools, masters/mistress and
WEOs. This was contrary to 37 (46%) teachers who claimed that the problem was far from existence. This
implies that most WEOs are confronted with poor communication when undertaking teaching and learning
monitoring activities.
Finally, 30 (38%) teacher respondents support that shortage of time to carry out the monitoring exercise
centered among the challenges; however, 50 (62%) teachers did not support the existence of such a problem. It
could therefore be ascertained that WEOs normally have enough time to undertake monitoring of teaching and
learning activities.
Table 3 show that 21 (26%) teachers felt that Ward Education Officers were mostly challenged by poor school
arrangement and the school related infrastructures. The highest 59 (74%) of the teachers claimed that poor
school arrangement did not affect effective monitoring of teaching and learning. The findings of this study
could be an indication that most primary schools have the problem of poor school arrangement and the school
related infrastructures which in turn affects effective monitoring of teaching and learning activities.
On the other hand interviewed respondents said that financial problems hinder the functioning of the WEO
where one of the respondents said that the WEOs expect money from the schools in order to effectively
conduct monitoring of teaching and learning. One head teacher said;
These people (WEOs) do not have sufficient budget. They depend much on contributions from schools but
these schools also fail to get money because the government budget is very small. (Interviewee, 2019). One of
the WEOs said; We have many activities that we are assigned to do by our boss. It becomes difficult for us to
monitor all school programmes effectively. (Interviewee, 2019).
This means that without money WEOs cannot visit the schools as required and hence many of the schools
remain unimonitored always and hence unprofessional behavior to teachers and students becomes a result.
Lupimo (2014) discovered that among the challenges facing WEOs in monitoring teaching and learning
activities were such as lack of transport, inaccessibility to the interior, fewness of the inspectors, other
administrative functions, increased number of schools, lack of money to finance the inspection visits,
secondary school inspectors located at the zonal level.
CONCLUSION
The study concluded that, the challenges faced by heads of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs in
monitoring teaching and learning among public primary schools varied and included poor school arrangement
and the school related infrastructures as experienced by, poor preparation of necessary documents, poor
classroom conditions, shortage of time to carry out the exercise, poor communication, lack of cooperation,
poor organization of pupils and teachers for easy assessment and lastly high tension among teachers and
pupils. The findings indicated that school heads of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs encountered
such challenges which made the monitoring exercise ineffective. It was perceived that the elimination of such
problems would help to make the teaching and learning monitoring exercise more successful than it was
conducted.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Drawing upon the findings, the following recommendations are made:
Recommendations to heads of schools
i. The findings in this study indicate that monitoring of teaching and learning activities are among of the
roles performed by head teachers, academic masters/mistress as well as WEOs. It is recommended that
heads of schools should be given regular trainings on specific monitoring of teaching and learning apart
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3052
www.rsisinternational.org
from other administrative duties they perform in schools. The training should also focus on teacher
professional development and learners’ understanding of monitoring of teaching and learning.
ii. In this study also respondents indicated their concern on the poor preparations of necessary documents
needed for monitoring exercises as hindrance to effective monitoring of teaching and learning. Such
documents include pupils’ exercise books, lesson plans, subject logbooks and schemes of work as the
criteria of evaluating the school performance. It is recommended that the prime goal of school
monitoring should be to monitor the process of teaching and learning in the classroom setting. It may
be easier for the heads of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs to discern the area of
weaknesses when teachers are assessed in the classroom setting.
Recommendations to academic masters/mistresses
Academic masters/mistresses in secondary schools should be motivated towards their dealings in monitoring
of teaching and learning. They should be equipped with necessary resources to ensure proper records and skills
to see that their work problems are solved.
recommendations to Ward Education Officers
WEOs should take their responsibility seriously when they understand that their work is of value and it
receives some attentions from the key stakeholders like that of the district director and DEO. For improvement
in teaching and learning to be achieved, the WEO and the school administration should make use of the school
monitoring reports and recommendations to motivate teachers. WEOs must change their attitudes and
considering teachers as part of their field and not always perceive them negatively. There should be a good
schedule of monitoring and not ambushing schools for inspection. They must be given limitation of areas of
monitoring and guidelines which must be accompanied with training to them on best monitoring process and
procedures to avoid power struggle relationship with teachers especially head of schools.
Policy Recommendations
As it has been learnt that monitoring is a critical process which need cooperation among stakeholders;
students, teachers, administrators, policy makers and academicians. Relevant data and monitoring feedback
should be always taken into consideration while educational policy making and implementation processes with
issues related to school monitoring. Therefore; further on perception and attitudes of teachers towards the
school monitoring, challenges facing heads of schools, academic masters/mistress and WEOs and the role of
school inspectorate on student performance would be carried out for effective school standards.
REFERENCES
1. Ali, M. (2011). Head teachers’ perception and practices of school leadership in primary Schools in
Sirajganj District, Bangladesh. Unpublished Master of Arts in Education Dissertation. NewZealand:
University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
2. Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods 2nd Edition. New York: Oxford
3. Carr, W & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London:
The Falmer Press.
4. Chapman, C. (2001b). Changing classrooms through inspection. In: School leadership and
management, Vol. 21, No 1, p. 59- 73.
5. Chingos, M. M. & West, M. R. (2010). “Do more effective teachers earn more outside of the
classroom? Programme on education policy and governance working Paper Series PE-PG 10-02.
6. Cohen, L., Manion, L & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.
7. Collie, S & Taylor, A. (2004). Improving teaching quality and the learning Organization. In: Tertiary
Education and Management. 6th Edition; Vol. 10, No. 2, p 139-155.
8. Coombe, C., Kelly, M & Carr-Hill, R. (2006). Quality education and HIV &AIDS. Paris: UNESCO
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3053
www.rsisinternational.org
9. Delvin, M., Kift, S. & Nelson, K. (2012). Effective teaching and support of students from low
socioeconomic status backgrounds: Practical advice for teaching staff. Resources for Australian higher
education. Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching.
10. Descombe, M. (2007). The good research guide for small scale social research project. Mc Graw Hill.
Open University Press.
11. Druker, P. (1991). The new productivity challenge. In Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69, No. 6, Pp.
69-75
12. Ehren, M & Visscher, A. (2008). The relationship between school inspections, characteristics and
school improvement. In The British Journal of EducationalStudies, Vol. 56, No. 2 pp 205-227
13. Friedman, M. (2005). Free Choice. In The Wall Street Journal, Pp. A16
14. Fuhrman, N. E., Fuhrman, R. G., & DeLay, A. M. (2010). Defining “good teaching” at the graduate
level: Are we meeting the instructional expectations of doctoral students? Journal of Faculty
Development, 24 (2), 19-24.
15. Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16. Gagne, R. & Driscoll, M. (1988). Essentials of learning for instruction. (2nd Ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
17. Gagne, R. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
18. Gagne, R. (1987). Instructional technology foundations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
19. Gagne, R., Briggs, L. & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of instructional design. (4th Ed.). Fort Worth,
TX: HBJ College Publishers.
20. Galabawa, J. (2005). Returns to investments in education: Startling relations and alternatives before
Tanzanians. Professorial inaugural lecture series 45. Dar esSalaam: University of Dar es Salaam
21. Gaynor, C. (1995). “Decentralisation of primary education: Implication at school and community level.
The case of Nigeria and Tanzania.” Consultant Report. World Bank, Economic Development Institute,
Washington, DC.
22. Goldhaber, D. (2002). The mystery of good teaching. Education Next. 2(1): 50-5
23. Grauwe, A. (2001). School supervision in four African countries: Vol. 1: Challenges and Reforms.
Paris: UNESCO.
24. Grauwe, A. (2007). Transforming school supervision into a tool for quality improvement. In
International Review of Education, p 709-714
25. Guffey, S. (2013) Essentials of business communication. London: Longman
26. Hande, H. S., Kamath, S. R. & D’Souza, J. (2014). Students’ perception of effective teaching practices
in a medical school. Education in Medicine Journal 6 (3) 63-66.
27. Hill, L. M. (2014). Graduate students' perspectives on effective teaching. Adult Learning, 25 (2) 57-65.
28. Hoyle, E & Mike W. (2005). Educational leadership: Ambiguity, professionals and managerialism.
London: SAGE Publications.
29. Kombo, D. K. & Tromp, D.L (2006). Proposal and thesis writing: An Introduction. Nairobi: Pauline’s
Publications Africa.
30. Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. 2nd Edition. New Delhi; New
Age International Publishers ltd.
31. Learmonth, J. (2000). Inspection: What’s in it for School? http://books.google.com/books?hl Accessed
on 20th March 2019
32. Lee, J. (1997). HIM and OFSTED: Evolution or revolution in school inspection. In: British Journal of
Educational Studies, Vol. 45, No. 1, Pp. 39-52.
33. Lee, V & Elyssa W. (2002). Education voucher system. Report Paper 06/01-02, Hong Kong: Research
and library Services Division.
34. Leeuw, F. (2002). Reciprocity and educational evaluations by European Inspectorates: Assumptions
and reality checks. In quality in higher education, Vol 8, No. 2, pp.137-149
35. Lopez, M. (2007). School management in multicultural contexts. International Journal of Leadership in
Education: Theory and Practice. England: Taylor and
Francis.thhp://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content?content=10.1080/13603120701308439 Accessed
on 18th February, 2008.
36. Lezotte, L. W. (2010). What effective schools do: Re-envisioning the correlates. Indianapolis, IN:
Solution Tree.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3054
www.rsisinternational.org
37. Lopez, M. (2007). School management in multicultural contexts. International Journal of Leadership in
Education: Theory and Practice. England: Taylor and
Francis.thhp://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content?content=10.1080/13603120701308439 Accessed
on 18th February, 2018.
38. MacBeath, J. (2006). School inspection and self- evaluation: Working with the new relationship.
London: Routledge.
39. MacIsaac, D. (1996). The Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermas
(http://www.physics.nau.edu/~danmac) Accessed on 6th March 2018.
40. Mavhunditse, T. (2014). Legal perspectives in education. Harare: Zimbabwe Open University.
41. Ministry of Education Science and Technology. (2000). Handbook for inspection of education
institutions. Dar es salaam, Government Printer.
42. Mmbando, J. S & Hongoke C. (2010). Management, inspection and supervision for effective delivery
of quality education. Thematic paper for the Joint Education Sector Annual Review.
43. MoEC. (2000). School inspection training manual. Dar es Salaam: Ministry of Education and Culture.
44. MoEC. (2005). School inspectorate: Powers, roles and responsibilities.
http://www.moe.go.tz/inspectors/roles_respons.html. Accessed on 6th March, 2018.
45. Mollel, C. (2015). Quality of Education Practices in Tanzania: A Case of community secondary
schools in Arusha District Council. Unpublished dissertation of Master of Education in Administration,
Planning and Policy Studies of the Open University of Tanzania.
46. Mupa, P & Chinooneka, T. I. (2015) Factors contributing to ineffective teaching and learning in
primary schools: Why are schools in decadence? Journal of Education and Practice Vol.6, No.19
47. Mwananchi News Paper. (2009). Kuna upungufu mkubwa wa wakaguzi elimu-utafiti
http://www.mwananchi.co.tz/newsrids.asp?id=9370 Accessed on 19th January 2019.
48. Najumba, J. (2013). The effectiveness of teaching and learning in primary schools. Boston: Sage
Publications.
49. Nemes, J & Sharali H. I. (2015). Effectiveness of head teachers in monitoring teaching and learning:
The case of selected public primary schools in Kondoa District, Tanzania. International Journal of
Education and Research; Vol. 3 No.pp. 106-150.
50. Ndungu, B. W; Allan, G and Emily, B. J (2015). Influence of monitoring and evaluation by principals
on effective teaching and learning in public secondary schools in Githunguri District. Journal of
Education and Practice. Vol.6, No.9. pp.34-81
51. Nkinyangi, S. (2006). Quality standards and quality assurance in basic education: Experience from
Burundi, Eritrea, Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda. Nairobi: UNESCO.
52. Nkumbi, E, Warioba, L & Komba, W. (2006). Capacity of primary school management for
professional development in selected primary schools in Tanzania. Research proposal presented at the
Africa-Asia Dialogue Seminar held at the United Nations University, Tokyo, 10th March 2006.
53. Pietrzak, D., Duncan, K., & Korcuska, J. S. (2008). Counseling students’ decision making regarding
teaching effectiveness: A conjoint analysis. Counselor Education & Supervision, 48, 114-132.
54. Quist, D. (2000). Primary teaching methods. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
55. Russel, T. and Mcpherson, S. (2001). Indicators of success in teaching education. Oxford: Macmillan
Education.
56. Rakesh. R (2003). Is primary education heading in the right direction? Thinking with Nyerere.
HakiElimu Working Paper Series No. 2003.4
57. Richards, C. (2001). School inspection: A re-appraisal. In Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol. 35,
No 4, p. 655-665
58. Sammons, Pamela. (2006). Improving school and raising standards: The impact of educational reforms
in England. In, Eder, Firdinand, Angela Gastanger & Franz Hofmann, Qualitat Durch Standards? New
York: Waxmann
59. Saroyan, A., Dangenais, J., & Zhou, Y. (2009). Graduate students’ conceptions of university teaching
and learning: Formation for change. Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning
Sciences, 37, 579-600.
60. Sergiovanni, T & Starratt, R. (2007). Supervision: A redefinition. 8edition. New York: McGraw- Hill.
61. Sprinkle, J. E. (2009). Student perceptions of educator effectiveness: A follow-up study. College
Student Journal, 43, 1341-1358.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 3055
www.rsisinternational.org
62. TEN/MET. (2007). Strengthening Education in Tanzania: CSO contribution to the education sector
review. Dar es Salaam: TenMet.
63. Tripp, D. (1992). Critical theory and educational research. In, Issues in educational research, Vol. 2,
No. 1 Pp. 13-23
64. Tshabalala, T. (2014). Comparative education. Harare: Zimbabwe Open University.
65. UNESCO. (2004). Education for All: The quality imperative. Paris: UNESCO
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001373/13733e.pdf. Accessed on 11th March, 2008
66. UNESCO. (2006). Teachers and educational quality. Monitoring global needs for 2015. UNESCO
Institute for Statistics.
67. URT. (2004). National Report on the Development of Education 2001-2004. International Conference
on Education. Unpublished report, Geneva: MoEC.
68. URT. (2001). Basic Education Master Plan (BEMP). Medium Term Strategic and Programme
Framework 2000- 2005. Dar es Salaam: Ministry of Education and Culture.
69. United Republic of Tanzania. (2008). Education Sector Development Programme: Teacher
Development and Management Strategy (2008-2013). Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: Government Printer.
70. URT. (2014). Education and Training Policy. Government printer, Dar es salaam
71. URT. (2016). A Performance Audit Report on School Inspection Programme for Secondary Schools in
Tanzania: A Report of the Controler and Auditor General of the United Republic of Tanzania. Dar es
salaam, National Audit Office.
72. Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Hakkinen, K & Hamalainen, S. (1998). External inspection of self evaluation?
A comparative analysis of policy and practice in primary schools in England and Finland. In British
Educational Research Journal, Vol. 24, No. 5 p. 539-556
73. Wilcox, B. (2000). Making school inspection visits more effective: The english experience. Paris:
UNESCO.
74. Williams, D. J. (2000). Monitoring School Performance For Standard Based Reforms. Retrieved on
January 8, 2019 from http: www.infomaworld.com.