RADIO INSTRUCTION TO STRENGTHEN 
EDUCATION (RISE) 
AND 
ZANZIBAR TEACHER UPGRADING BY RADIO 
(ZTUR)
Post-Project Evaluation in Zanzibar
Final Report 
January, 2015 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
BACKGROUND TO THE RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS 
The Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE) Projects and Zanzibar Teacher Upgrading 
through Radio (ZTUR) Projects were established in Zanzibar in 2006. The programs ran 
consecutively through 2011 with the goals of: 
1. Building the capacity of Zanzibar’s Ministry of Education and Vocational Training 
(MoEVT) staff in the area of early childhood development (ECD) and education – which 
this report defines as services for children through the age of 8, and within Zanzibar’s 
education system covers two years of preschool education and Standards 1 and 2; 
2. Improving access to quality math, literacy and life skills instruction and materials for 
underserved young children (preschool to grade two); and 
3. Developing a quality distance and open learning program through which in-service early 
childhood teachers can upgrade their skills and work towards preschool accreditation. 
RISE was implemented jointly by Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC) and Zanzibar’s
MoEVT, and sponsored by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 
RISE activities were implemented in Zanzibar’s two lowest-performing districts, and eventually 
expanded into a Zanzibar-wide teacher training and certification program through ZTUR. 
The key activities under the RISE project were: 
 Developing and piloting three series of Tucheze Tujifunze1
 (Tu Tu) Interactive Audio 
Instruction (IAI)2
 programs for preschool, Standard 1 and Standard 2 students, including 
those in formal and non-formal settings, with accompanying instructional and learning 
materials; 
 Establishing over 180 Tucheze Tujifunze early childhood learning centers (TuTu Centers) 
in areas with poor access to ECD and education; 
 Producing interactive videos for guiding teacher professional development in teaching 
English as a second language; 
 Training a cadre of preschool and early grade educators (formal and non-formal) to
teach literacy, math, and life skills; and 
 
1Tucheze Tujifunze, translates as “Let’s Play, Let’s Learn” and is a name used locally to refer to the IAI programs. 
2
 IAI is an interactive teaching and learning pedagogy that promotes quality learning in diverse environments, 
including those with shortages of qualified teachers, school infrastructure, and learning materials. Based on child￾friendly instruction, which is inclusive, playful, active, and engaging, each 30-minute broadcast uses the formal 
Zanzibar curriculum as the foundational content (Kiswahili, math, English and basic life skills), but integrates games, 
songs, and activities through a common story-line. The IAI programs encourage problem solving and self-directed 
exploration. 
ii
 Building the capacity of a MoEVT team to lead distance and open learning for all of 
Zanzibar. 
At the close of the project, RISE had provided ECD opportunities to over 35,000 Zanzibari 
children3
 and trained over 809 formal teachers and non-formal facilitators in IAI pedagogy, 
classroom management and other key areas. The project also distributed over 28,000 teaching 
and learning materials developed by the team. 
The subsequent ZTUR Project was designed to further RISE’s ECD work by creating a 
comprehensive preschool teacher certification program to be implemented by MoEVT. The 
intention of the certification program (the Early Childhood Advancement Certificate Program, or 
ECACP) is to provide in-service teachers with critical knowledge, skills, and practice through a 
distance learning platform administered through their district in-service Teacher Centers. The 
ECACP program consists of audio, video and print materials that guide teachers through ECD 
instructional theory and practice, and support them as they actively apply their knowledge in 
their classrooms. 
STUDY OBJECTIVES 
In 2014, EDC commissioned a post-project study to answer the following questions: 
 
1. To what extent have the ZTUR and RISE Project activities been sustained or expanded 
under the leadership of MoEVT after the projects were transferred in March 2011? 
2. Do learners that participated in IAI (Tucheze Tujifunze) programming perform higher at 
the end of their primary cycle than those that did not participate? 
The study uses a mixed-method design (process and impact evaluations) to explore these 
questions. The process evaluation looks at what has been sustained, how it has been sustained, 
and what challenges and success MoEVT has experienced along the way. Interviews and surveys 
were conducted between March and June 2014 with 94 individuals, including MoEVT officials 
from the central and district offices, Teacher Center staff, head teachers of RISE intervention 
schools, teachers that were trained in Tucheze Tujifunze programming, and learners that 
listened to the programs. Data were analyzed qualitatively to elicit common themes in 
responses related to the research questions. 
The impact evaluation looks at student performance at Standard 7 (equivalent to grade 7 in the 
United States) Kiswahili, English, and Math. The test was developed by the evaluation team 
based on an existing government exam. The same sample of learners who took part in an earlier 
evaluation in 2008 (when they were in Standard 1) was used for the subsequent 2014 data 
 
3Note that over 35,000 unique learners were reached. However, as some learners received multiple years of 
intervention (preschool, Standard 1 and Standard 2) the total aggregated learners by year is 44,843. 
iii
collection. Of the total 1,543 learners from the 2008 sample, 904 (or 58.6%) were tested in 
2014; including 552 from the RISE group (those that had listened to the Tucheze Tujifunze
programming) and 352 from the comparison group (students in a district with similar 
demographics that did not have direct exposure to the Tucheze Tujifunze programming). Not all 
students tested in 2014 were found to be in Standard 7; assessment data for those who were in 
lower grades were not included in the analysis of the assessment results since the test was 
developed to test Standard 7 proficiency.
FINDINGS 
INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFER AND SUSTAINABILITY OF RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS
The main success of the RISE and ZTUR Projects consisted of successfully establishing a distance 
and opening learning division (the eLearning Division), within the MoEVT. The eLearning Division 
consists of the staff who were trained and supported by RISE and ZTUR; this continuity has 
allowed the division to further some of the work started under the projects. By 2014 there were 
14 technical staff working in the eLearning Division, and their activities (which continue to build 
on the foundational activities established under the RISE and ZTUR Projects) were in the process 
of being further developed with support of the Global Partnership for Education (GPE). By 2016, 
120 new centers (60 in Pemba’s Mkoani, 60 in Unguja’s North B) will be opened, materials and 
training will be provided to 240 mentors, and 200 new preschool programs will be recorded.
As of 2014, 179 of the original 180 Tucheze Tujifunze ECD centers are still in existence, and some 
efforts have been made to help build more permanent spaces for the centers that were in non￾permanent structures. Payments for TuTu Center mentors have been fully integrated into the 
Ministry’s annual budget, and the augmentation of mentor remuneration in 2013 is evidence of 
the division’s commitment to providing continued support to its mentors. 
Broadcast of Tu Tu lessons has continued, with the exception of a 4-month interruption in 2014, 
when the Voice of Tanzania, Radio Zanzibar underwent restructuring and semi-privatization. All 
preschool programs are now being aired by ZBC. 
Head teachers (principals), formal school teachers and mentors (non-formal teachers in the 
Tucheze Tujifunze centers) all expressed the continuing importance of the Tucheze Tujifunze
programming. Mentors have continued to facilitate classes, despite limited access to the 
programs and materials and the resource-lean circumstances. 
The RISE continuous training model has not been sustained, largely because of a lack of 
allocated funds for training. However, two trainings took place in early 2014 to build the 
capacity of new mentors for the 51 newly established centers. Funds were provided by GPE. 
iv
The ECACP certification program, which was designed and developed under ZTUR, was rolled 
out in seven Teacher Centers early in 2014.4
 Currently, support is being provided by the GPE to 
implement ECACP across Zanzibar. At the time of this study, there were 352 teachers from all 
ten districts going through step 1 and 26 trainers had been trained by the e-Learning Division 
and Aga Khan Foundation. All 26 trainers had received ECD certificates from Aga Khan 
Foundation. Over 700 teacher participants are expected to benefit from the ECACP, starting in 
2014. 
The major challenges to continued quality implementation lie in maintaining both access to and 
quality of materials and programming. Maintenance and replacement of radios and 
broadcasting are major barriers to listenership. A lack of printing and distribution of new 
materials and limitations on the resources committed to regular trainings and monitoring also 
affect the quality and fidelity of implementation. 
LEARNER PERFORMANCE
The 2008 evaluation showed that the RISE IAI programming and approach had increased 
learning gains in both formal and non-formal settings in Zanzibar relative to a comparison group 
(students in formal schools that did not receive IAI programming). RISE participants 
demonstrated substantial test score gains across all three tested disciplines (Kiswahili, math and 
English). Although learners in formal treatment classrooms made the most significant learning 
gains, non-formal treatment learners were not far behind them. Whereas both boys and girls 
benefited from the RISE intervention, girl learners showed greater overall growth. The 2008 
evaluation demonstrated that RISE’s unique combination of IAI radio programming and early 
childhood education not only engaged learners, but also promoted the quality of their learning. 
The 2014 study tracked approximately 59% of the students from the original sample. Slightly 
more students from the RISE formal school model group (63.4%) were located and included in 
this study than from the RISE non-formal school model group (55.9%). Fewer students from the 
RISE non-formal and combination non-formal and formal intervention models were located than 
from the RISE formal schools. Consequently, the study team made a decision to combine 
students from the RISE non-formal and combination models into a “mixed” group for analysis. 
The 2014 assessment found that RISE formal school students performed significantly better on 
standardized grade-level assessments in Kiswahili, English and math, compared to their 
counterparts from the comparison group and from the RISE mixed group. Six years after the 
intervention, RISE formal school students demonstrated a better mastery of grade-level 
concepts. However, the overall performance level in English and math was found to be very low 
among all study groups. 
 
4Centers include: Kiembe, Samaki, Bububu, Mkwajuni, Dunga, Kitungoni, Mizingani-Mkoani.
v 
RISE appears to have contributed to sustained advantages for the formal school students who 
participated in the program. Unfortunately, not enough students from the non-formal or 
combined groups (the mixed group) could be traced to enable the drawing of strong conclusions 
about the effect of the program on non-formal populations. A significant portion of RISE mixed 
group students either could not be found for inclusion in the study, or had repeated grades and 
thus could not be included in the analysis. Since those students were particularly disadvantaged, 
due to very low parental literacy or due to poverty, they were an important focus of the RISE 
intervention. Determination of the long-term benefit of the Tuchzeze Tujifunze programming on 
their academic performance would be helpful in informing policy decisions about how to target 
continued interventions for similar populations through the eLearning Division of the MoEVT. 
Additional follow up or tracer studies that focus particularly on this non-formal group of 
students would be beneficial. 
CONCLUSION 
Despite logistical and coordination challenges, which are common when donor-funded projects 
are transferred to an official counterpart institution, the MoEVT’s goal of using RISE and ZTUR as 
the foundation for long-term improvements in ECD in Zanzibar has largely been achieved. The 
eLearning Division has been strategic about moving its work forward with the support and 
guidance of the MoEVT leadership. eLearning staff have made conscious and noble efforts to 
sustain and scale-up RISE and ZTUR activities and to ultimately ensure that their policy goals 
related to early childhood development are advanced. The insistence of the MoEVT leadership 
that the division remains cohesive, as it was created under the RISE and ZTUR Projects, has 
ensured the sustainability of the team and their work, and encouraged the confidence of new 
partners who can substantially contribute to continued development of this sector. 
In addition, the Tucheze Tujifunze model of intervention has demonstrated sustained positive 
effects on students who participated in the programs, providing them with an advantage in 
academic performance 6 years after their initial performance was assessed. This is particularly 
true for students in the RISE formal school group. However, the assessed achievement of both 
RISE and comparison participants was still relatively low, when compared to national 
expectations for grade-level performance in Standard 7. Clearly, as identified in the Zanzibar 
Education Policy and Zanzibar Education Development Programme, work remains to be done to 
increase the percentage of Zanzibari students who meet performance standards across pre￾primary and primary education. Additional tracer research on the impact of the Tucheze 
Tujifunze programming model on the most disadvantaged students (those in the RISE non￾formal group) would also help ensure the greatest possible impact on that group as 
programming continues to evolve. 
Given the Zanzibari context, IAI programming remains a viable and useful intervention format 
for increasing access to high-quality early education, particularly in the most challenged districts. 
Careful attention will need to be paid to the mechanisms necessary for continuing to ensure the 
vi
quality of Tucheze Tujifunze programming (specifically: management of hardware resources; 
thoughtful integration of the programs into the increasingly dense school timetable; the 
provision of continuous support and professional development for teachers and mentors; and 
sufficient and effective monitoring and evaluation of programs as they are rolled out). With 
additional investment in these quality assurance processes, and the continued commitment of 
the MoEVT to the work of the eLearning Division, the improvements begun under RISE and ZTUR 
can continue to be built upon and sustained.
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................. i
BACKGROUND TO THE RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS .................................................................................................. i
STUDY OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................................................ ii
FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................................................................................iii
INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFER AND SUSTAINABILITY OF RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS .......................iii
LEARNER PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................................................... iv
CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................................................. v
ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................................................................................... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................................ ix
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
EDUCATION IN ZANZIBAR .................................................................................................................................................. 1
THE RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS ....................................................................................................................................... 3
METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6
2008 EVALUATION ................................................................................................................................................................. 7
2014 POST-PROJECT EVALUATION ................................................................................................................................ 8
SAMPLE .................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
........................................................................................................................................................................................................10
DATA COLLECTION (PROCESS AND TOOLS) ............................................................................................................10
DATA ANALYSIS .....................................................................................................................................................................11
LIMITATIONS ..........................................................................................................................................................................11
FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................................................................13
FINDINGS: INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFER AND SUSTAINABILITY OF RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS .....14
RELEVANCE TO THE ZANZIBAR EDUCATION POLICY AND ZANZIBAR EDUCATION 
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (ZEDP) ..................................................................................................................14
SUSTAINABILITY OF RISE AND ZTUR ACTIVITIES AFTER TRANSFER TO MOEVT ..........................15
CONCLUSION: INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY ..............................................................32
FINDINGs: LEARNER PERFORMANCE .........................................................................................................................34
STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS ........................................................................................................................................34
ASSESSMENT FINDINGS ...............................................................................................................................................39
DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................................................................48
CONCLUSION: LEARNER PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................49
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................................................50
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................................................51
APPENDIX: LEARNING AND TEACHING MATERIALS ................................................................................................. 52
ACRONYMS 
ECACP Early Childhood Advancement Certification Program 
ECD Early Childhood Development 
EDC Education Development Center, Inc. 
GER Gross Enrollment Ratio 
GPE Global Partnership for Education 
IAI Interactive Audio Instruction 
IEU Inclusive Education Unit 
MoEVT Ministry of Education and Vocational Training 
NER Net Enrollment Ratio 
RISE Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education 
SDLM Self-directed Learning Modules 
SMC School Management Committee 
TuTu Tucheze Tujifunze (IAI series) 
USAID United States Agency for International Development 
ZBC Zanzibar Broadcasting Corporation 
ZEDP Zanzibar Education Development Plan 
ZTUR Zanzibar Teacher Upgrading by Radio 
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
EDC thanks the Ministry of Education, Training and Vocational Training (MoEVT), primarily the 
Deputy Principal Secretary, Mr. Abdulla Mzee; Director of ICT in Education, Mr. Omar Said Ali; 
and MoEVT Pemba office staff for their generous support of this evaluation. The Ministry’s
eLearning Division representatives, Abrahman Faki Othman and Sabrina Masoud Suleiman, were 
instrumental in coordinating the testing of learners and donated countless hours and resources 
to ensuring that quality data were collected. The study’s two lead researchers and coordinators, 
Asha Mohammed Ahmed and Fatma Kassim Mohammed, managed all the interviews, surveys 
and testing, and ensured data was processed efficiently. We thank the eLearning Division staff 
and field data collectors for their tireless efforts to delivery timely, accurate and high quality 
data. 
1 
INTRODUCTION 
EDUCATION IN ZANZIBAR 
Zanzibar is an archipelago in the Indian Ocean situated off the east coast of Tanzania, the two 
largest islands of which are Pemba (population 406,848) and Unguja (population 896,721).5
Zanzibar is approximately 99% Muslim and is economically reliant on tourism and other services 
as well as agriculture, including fishing, seaweed farming, and production of cloves and other 
spices.6
 Approximately 49% of the population is between the ages of 0 and 17.7
Although Zanzibar officially became part of the United Republic of Tanzania in 1964, it has 
retained autonomy over its internal affairs, including the provision and financing of education. 
The government of Zanzibar is committed to and has made progress toward achieving universal 
primary education. In 2006, the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT) 
established the Zanzibar Education Policy (“Education Policy”) and set a number of goals, 
including improving the quality of education and instruction, increasing the number of trained 
preschool teachers, reducing the Standard 1 entry age, and addressing an acute shortage of 
classrooms and serious overcrowding in a number of districts. From the policy, the Zanzibar 
Education Development Plan (2008-2015), or ZEDP, was developed to set a framework for 
action and to develop achievable targets. 
In 2006, when the Education Policy was approved, primary school starting at Standard 18
 was 
free and compulsory in Zanzibar, and the gross enrolment ratio (GER) 9
 was over 100%.10
However the net enrolment ratio (NER) was 77.3% for boys and 78.7% for girls, 11 which 
increased to an overall 81.5% by 2010.12 Regionally, there are some differences in enrolment 
across islands and urban and rural areas; according to 2010 MoEVT data, Pemba island had a 
 
5 National Bureau of Statistics, United Republic of Tanzania. (2013). Population and Housing Census 2012. pp. vii 
6
ILO. (2008). Good Practices on Social Protection and Coping Strategies used by Low Income Women Workers in the 
Informal Economy in Zanzibar to Mitigate Against Social and Economic Risks, 6. Accessed on November 2, 2014. 
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---
gender/documents/publication/wcms_098172.pdf.
7
 National Bureau of Statistics, United Republic of Tanzania. (2013). Population and Housing Census 2012. pp. vii 
8
 Standard 1 is equivalent to US Grade One.
9
 GER measures the total number of children enrolled, regardless of age, as a percentage of the population of children 
of that school age. The NER measures children of the appropriate age group enrolled in school as a percentage of the 
population of children at that school age. 
10 Note that specific data related to preschool education is not disaggregated from past national data. 
11Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2006). Education Policy. p.11
12Tanzania Millennium Development Goals. (September 2011). Country Report on the Millennium Development Goals. 
Dar es Salaam, p. 16 
2 
NER of 80.9%, while Unguja island’s NER was 93.2%. These data indicate that students in Pemba 
are enrolling in school later than learners in Unguja, especially those in the rural areas.13
Zanzibar’s NER is lower than GER largely due to the significant number of over-aged students 
matriculated.14 In order to address the over-age challenge, the new education policy officially 
lowered the Standard 1 entry from eight to six years of age and set the target of raising 
preschool (pre-primary) gross enrolment from 15.9% in 2005 to 35% by 2010.15 The ZEDP further 
set the target of “increased enrolment in public preschools to reach 30% by 2016 and expansion 
of enrolment to private preschools to reach 40% by 2016.”16
Gender balance in access and retention is another focus of the ZEDP. During the first period of 
the policy, between 2006 and 2009, gender parity in primary education remained stable, with 
49.9% males and 50.1% females enrolled in schooling.17 Although gender parity in gross 
enrollment had been achieved at the primary level by 2006, the Education Policy recognized the 
importance of ensuring the retention and progression of girls throughout secondary and tertiary 
levels, as potential gender inequalities caused by early marriages and pregnancies, household 
responsibilities, cultural values, and lack of resources for supporting female achievement and 
retention have led to gender disparities in enrolment in higher grades.18
 
Another major concern addressed in the Education Policy 
and subsequent ZEDP is the availability of primary and 
preschool education facilities. Efforts are being made by 
MoEVT and partners to increase the number of facilities 
(both public and private) to address overcrowding. 
Between 2006 and 2009, the number of primary schools 
increased by 25% from 185 to 232.19 By 2010 there were 
a total of 425 preschools in Zanzibar, and the number of 
preschools is steadily increasing, with a particularly rapid 
increase in the number of private pre-schools. Despite 
 
13Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2013). Zanzibar EMIS office 
under the Department of Policy, Planning and Research (DPPR). 
14USAID/Tanzania (2009). USAID/Tanzania Education Strategy for Improving the Quality of Education FY 2009-2012, p. 
2
15Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2006). Education Policy, 
p.11. Data on the gross enrollment is from the MKUZA;/ZSGRP (Zanzibar Strategy for Growth and Reduction of 
Poverty 2007-2010), as referenced in the ZEDP report: Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary 
Government of Zanzibar. (2007). Zanzibar Education Development Program 2008-2016, p.11.
16 Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2007). Zanzibar Education 
Development Program 2008-2016, p.59.
17 Ibid, p. 52 
18 Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2006). Education Policy. 
p.59
19Office of Chief Government Statistician, Zanzibar. (May 2010). Socio-Economic Survey, p. 49
“Preschool education was not 
compulsory in the past, so the 
Ministry neither had pre-schools nor 
qualified teachers at this level. RISE 
helped the Ministry to increase the 
pre-school coverage in remote areas 
in the same way as in town.” 
Director, Department of ICT in 
Education
3 
increases in education facilities, however, student to teacher ratios have only slightly changed, 
with an average of 29 students for every 1 teacher in 2006 to 28 students to 1 teacher in 2009.20
The teacher-student ratio is greater in primary schools than in secondary schools, and can reach 
as high as one teacher to 100 students in the early grades. Despite the progress that has been
made, a lack of sufficient facilities in some areas and the need for trained teachers to keep up 
with the expansion are still critical issues. 
Finally, the Education Policy and ZEDP are intended to address the overall quality of education. 
Formal test results are low for Zanzibar overall, with 2000 SACMEQ results showing that less 
than 3% of Standard VI (Grade 6) performed at adequate and proficient levels during a reading 
and mathematics assessment.21 While more students are matriculating at younger ages, their 
performance on high-stakes assessments and transition to secondary school is still a critical 
issue. 
THE RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS 
The Radio Instruction to Strengthen Education (RISE) and Zanzibar Teacher Upgrading by Radio 
(ZTUR) projects, hereafter referred to as RISE and ZTUR, were established to support the 
Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT) in its efforts to put early childhood 
development and education strategies from the 
2006 Education Policy into practice. Both 
projects were funded by USAID, and were 
implemented by Education Development Center 
(EDC) in partnership with MoEVT. The main 
objectives of RISE were to: 1) build the capacity 
of Zanzibar’s MoEVT staff in the area of early 
childhood development (ECD) and education; 
and 2) improve access to quality math, literacy 
and life skills instruction and materials for 
underserved children (preschool to Standard 2).
The primary objective of ZTUR was to develop a quality distance and open learning program 
through which in-service teachers can upgrade their skills and work towards preschool 
accreditation. RISE worked primarily in Zanzibar’s two lowest-performing districts (Micheweni 
District in Pemba and North A District in Unguja) between 2006 and 2010, and eventually 
expanded into the Zanzibar-wide teacher training and certification program implemented by 
ZTUR between 2010 and 2011. 
 
20 Ibid, 59 
21 The Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ) includes 17 countries in 
East, Central and Southern Africa. The SACMEQ provides the only consistent comparative information on regional 
education quality. 
4 
The key activities under RISE were: 
 Developing and piloting three series of Interactive Audio Instruction (IAI)22 programs
for preschool, Standard 1 and Standard 2 learners, including those in formal and non￾formal settings, with accompanying instructional and learning materials. The Tucheze 
Tujifunze23 IAI programs were carefully developed by Zanzibari educators and integrated 
math, life skills, and English and Kiswahili literacy lessons into comprehensive 30-minute 
programs. The IAI programs complemented the standard curriculum, engaged listeners 
through locally based stories and activities, and supported teachers with minimal ECD 
instructional experience. The programs were broadcast on the government-sponsored 
radio station as well as through portable media player technology. 
 Establishing over 180 Tucheze Tujifunze (TuTu) early childhood learning centers (TuTu 
Centers) in areas with poor access to early childhood development (ECD) and education. 
TuTu Centers offered non-formal 
preschool and Standard 1 education to the 
most vulnerable children in remote 
communities in two of Zanzibar’s ten 
districts. RISE staff trained local 
community members as mentors to guide 
learners through the TuTu broadcasts and 
post-broadcast activities in non-formal 
settings identified by the community. This 
intervention was known as the RISE Non￾formal School Model. In some pilot 
circumstances students received both non-formal TuTu programming after the formal 
school day in their formal RISE schools (Combination Model). However, this model was 
discontinued in 2009, based on results from the 2008 Impact Study. 
 Training formal Standard 1 and Standard 2 teachers in IAI pedagogy and how to utilize 
Tucheze Tujifunze lessons and materials in their classrooms. This intervention was 
known as the RISE Formal School Model. 
 Producing interactive videos for guiding teacher professional development in teaching 
English as a second language. 
 Building the capacity of a cadre of MoEVT educators to write and develop IAI programs 
and accompanying instructional and learning materials; produce audio and video 
 
22 IAI is an interactive teaching and learning methodology that promotes quality learning in diverse environments, 
including those with shortages of qualified teachers, school infrastructure, and learning materials. Based on child￾friendly instruction, which is inclusive, playful, active, and engaging, each 30-minute broadcast uses the formal 
Zanzibari curriculum as the foundational content and includes Kiswahili, math, English and basic life skills, integrating 
games, songs, and activities through a common story-line. The IAI programs encourage problem solving and self￾directed exploration. 
23Tucheze Tujifunze, translates as “Let’s Play, Let’s Learn” and TuTu is the name that is used locally to refer to the IAI 
programs.
5 
programs; and conduct monitoring and evaluation activities to measure fidelity of 
implementation and outcomes. 
 Training district MoEVT officials in IAI implementation, in addition to monitoring and 
evaluation. 
By the end of RISE, ECD opportunities had been provided to over 35,000 Zanzibari children,24
and the team had trained 809 formal teachers and non-formal facilitators in IAI pedagogy, 
classroom management and other key areas. The project also procured over 28,000 teaching 
and learning materials, ranging from portable media players to slates, manipulatives, and print 
materials. All print materials were developed by the cadre of MoEVT educators who were 
seconded as RISE staff and now compose the eLearning Division. 
The subsequent ZTUR Project was designed to further the ECD work started under RISE by 
creating a comprehensive preschool teacher certification program (through distance learning) to 
be implemented by MoEVT. The intention of the certification program (the Early Childhood 
Advancement Certification Program, or ECACP) is to provide in-service teachers with critical 
knowledge, skills, and practice through a distance learning platform administered through their 
local Teacher Centers, which are the in-service training centers located in each district. The 
ECACP program consists of audio, video and print materials that guide teachers through ECD 
instructional theory and practice, and support them as they actively apply their knowledge in 
their classrooms. 
The specific contents of the ECACP program are: 
a) a series of IAI programs, including activities 
in reading, math and science that embody 
best-practices, directed at teachers for use 
in their classrooms; 
b) a series of video-based self-directed 
learning modules (SDLM) that cover six key 
content areas25 and integrate theory as well 
as practice; 
c) print materials that accompany the teacher audio and video programs; and 
d) workbooks that guide teachers’ independent studies, cluster meetings and workshops. 
ZTUR also conducted a Zanzibar-wide needs assessment with stakeholders across Zanzibar 
identifying the gaps and opportunities for implementing successful preschool programming.26
 
24 Over 35,000 unique learners were reached. However, as some learners received multiple years of intervention 
(preschool, Standard 1 and Standard 2) the total of aggregated learners is 44,843.
25 These six key content areas are: child development; interpersonal communication and classroom management; 
play and early childhood curriculum; building and using teaching and learning materials in language, mathematics and 
science; assessment and reporting; and learners with special needs. 
6 
When the RISE and ZTUR Projects were handed over to MoEVT in March of 2011, the intention 
was to leave behind a sustainable ECD program. The leave-behinds included: a trained team of 
early grade and distance-learning experts, a community ECD model that could be sustained and 
replicated across the islands, and the foundation for an ECD teacher certification program that 
could be expanded upon, and implemented, by the MoEVT. This evaluation addresses the extent 
to which the goal of sustainability was met, and the extent to which lasting effects of RISE and 
ZTUR programming remain in the system. 
 
26 Downie, Bruce and Peter Mwaura. (January, 2010) Building Capacity for Pre-School Teaching: A Status Assessment 
and Recommendations for Teacher Training Programming. Reported was commissioned by the ZTUR project, with 
direct support from USAID.
7 
METHODOLOGY 
This study was designed as a follow on to and expansion of the RISE Project’s 2008 evaluation, 
which explored the effects of the intervention on participating students. The 2014 study tracks 
students from the 2008 sample to explore whether they have continued to enjoy a performance 
advantage over time, and adds an institutional evaluation of the extent to which the RISE and 
ZTUR programs have been sustained, integrated, and expanded under MoEVT. 
2008 EVALUATION
RISE’s 2008 evaluation was a quasi-experimental study measuring the learning gains of Standard 
1 learners who participated in the RISE activities in formal classrooms or non-formal Tucheze 
Tujifunze (TuTu) centers. It tested the hypothesis that the sample of RISE students would 
perform better on basic competency tests than a group of comparison students, as a result of 
the RISE intervention. The comparison group had similar characteristics, and were attending 
formal schools at a Standard 1 level, but they had not been exposed to RISE’s IAI programs. 
The study also analyzed the difference in RISE students’ performance according to the setting in 
which they received the intervention. In 2008, three different models were used to deliver 
Standard 1 Tucheze Tujifunze programming to students in Zanzibar: 
1. Non-Formal model: In remote communities, due to a lack of government schools, 
learners received preschool and Standard 1 Tucheze Tujifunze lessons in non-formal 
centers, which ranged in structure from non-permanent (i.e. under a tree) to permanent 
(i.e. local religious school classroom); 
2. Formal model: Learners received Standard 1 Tucheze Tujifunze lessons at the formal 
government schools that they were already attending; 
3. Combination model: Learners in this group received two years of exposure to Tucheze 
Tujifunze lessons; first at non-formal TuTu centers as preschool learners in 2007, and 
later in 2008 as formal Standard 1 learners who continued to attend Tucheze Tujifunze 
lessons at non-formal centers after their formal school day. 
The evaluation results showed that RISE’s learner beneficiaries outperformed comparison group 
learners by 7.5 points out of 75 total points (or 10%) overall on the Standard One-level 
assessment.27 Analysis of pre- and post-tests showed that the greatest subject gains were found 
in Kiswahili. Progress was also evident in English and math results, where scores had risen by 
about 2 and 2.5 points from pre-test to post-test, respectively, for RISE learners, over and above 
gains made by the comparison group learners. As for delivery models, learners in the formal 
 
27 These findings were confirmed by a positive program effect size of 0.55, which falls in the medium range. In other 
words, the mean of the treatment (IRI) group was at the 76th percentile of the comparison group.
8 
schools (Formal Model) had the greatest gains, followed by the RISE non-formal learners (Non￾formal Model); both groups had significant gains relative to the comparison group. 
2014 POST-PROJECT EVALUATION
This post-project evaluation expands on the 2008 study. The 2014 study was designed to assess 
the degree to which project transfer to the MoEVT was successful, and to analyze any 
observable long-term advantages in learning outcomes among learners that participated in RISE 
activities when they were in Standard 1. This evaluation was conducted three years after the 
RISE and ZTUR Projects were handed over to MoEVT Zanzibar and addressed the following 
questions: 
1. To what extent have the ZTUR and RISE Project activities been sustained or expanded 
under the leadership of MoEVT after the projects closed (March 2011)? 
2. Do learners that participated in IAI (Tucheze Tujifunze) programming perform higher at 
the end of their primary cycle (Standard 7) than those that did not participate? 
The study used a mixed-method design, namely a process (qualitative) and impact evaluation 
(quantitative). The process evaluation looked at what has been sustained, how it has been 
sustained, and what challenges and successes MoEVT has experienced in attempting to further 
programming since 2011. Interviews and surveys were conducted between March and June 
2014 with 94 individuals, including MoEVT officials from the central and district offices, Teacher 
Center staff, head teachers of RISE intervention schools, teachers that were trained in Tucheze 
Tujifunze programming (formal and non-formal), and learners that listened to the programs. 
The quantitative analysis looked at Standard 7 (equivalent to grade 7 in the United States) 
learner performance in literacy (Kiswahili and English) and math. The test was developed by the 
evaluation team based on an existing government exam. It was piloted in April 2014, and 
between May and June of 2014 the testing was conducted. The same sample of Standard 1 
learners who took part in the 2008 evaluation was used for the 2014 data collection, at which 
point the learners were at the end of their primary cycle (ranging from Standard 4 to 7). Of the 
total 1,543 learners from the 2008 sample, 904 (or 58.6%) were tested in 2014; including 552 
from the RISE group (Formal, Nonformal and Combination Models) and 352 from the 
comparison group (learners in a district with similar demographics that did not have direct 
exposure to the Tucheze Tujifunze programming). 
SAMPLE
Respondents for the structured key informant interviews (designed to address evaluation 
question 1 on the institutionalization of the program within the MoEVT) are listed in the table 
below by type (including MoEVT division). Respondents were selected to represent the range of 
actors and stakeholders involved in RISE and ZTUR programming. MoEVT management staff and 
9 
all Teacher Center staff in the two RISE target districts were interviewed, as were head teachers 
(principals) from all treatment schools in the sample, and a few of the comparison group 
schools. Teachers at the test schools and non-formal Mentors who were still teaching Standard 
1 were also interviewed from a random sample. Students were selected randomly from among 
the sampled schools on the two islands. 
TABLE 1. SAMPLE OF BENEFICIARIES WHO PARTICIPATED IN STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS (N=94) 
Division/
Type of respondent
Protocols (Tools) Location Sample
Central, District, MoEVT staff 
(management and ECD 
Division)
 Structured Interviews  Unguja (Central)
 Pemba
 6 officials/staff
 6 officials/staff
eLearning Department staff 
(former RISE/ZTUR staff)
 Focus Group 
Discussion
 Questionnaire
 Central Vuga Road
Office
 2 staff (director & 
head of M&E)
Teacher Center staff (tasked 
with implementing the 
certification program)
 Structured Interviews  Teacher Center staff 
in Unguja
 Teacher Center staff 
in Pemba
 2 in Unguja;
 3 in Pemba
Teachers and head teachers 
from Tucheze Tujifunze schools, 
comparison schools and non￾formal TuTu centers
 Questionnaires  Micheweni Pemba
 North A Unguja (all 
from form RISE 
supported schools)
 24 head teachers 
(12 Unguja; 12 
Pemba)
 17 teacher (8 
Unguja; 9 Pemba)
TuTu Center mentors 
(facilitators)
 Structured Interviews  Micheweni Pemba
 North A Unguja
 10 mentors (8 
Pemba, 2 Unguja)
Former RISE learners
(participated in TuTu
schools/centers in 2008)
 Structured Interviews  Micheweni Pemba
 North A Unguja
 24 total learners 
(10 Unguja; 14
Pemba)
To answer the second evaluation question (on learning outcomes), learners who were assessed 
against Standard 1 basic competencies in 2008 were tested again in 2014 using a standard 
equivalency exam, which was based on an official Standard 7 National exam paper. The 2014 
sample was nearly evenly divided by island, with 47% of assessed learners from Pemba and 52% 
from Unguja. Approximately 59% of students from the original sample were found and included 
in this evaluation. Slightly more students from the comparison group (63.4%) were found and 
included in this study than the intervention group (55.9%). Within the intervention group, fewer 
students from the RISE non-formal and combination intervention models could be located than 
from the formal government school model. Consequently, the study team made a decision to 
combine students from RISE in non-formal and combination models into a “mixed” group for the 
2014 analysis. 
Table 2 shows the description of the 2008 sample and the 2014 sample. 
10
TABLE 2. SAMPLE BY STUDY GROUP AND ISLAND 
ISLAND Year Comparison 
group
RISE formal RISE non￾formal
RISE 
combination TOTAL
Pemba
2008 261 252 141 110 764
2014 170 124 132 (“mixed”) 426
Unguja
2008 294 274 128 83 779
2014 182 167 129 (“mixed”) 478
Total
2008 555 526 269 193 1543
2014 352 291 261 (“mixed”) 904
DATA COLLECTION (PROCESS AND TOOLS) 
Qualitative data were collected by an independent Zanzibari researcher who had no prior 
knowledge of or relationship to the RISE and ZTUR projects. Structured interview forms, a focus 
group protocol, and an informant questionnaire were developed specifically for these activities. 
The administration of the learner tests in 2014 was managed by the same team of MoEVT 
officials and eLearning staff as in the 2008 evaluation. Whereas the Standard 1 test was 
administered in a combination of oral and written formats in 2008 to accommodate the age￾level of the learners, only a written test, using the format of the national Standard 7 exam, was 
administered in 2014. 
The 2014 testing was overseen by seven MoEVT staff from a mixture of six departments, all of 
which collaborate with the eLearning Division. These departments included: 
 Department of ICT in Education 
 Department of Pre-School and Primary Education 
 Zanzibar Institute of Education (curriculum and materials content development) 
 Department of Teacher Training 
 Central Library 
 District Education Offices 
11
The 2014 assessors attended a two-day training, facilitated by the former ZTUR Director/Chief of 
Party and the current eLearning Division Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, who coordinated 
the 2008 evaluation activities. 
DATA ANALYSIS 
Data from in-depth interviews were analyzed using principles of content analysis28 and 
grounded theory.29 During the first stage of data analysis, all data were coded according to pre￾determined questions. The analysis began with some initial codes (based on the well-tested 
semi-structured protocol employed for the study), which were revised throughout the analysis, 
and each transcription was marked with the appropriate codes. However, whenever relevant 
information was found that was not congruent with any of the existing codes, a new code was 
added. The central higher-order codes remained the same throughout the analysis process, and 
only lower-order codes went through fine-tuning. 
Only students who were tested in both 2008 and 2014 were included in the learner assessment 
data analysis. All data analyses were disaggregated by sex and study group (RISE formal, RISE 
mixed (non-formal), and comparison group). Assessment data were analyzed utilizing standard 
statistical methods. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were used for different 
analytical purposes. Central tendency analyses (mean, median) were used for continuous 
demographic variables. Comparison of means statistical tests (independent samples t-test) 
were conducted on the results between different study groups, as well as between assessment 
results of males and females. Bivariate statistical analyses (e.g., correlations) were conducted to 
examine the relationship between different variables. Multivariate analyses (regression) were 
used to determine relationships between variables. The null hypothesis is that there is no 
significance in gain score between the baseline and the subsequent measurements. The 
probability that the null hypothesis is true (the p-value) was determined on the basis of the t
score. Finally, the p-value was compared to the predetermined .05 significance level. 
LIMITATIONS 
Quasi-experimental design: In 2008, it was not possible to randomize learners into participants 
and non-participants as the target districts were identified prior to the implementation of RISE 
activities and the intervention included all schools in the two target districts. Therefore, the 
strength of attribution of observed outcomes to the programming is somewhat reduced due to 
the selection bias. The comparison group was comprised of the students from formal schools, 
which is only directly comparable to the “RISE formal schools” intervention group.
 
28 A content analysis approach assumes a coding frame based on a set of predefined categories for which evidence is 
sought in the data. 
29 A grounded theory approach assumes that the explanatory framework is developed through the process of analysis 
rather than based on a predetermined set of categories. 
12
Data points: Data were collected in 2008 and again in 2014, with no formal contact by 
evaluators with this group of learners occurring in the interim. More data would have helped 
address issues of maturation and identify contextual factors that are likely to have influenced 
learner performance. 
Social factors and context: Research indicates that social factors (i.e. parent/household 
demographics, family’s educational values, etc.) are important in understanding and 
interpreting the findings of studies such as these. However, it was not possible in either of the 
data collections to collect household level data, given the limited resources and time 
constraints. 
Attrition: Tracking the sample group across time posed a number of challenges. Nearly 59% of 
learners were recovered in the 2014 sample six years later, but it was not possible to determine 
what happened to the over 40% of learners that were not traced. The evaluation team was able 
to identify a few major factors that may have accounted for attrition: 1) movement to other 
schools, districts or regions; 2) drop-out from school; 3) absent on the day of the testing and 4) 
accidents/disasters, including a ferry accident in September 2011 that claimed 1000 total lives, 
including two mentors and at least five children from the 2008 sample. 
13
FINDINGS 
The study’s findings are divided into two sections: 1) Institutional Transfer and Sustainability, 
and 2) Learner Performance. In the first section, findings are reported based on relevance to the 
Zanzibar Education Policy and Development Programme and sustainability after the transfer to 
MoEVT. In the second, the sustained RISE effect on student achievement is examined. 
14
FINDINGS: INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFER AND 
SUSTAINABILITY OF RISE AND ZTUR PROJECTS 
RELEVANCE TO THE ZANZIBAR EDUCATION POLICY AND ZANZIBAR EDUCATION 
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (ZEDP)
The RISE and ZTUR projects were designed to be directly aligned with the following areas in the 
Education Policy: 30
 
TABLE 3: ALIGNMENT OF RISE/ZTUR ACTIVITIES TO POLICY AREAS 
Education Policy Area RISE or ZTUR Activities (Post-project)
 Merging the existing strengths 
reflected in the government 
infrastructure and teacher 
qualification with the strong good 
practices in community-based 
schools, especially in modes of 
delivery and teacher-student
interaction
 Introduction of the Interactive Audio Instruction 
methodology
 Integrating child-centered classrooms and 
effective teacher-learner interaction with the 
Zanzibar learner and teacher curricula through 
RISE teacher/mentor training and the ZTUR 
ECACP
 Establishment of satellite preschools  Establishment of 180 community (satellite) TuTu
Centers (with preschool and Standard 1 classes)
 Establishment of a community preschool model
 Improving ECD training  Development of the ECACP ECD training for in￾service teachers
 Ensuring that the community fully 
participates in the management of 
the school with regard to both 
enhancement of curriculum content 
and management of resources 
 Prior to starting up community preschools (TuTu 
Centers), holding a community mobilization 
meeting to arrive at a joint management plan for 
establishing and supporting the center
 Training of school management committees 
(SMCs) to ensure they are supporting TuTu
Centers in addition to the formal schools; 
ensuring presence at facilitator and teacher 
trainings
 Creating programs to acquaint 
children with ICT as early as possible
 Creating audio programs to orient educators and
learners to radio and portable media player 
technology
While RISE and ZTUR were not involved in construction of formal preschool classrooms and 
playgrounds, school feeding, or dental health programming (the main activities outlined in 
ZEDP), RISE did support ZEDP’s efforts to “conduct awareness campaigns and provide incentives 
 
30 Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2006). Education Policy.
15
for establishing preschools”31 through its community 
mobilization meetings and by working with communities 
to identify volunteers and space for establishing non￾formal preschools. In addition, during the development 
of the ECACP training program, ZTUR also addressed 
“criteria for preschools” in the ECD Working Group. This 
Working Group was established by ZTUR staff in 
partnership with the Aga Khan Foundation’s staff from 
the Zanzibar Madrassa Resource Programme. Other 
members of the working group were the Ministry of 
Health and Social Welfare; Ministry of Youth, 
Employment, Women and Children Development; Save 
the Children; the Zanzibar Association for People with Disability; and Voluntary Services 
Overseas.
SUSTAINABILITY OF RISE AND ZTUR ACTIVITIES AFTER TRANSFER TO MOEVT
The greatest accomplishment in sustaining the efforts of 
the RISE and ZTUR Projects was establishing the 
eLearning Division within the MoEVT. The projects’ 
space, team and equipment became the eLearning 
Division under the Department of Information and 
Communication Technology (ICT) in Education.32 The 
Department of ICT in Education is one of eight MoEVT 
departments and was created in 2010/2011 to integrate 
ICT into basic education in Zanzibar. According to the 
MoEVT, the establishment of this department was a key 
step in the implementation of the 2006 Education Policy 
goal of employing ICT across the education system.
The eLearning Division’s mandate is to: 
 train the staff of all divisions and sections in ICT, including schools, teaching colleges, 
and libraries; 
 integrate ICT into teaching and instruction; 
 conduct seminars and training (long and short-term) on how to use ICT in Ministry work 
(i.e. communications and management); and 
 ensure that MoEVT divisions are working together in the areas of ICT33
 
31 Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2007). Zanzibar Education 
Development Program 2008-2016, p. 60.
32Initially called the Training Division, eLearning became the official name in 2012. 
33 Summarized from website. MoEVT, Zanzibar. (2014). Accessed on November 2, 2014. 
http://www.moez.go.tz/?cq=dept&dept=10 
“I think the fact that MoEVT 
continue to support and manage 
this [RISE] project is an indication 
that there was a very good 
relationship between the Ministry 
and RISE. The Ministry has 
allowed its teachers to continue 
using tools, reading materials and 
other skills acquired from RISE in 
their day to day teaching and 
learning.” eLearning District 
Coordinator, Micheweni, Pemba
“The most important and effective 
aspect of this [RISE and ZTUR] 
project was its participatory 
approach, by which community 
members were directly engaged 
in searching for areas to be used 
as Learning Centers as well as 
identifying mentors that come 
from the communities 
themselves.”
District Education Officer (DEO), 
North A, Unguja
16
The table and text that follow provide additional detail on the extent to which the key project 
components of RISE and ZTUR have been institutionalized and sustained 3 years post-project, 
based on interviews with key staff in the eLearning Division and the Director of the Department 
of ICT in Education at the MoEVT. 
TABLE 4: KEY PROJECT COMPONENTS AND CURRENT POST-PROJECT STATUS 
Key project 
components
March 2010/11 (end of RISE and 
ZTUR)
April 2014
I. Policy and Ministry Level 
1. Establish an
eLearning 
division under 
MoEVT, with a 
trained team
- RISE/ZTUR team of 11 MoEVT 
seconded technical staff were 
trained and became the eLearning 
Division (after initially being called 
the ICT Division)
- eLearning Division currently has 14
staff (12 worked with RISE/ZTUR in 
some capacity). 
2. Create synergy 
with other 
divisions in 
MoEVT
- eLearning was collaborating with 4 
divisions: 1) Teacher Training, 2) 
Preschool, 3) Primary, and 4) 
Department of Curriculum (now 
Zanzibar Institute of Education)
- eLearning is collaborating with 4 
original divisions plus 3 new 
divisions: 5) Technical Division 
under Department of ICT in 
Education, 6) Inspectorate, and 7) 
Inclusive Education Unit
3. Develop the 
Early Childhood 
Advancement 
Certificate 
Program (ECACP)
- first module developed, materials 
distributed to Teacher Centers, and 
Teacher Center staff trained
- MoEVT had not yet figured out the 
logistics of program 
implementation
- certification training started in 2014 
with trainers of ECD teachers. 350 
formal teachers in 10 districts are 
about to start 2 years (includes field 
practice) of ECACP; 30 Trainers have 
been trained. 
4. Establish 
Tucheze Tujifunze
centers & schools 
- 180 non-formal TuTu centers 
established
- Centers were supposed to cap at 
25-30 students
- 264 formal Standard 1 & 2 
classrooms using TuTu materials
- 179 out of 180 original non-formal 
TuTu Centers still open
- 51 new centers being opened in 2 
new districts (with GPE support)
- Issues of up to 80 learners/new 
center
- no TuTu materials are currently 
being used in formal classrooms
5. Set up a
mentor payment 
system
- mentors paid equivalent of $20 a 
month
- payments transferred to MoEVT 
budget
- mentor payment increased by 33% 
- payments still in MoEVT budget
II. Training
6a. Train TuTu
Center 
facilitators (non￾formal mentors) 
in TuTu 
programming
- RISE (Tucheze Tujifunze) training 
program included initial training 
and 2 refreshers each year
- 430 mentors trained
- two trainings for former mentors 
have taken place since project 
closed
- two trainings for new mentors in 51
new (25 in Pemba) centers started 
in March 2014 (using GPE funds)
17
6b. Train formal 
school teachers 
in TuTu 
programming 
- 273 teachers trained - no additional training
6c. Train school 
management 
committees
(SMCs) and 
officials
- 138 SMC members trained (in 
original TuTu Centers)
- 182 head teachers and MoEVT 
officials trained
- no training for committees has 
taken place and no follow-up 
support in pedagogy and instruction 
III. Development and Delivery of Materials
7. Audio and 
video programs 
(for learners and 
educators)
produced
- 3 Tucheze Tujifunze series 
developed (preschool to Standard 
2)
- first of six ECACP training videos
produced; 3 others designed (4 
videos produced)
- produced 2 IAI teacher series
- produced English Language 
Instruction for Standard 1 teachers
- play-to-learn was catching on 
- preschool series #2 in process
- two preschool teacher training 
modules produced (using UNICEF 
funds)
- fourth module is being developed 
and modules 5/6 to be ready by 
2016
- Tucheze Tujifunze (play-to-learn) 
pedagogy has become well￾accepted by education community 
and parents
9. Broadcasting - 3 series broadcast 3 days/week 
under state-run station; no direct 
charge
- programs broadcast for no direct 
charge until December 2013
- in Feb 2014 station was semi￾privatized and stopped 
broadcasting; programs were off air 
from 11 February - 28 May 2014.
- Airing programs resumed from 29 
May 2014. All programs (including 
preschool and primary) are now 
being aired by ZBC.
10. Print and 
technology 
materials 
developed and 
distributed
- 18,892 print materials for 
classroom packages distributed
- 5,637 print materials for ECACP 
packages distributed
- 1,752 wind-up, solar radios and 
portable audio players (with 
integrated Mp3s) for schools and 
TuTu Centers distributed
- 14 technology and materials kits 
for Teacher Centers 
- no materials printed or distributed 
to old sites
- 51 copies of Mentor’s Guides and 
Learner Materials to be distributed 
to new centers (through GPE)
IV. Monitoring and Evaluation
18
11. Monitoring - 6 coordinators overseeing two 
districts; paid by the project but 
employed by MoEVT.
- 1 M&E coordinator in central 
project offices
- each center and school was to be 
monitored each quarter per a set 
schedule
- 6 coordinators overseeing four
districts (4 in Unguja, 2 in Pemba); 
coordinators are employed and paid
by MoEVT.
- 2 M&E coordinators in central 
project offices
- not enough resources to visit 
centers and schools regularly, so 
actual monitoring is limited. 
13. Evaluation - impact evaluation of grade 1 
student learning conducted in 2008
- no further evaluations conducted
POLICY AND MINISTRY LEVEL EFFECTS
1. Establish an eLearning Division under MoEVT, with a trained team 
The RISE and ZTUR teams officially became the eLearning Division in 2010/11. Currently there 
are 14 technical team members and one administration staff person in the Division. The Head of 
the eLearning Division was previously the RISE and ZTUR Lead Materials Development 
Specialist/Training Coordinator, and assumed leadership of the division at the close of the 
projects. She reports directly to the Director of the Department of ICT in Education, MoEVT 
Zanzibar. 
Of the 14 current technical staff, nine were part of the original RISE team as MoEVT-seconded 
trainers, scriptwriters, and studio team members. Of the remaining five, three joined the 
RISE/ZTUR team in varying capacities in 2008, and officially joined the eLearning Division in 
2011. Before joining the division officially they were: a former RISE/ZTUR video teacher, a 
Ministry ICT staff member trained in RISE studio production, and a Standard 1 teacher from the 
RISE IAI pilot school (the formative evaluation site for the IAI programs as they were being 
developed). The only two members new to the team are a former primary school teacher who 
was trained in writing radio scripts by the eLearning Division, and a staff member from the ICT in 
Education Division who has been trained in studio production. Of the original RISE/ZTUR-MoEVT 
team, only one staff member, a studio producer, has transferred to a different MoEVT 
department. 
In the interviews conducted with the eLearning Division staff for this evaluation, all identified a 
need to have more professional development in distance and eLearning now that their scope of 
work has been clearly defined. The eLearning division is tasked with all technology and 
professional development for MoEVT, but has limited knowledge outside of development of 
print, audio and video materials. They also see the immediate need for integrating new 
technologies, specifically mobile phones, into their division, in order to share content and 
training materials with schools and teachers and to better monitor schools. As the team has no 
19
prior experience with mobile phone technology for technical and M&E purposes, this is a critical 
area of needed support. 
As the eLearning Division moves forward, their planned activities continue to build on the 
foundational activities established under the RISE and ZTUR Projects. According to the Director 
of eLearning (Interview, 12 May 2014), 2014-2015 plans for the Division include: 
 Developing an additional year of Tucheze Tujifunze preschool programs
 Continuing to produce the ECACP video models: ZTUR completed the first of six Self￾directed Learning Modules (SDLM) with four completed videos; UNICEF funded modules 
2 and 3; and the 4th module is currently being developed. The last two modules are to 
be completed by 2016; 
 Monitoring and establishing Tucheze Tujifunze Centers: The Division will monitor the 
179 existing TuTu centers, and establish 51 new centers in two new districts: Unguja’s 
North B and Pemba’s Mkoani. Establishment of new centers includes community 
mobilization, mentor (facilitator) trainings, sensitization of head teachers and officials, 
material printing and distribution, procurement of radios, and other activities. Support 
for this activity is coming from the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) 
 Developing math and science programming: In the future, the team will be developing 
math and science programs for primary school and eventually for secondary and above. 
2. Create synergy with other divisions in MoEVT 
The Department of ICT in Education meets weekly with all four divisions. Cross-division meetings 
hosted by MoEVT are held twice a year. The eLearning Division is expected to collaborate with 
the following five MoEVT divisions/units: 
1. Teacher Training (for training of facilitators and teachers and pedagogy); 
2. Preschool (in the areas of materials and planning centers); 
3. Primary (in the areas of materials and trainings);
4. Zanzibar Institute of Education (for the content of teacher and learner programs and 
curriculum); 
5. Technical Division under the Department of ICT in education; 
6. Chief Inspectorate Office (less direct collaboration); and 
7. Inclusive Education Unit (for content to serve students with special needs) 
One change since 2011 is that Inspectors SMCs, which are equivalent to parent teacher 
associations, were officially made responsible for overseeing the new TuTu Centers. In 
accordance with this mandate, the eLearning Division has been trying to integrate inspectors 
into current and future trainings to ensure that they have more knowledge and ownership of 
the TuTu Centers. However, it was reported during this evaluation that inspectors have not yet 
begun monitoring TuTu Centers as part of their regular work load. 
In addition to new collaborations with the Inspectorate, the eLearning Division has also begun 
inviting the Inclusive Education Unit (IEU) to participate in current and future trainings. In 
20
“I would like to call upon all teachers in 
preschools, or those who will teach 
preschools in future, to take advantage of 
building their capacity through in-service 
training ECCP [ECACP]. I personally 
promise that those teachers passing 
through this training program will be duly 
recognized.”
Honorable Ramadhan A. Shabaan
Minister, MoEVT (2011)
theory, the IEU will also help with future content development. However, its participation until 
now has been limited because clear activities and guidelines for collaboration are not yet in 
place. 
3. Develop the Early Childhood Advancement Certificate Program (ECACP) 
One of the main concerns in the ZEDP34 regarding the implementation of the pre-primary policy 
was a lack of trained preschool teachers. Preparing an adequate supply of trained teachers is 
one of the critical steps in ensuring that compulsory preschool education across Zanzibar is 
provided to all children. As the ZEDP plan describes: 
Enrollment at the preschool level of education is still low and teacher quality is inadequate. One 
area that needs special attention is childhood care and development, a concept that 
encompasses all children, from nine months to the time these children enter primary schools. 
Interventions in this regard would include developing a holistic approach to cover care, nutrition, 
health and education. (MoEVT, 2007, 12) 
The original intent of developing the ECACP under ZTUR was to help MoEVT address the 
shortage of trained preschool teachers35. The ECACP 
uses a distance-learning model to reach in-service 
primary school teachers throughout the islands with 
the ultimate goal of providing them with the 
additional skills and credentials needed to teach a 
preschool curriculum. The distance-learning 
methods consist of audio (Chezesha Ufundisha IAI 
programs), video (Self-Directed Learning Modules) 
and print materials, integrated with short-term and 
intensive trainings and peer support/mentoring 
through cluster meetings. The coursework is 
facilitated and overseen by MoEVT’s ten Teacher Centers, which are the in-service training 
centers located in each district. Although the majority of the ECACP design and materials was 
developed under ZTUR, the certification program was rolled out in seven Teacher Centers early 
in 2014. 36 Currently, support is being provided by the GPE to implement ECACP across Zanzibar. 
 
34 The term preschool is used in this document, as there are few activities and guidance provided for children aged 
birth to three in the pre-primary section of the Education Policy and ZEDP. 
35 Another advancement made in the last year is the decision to pay MoEVT-employed preschool teachers the same 
as primary school teachers. In 2010-11, at the time ZTUR was being implemented, preschool teachers were being paid 
less than the primary school teachers, which was a disincentive for joining the preschool teaching force. 
36Centers include: Kiembe, Samaki, Bububu, Mkwajuni, Dunga, Kitungoni, Mizingani-Mkoani. 
21
The ECACP is structured as follows: 
 Step 1: Complete the Aga Khan Foundation-Zanzibar Madrassa Resource Program 
preschool teacher training (2 years) OR Obtain a primary school teaching certificate 
 Step 2: Complete the ECACP distance training, which includes the audio trainings, video 
modules (SDLM), and independent and cluster group work (completion varies from 1.5 
to 2 years) 
 Step 3: Receive Certificate 
 Step 4: Obtain appointment as a Preschool Teacher or Trainer of Trainers (includes 
individuals who are under the Teacher Training Division) 
ECACP consists of 607 core hours, to be completed over one or two years, depending on the 
pace of the teacher participant. Teacher participants include: a) Certified and in-service primary 
teachers who will teach preschool; and b) In-service preschool teachers who require 
certification. At the time of this study, there were 352 teachers from all ten districts going 
through step 1 and 26 trainers had been trained by the e-Learning Division and Aga Khan 
Foundation. All 26 trainers had received ECD certificates from Aga Khan Foundation. Over 700 
teacher participants are expected to benefit from the ECACP, starting in 2014. 
Understandably it took a number of years for MoEVT to roll ECACP out, as they had to identify 
preschool advisors for the Teacher Centers, approve the curriculum and program requirements, 
and come to agreements across all the concerned divisions and departments. However, 
momentum and awareness now need to be rekindled, as nearly three years have passed 
between the initial Teacher Center staff’s ECACP orientation in 2011 and the roll-out of the 
official training (2014-2015). It was evident during the interviews with Teacher Center staff that 
not all districts have the same understanding and information about ECACP, and some effort 
needs to be made to get everyone on the same page. Additional follow up in 2015, when ECACP 
is fully rolled-out, would be useful for assessing whether the ZTUR-distributed materials and 
equipment are indeed being used for the training. 
4. Establish Tucheze Tujifunze (TuTu) centers and schools 
Under RISE, 180 non-formal TuTu Centers were established in communities across two of 
Zanzibar’s ten districts: Micheweni (in Pemba) and North A (in Unguja). The centers reached 
over 20,000 non-formal preschool and Standard 1 learners over the course of the project. 
One of the first steps in establishing the centers was mobilizing the communities to make sure 
they were 1) ready to accept the Tucheze Tujifunze preschool and Standard 1 out-of-school 
model and 2) willing to provide structures for the non-formal centers, volunteers to serve on the 
SMCs, and mentors to lead the classes. RISE did not provide any direct financial resources for 
building centers, but did help provide communities with a design for simple cost-effective 
structures and linked some of them to local hotels and donors that could provide materials. 
Even so, one of the major concerns during the duration of RISE was the physical infrastructure of 
the preschool classes. Approximately 8% of the non-formal TuTu Centers (15 out of 180) were 
22
situated in non-permanent structures in open environments, which was especially problematic 
on rainy days when the spaces were not usable. 
As of 2014, 179 of the original 180 centers are still 
in existence, and some efforts have been made to 
help build more permanent spaces for the centers 
that were in non-permanent structures. Post-RISE, 
the eLearning Division is also in the process of 
opening up an additional 51 centers in two new 
districts (Mkoani in Pemba and North B in Unguja) 
with the support of the GPE. GPE will fund 40% of 
preschool classroom construction (roofing and 
some cement), mentor training , and printing and distribution of learning and teaching 
materials. The communities are expected to contribute the remaining 60% of the costs of 
classroom construction (materials and labor). MoEVT will be responsible for community 
mobilization and monthly stipends for mentors. Although the Education Policy sets the goal of 
ensuring that every primary school has a preschool, this goal is still far from being achieved, and 
even those that do exist are often too far away for children to reach. Therefore the need for 
non-formal preschools remains high. Of the 24 formal school head teachers surveyed for this 
evaluation, only 30% reported actually having preschool classrooms at their schools. Although 
this sample is not representative of Zanzibar, it confirms that more funding for preschool 
infrastructure and programming is critical. 
While the Tu Tu Centers remain strong, the Tucheze Tujifunze formal schools have not been as 
successfully sustained. Few of the original 136 Standard 1 and 2 classrooms (in 65 schools) 
receiving technology, print materials, training and other support under RISE are still using the 
resources as intended. During RISE, Tucheze Tujifunze programming had reached over 20,000 
Standard 1 and 2 learners. Interestingly, although the staff at the eLearning Division reported 
that no schools were currently listening to the TuTu programs, 33% of the head teachers 
surveyed reported that their learners were actually listening, even if not regularly. And of the 
schools listening to the TuTu programs, all but one rated the programs as “very important” to 
their efforts (the remaining school rated the program as “somewhat important”).
The major reason that schools are not listening to programs is a breakdown in technology and 
broadcasting. Of the schools that were not listening to the programs, over 75% attributed not 
listening to problems with the operation of the radios. 100% of the surveyed schools had two or 
more radios and the majority (65%) of schools had at least 5 radios. However, only 50% of these 
radios were reported to be functioning. 
23
FIGURE 1. PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOLS WITH TWO OR MORE RADIOS (N=24) 
In the last wave of distribution of by RISE in 2011, the company manufacturing the radios had 
gone through major business and leadership changes, which affected the release date and 
quality of the wind-up, solar charged, portable audio player devices (with integrated Mp3). The 
shipment of the 1,000 devices was delayed over seven months because of manufacturing and 
customs issues, and as a consequence devices were distributed the week before the projects 
were transferred to MoEVT. Thus, there was no time for the ZTUR project team to conduct 
quality assurance and testing of the devices. Although some schools have figured out ways to 
fix their radios on their own since 2011, the quality of the last wave of audio devices has been a 
major challenge to sustaining listenership. Furthermore, MoEVT has not provided on-going 
maintenance or IT support to address these issues. As of May 2014, MoEVT was working on 
procuring more radios for new centers, but had no plans for fixing the old radios or putting in 
place a technology maintenance plan. 
In addition to problems with technology, another notable issue affecting the utilization of 
programming in formal schools was the challenge of fitting the Tucheze Tujifunze programming 
into the primary school curriculum and timetable. According to one head teacher, the primary 
school timetable has gotten denser, but there is no strategy for re-integrating the programs into 
the new schedule. This head teacher also noted that the USAID-funded Tanzania 21st Century 
(TZ21) Project, which introduced new content into the primary school curriculum, was an 
additional challenge to the timetable. TZ21 curriculum changes were not coordinated with other 
programming, such as Tucheze Tujifunze, when they were developed.37 As one head teacher 
suggested, “MoEVT needs to be more top-down and give the official word to schools that they 
should be using the [TuTu] programs.” As the curriculum moves from five to eight subjects by 
2016, and there are new projects targeting early grades with new content, it is critical that 
MoEVT look deeply at the timetable issue and make recommendations to schools about how to 
structure and integrate traditional content and ICT programming. 
 
37 The TZ21 project provided technical assistance to the Tanzanian MoEVT in Zanzibar with comprehensive, localized, 
interactive digital student learning materials, called “e-Content”, which were designed and implemented in lower 
primary schools, along with corresponding teacher training materials to facilitate application of the e-Content through 
child-centered learning. 
13.0%
4.3%
17.4%
30.4%
17.4%
13.0%
4.3%
2 radios
3 radios
4 radios
5 radios
6 radios
7 radios
8 radios
24
During the first year that Tucheze Tujifunze programs were on air (2007-2008), there were 
challenges in some communities in Unguja, and a few in Pemba, who were reluctant to accept 
the play-to-learn model and ECD pedagogy that encourages interactive and playful learning, 
rhythms, and gender-mixed classrooms. During the first year of implementation, community 
and religious members also expressed concern that the programs did not explicitly involve 
religious teachings or references, and instead involved rhythms or music which could be 
considered religiously unacceptable. Some critics also felt that play-based learning was not 
effective—they believed that preschoolers should focus on reading and writing. Religious and 
pedagogical objections to the programming were less of a concern in 2010/11 when the projects 
closed, likely due to the extensive efforts by the RISE and MoEVT team in sensitizing community 
members to the importance of ECD and working with religious leaders to vet the programming. 
However, one head teacher interviewed in 2014 noted that religious concerns of parents and 
the community about Tucheze Tujifunze programming have continued to be a challenge. 
According to this head teacher, parents feel that “the programs are missing religion. Islam is not 
in them. It would be good for the children who listen to the programs to have religious topics 
integrated, for the programs to be acceptable.” Another head teacher identified the need for 
on-going mobilization of the community to ensure that the importance of ECD and Tucheze 
Tujifunze programming is clear to caregivers. The fact that head teachers are still reporting 
issues with community acceptance of ECD and the Tucheze Tujifunze programming signals the 
need for ongoing community mobilization and sensitization when expanding the programming. 
During RISE, it became clear that many teachers and head teachers were not clear on the 
Zanzibar curriculum, which includes a coast ecology component in Standard 1 and 2; nor did 
they have access to any of the materials. Comments by some mentors interviewed in 2014 show 
that this trend has continued, as they commented that marine life content in the RISE programs 
was not suitable for their communities, as they were not directly living on the sea38
. 
5. Set up a TuTu Center mentor payment system 
One particular success of the RISE/ZTUR programming in the last year of implementation was 
working with MoEVT to integrate payments for TuTu Center mentors into the Ministry’s annual 
budget. In July 2010, MoEVT assumed payment of mentors, and since that time the eLearning 
Division has systematically managed the monthly payments to mentors. Of the ten mentors 
surveyed for this evaluation, 100% reported receiving their payments on time. Between 2006 
and 2011, mentors were paid the equivalent of $20 a month for a volunteer stipend, which was 
in-line with MoEVT’s policy for paying alternative education mentors and facilitators. In July 
2013 the amount was increased from TSh 20,000 to TSh 30,000. Although the new amount is 
 
38 It should be noted that, given the size of Zanzibar, no community can be more than 43 kilometers away from the 
sea. Unguja is 85 Kilometers (kms) long and 39 kms wide, while Pemba is 67 Kms long and 23 Kms wide. Zanzinet, 
“About Zanzibar,” http://www.zanzinet.org/zanzibar/visiwa.html
25
still equivalent in 2014 to $20 due to inflation, the augmentation of mentor remuneration is 
evidence of the division’s commitment to providing continued support to its mentors.39
 
TRAINING 
6. Train Mentors, Teachers, Head Teachers, SMCs and MoEVT officials 
Under RISE, the team provided an initial training of three to four days for new TuTu Center 
mentors, followed by two follow up trainings of one to two days each. Every year there were 
refresher trainings for returning mentors. RISE also held annual two-day trainings for new 
Standard 1 and 2 teachers, and a one-day follow-up training. Ever year of the project, refresher 
trainings were provided. In addition to training the mentors and trainers facilitating the 
programs, RISE also trained head teachers, MoEVT officials (Teacher Center advisors and District 
leaders), and SMCs, to ensure that there was continued management and pedagogical support 
available to mentors and teachers. Over the life of the project, RISE trained 430 mentors, 273 
Standard 1 and 2 teachers, 182 head teachers and MoEVT officials, and 138 members of SMCs. 
This continuous training model has not been sustained, largely because of a lack of allocated 
funds for training. However, according to the eLearning Division respondents, two trainings took 
place in early 2014 to train the new mentors for the 51 newly established centers. Funds were 
provided by GPE. By 2016, the GPE has the following plans: open 120 new centers (60 Mkoani, 
60 North B), provide materials and training to 240 mentors, and record 200 preschool programs, 
with hope that MoEVT will broadcast them, and buy 120 mp3 radios for the 129 new centers. 
Sustaining access and quality of Tucheze Tujifunze programming is a challenge with high teacher 
turnover. Formal schools experience fairly high teacher turnover as teachers are consistently 
trying to move up to work with older learners (upper elementary or secondary) because the pay 
is higher for upper grade levels. Another contributing factor to teacher turnover is female 
teachers marrying and moving to other locations to 
be with their spouses. For non-formal mentors, major 
turnover is due to their volunteer status and minimal 
stipend; as they increase their skills and confidence, 
they find other opportunities that pay more. As a 
result, under RISE the team was training a new cohort 
of formal preschool, Standard 1 and 2 teachers 
annually to replace those that had moved or left 
teaching. Consequently, regular trainings and 
monitoring are critical to ensuring that the quality of 
implementation remains high. At present, with no 
 
39 In 2013, MoEVT officials reported to EDC that a group of Tucheze Tujifunze mentors converged on the lawn of the 
central MoEVT offices in Stone Town to demand greater recognition, certification and pay. It is not clear if increases in 
stipends are related to this event. 
26
formal training schedule for existing centers and schools, teachers and mentors have not been 
consistently and regularly trained or monitored since 2011, and teaching quality was perceived 
as low by MoEVT staff at all levels and by head teachers who participated in interviews. 
DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY OF MATERIALS 
7. Audio and video program development (for learners and educators) 
Perhaps the most time and resource-intensive activity of RISE and ZTUR, beyond the trainings,
was the development of the Tucheze Tujifunze IAI programs and accompanying print materials, 
and the interactive video programs: RISE’s English Language Training series and ZTUR’s SDLM 
videos 
Under RISE, three series of audio programs were produced for 
preschool, Standard 1 and Standard 2 learners. Tucheze 
Tujifunze programs were each 30 minutes in duration and 
covered life skills (environment and health), Kiswahili, English 
and math. Programs integrated the government curriculum 
with Zanzibar songs, stories, riddles, games and other creative 
and cultural based activities. The development process 
included: 
 intensive training of 11 scriptwriters, editors, and 
producers in IAI pedagogy and materials 
development; 
 researching the content for each script using the 
Zanzibar curriculum, and as needed consulting with 
local experts (health, environmental, child rights, inclusive education, etc.) for the life 
skills content; 
 writing of master plans, scope-and-sequences and scripts; 
 one-on-one peer and editorial reviews of each script; 
 first recording of the script with child and adult actors, and rhythmic/musical content; 
 formative evaluation of the programs in one of the pilot classrooms; 
 revision of the scripts; and 
 re-recording and editing of the scripts based on the changes made. 
Chezesha Ufundishe, an IAI teacher’s series, was developed under ZTUR, and focuses on the 
areas of ECD that are critical for preschool teachers to understand theoretically and practically. 
These 20 programs guide teachers in the classroom through activities, allowing them to practice 
new material directly with their students. The series is part of the ECACP curriculum, along with 
the SDLM modules. 
27
The SDLM videos, with accompanying print materials, were created for ECACP to introduce 
teachers to early childhood theory and pedagogy, and to model effective teaching in the 
preschool classroom. The first module, Child Development, was fully filmed under ZTUR and 
includes four 30-minute video trainings with structured activities; each video frames a four-hour 
training day. These programs target teachers who are already working in preschool classrooms, 
allowing MoEVT to deploy teachers to preschool classrooms early in the program. 
Finally, four English Language Training Program videos were developed under RISE, with 
accompanying teachers guides. These programs guide teachers through an interactive training 
that tackles the first units of the Standard 1 English curriculum. The aim of the videos was to 
help teachers improve their comprehension of the English language as well as their ability to 
teach English content in their classroom through activities that are child centered and use active 
learning pedagogy. 
Production of these eight interactive video programs followed the same process as the audio 
production outlined above, but was more time intensive, as filming of children, teachers and 
classrooms requires significant planning, coaching and reshooting. 
Over the nearly four-and-a-half years of the RISE and ZTUR programming, the current staff on 
the eLearning Division team received considerable professional development and support in 
production of audio and video programs and accompanying print materials. Fortunately the 
eLearning team has retained all but one of the initial staff members, which has enabled them to 
continue producing and developing audio and video programs. 
At the time of this report, the eLearning Division was writing and producing a second-level of 
preschool Tucheze Tujifunze programming (the first 20 of 78 programs had master-plans 
developed under RISE) and was producing the fourth module and accompanying videos in the 
SDLM sequence. SDLM modules two and three were produced between 2011 and 21013 with 
the support of UNICEF. 
8. Broadcasting 
Between 2007 and 2014 (January), the state-owned Voice of Tanzania, Radio Zanzibar was 
broadcasting Tucheze Tujifunze free of charge, as part of its educational and social commitment 
to its Zanzibar audience. In return, RISE and ZTUR Projects provided the station with 
broadcasting equipment, staff training, and logistical support to ensure the over 276 programs 
were aired three times a week for five years. Following the project closures in 2011, the 
eLearning Division continued to provide weekly support to the station to ensure the programs 
continued to air. The director of the radio, MoEVT officials, and even the President of Zanzibar 
advocated for the programs to remain on air free of charge during the RISE and ZTUR Projects, 
and the eLearning Division was able to maintain this high-level support after the projects closed. 
In late 2013, the radio station formally underwent restructuring and semi-privatization. The new 
leadership began demanding payment of more than $3,000 a year, which was beyond the 
28
means of the eLearning budget. In consequence, the eLearning Division and MoEVT officials had 
to begin a new process of negotiations with the station. The President of Zanzibar asked the 
radio station for a transition period, as he claimed he had been listening to the programs. 
Although TuTu programs were off air from February to May 2014, broadcast resumed at the end 
of May. Preschool programs are now being aired by ZBC, but Standard 1 and 2 programs remain 
off the air. 
As noted earlier in this report, equipment maintenance poses challenges to continued successful 
use of the broadcasts. Although over 652 pre-loaded Mp3 radios were distributed to schools 
and TuTu Centers, it is estimated from the survey of 24 schools that at least 50% of these audio 
devices were not working for the full 30 minutes of the programming (an 80% estimate for 
centers is even higher than for schools). With help from the Teacher Center Mkwajuni in Unguja, 
some radios have been fixed using local solutions, for example, using outside batteries. 
However, very little to no follow-up on how to use the radios had been conducted by the 
eLearning team, so it was not clear how many centers and schools are using the pre-loaded 
programs (as opposed to broadcast). The TuTu Centers have been instructed in the absence of a 
functioning audio devices and broadcasts to simply follow the Mentor’s Guide, which limits the 
fidelity of the pedagogy, as well as the quality. 
In February 2011, USAID financed a radio engineer consultant to conduct an assessment of radio 
capacity issues and make recommendations to MoEVT on how they may institute a new 
frequency. However, after the initial distribution of the report no further funding or support was 
provided to MoEVT to realize the report recommendations.40 Until the broadcast issue and 
maintenance of audio devices, can be resolved, the long-term sustainability of the Tucheze 
Tujifunze audio programming is uncertain. 
9. Print and technology materials developed and distributed 
RISE and ZTUR teams produced extensive materials for learners, teachers, Teacher Centers and 
trainers. These include: 
 Classroom packages for preschool, Standard 1 and Standard 2 
 ECACP Student Teacher packages 
 ECACP Trainer packages 
 Teacher Center packages 
A breakdown of the materials by recipients is presented below. 
 
40 Kilimanjaro International. (February 18, 2011). Radio Capacity in Zanzibar. 
29
TABLE 5. LEARNING AND TEACHING MATERIALS BREAKDOWN 
The total number of materials distributed by type is as follows (for a full list of the print 
materials and technology distributed under the RISE and ZTUR projects, see Appendix 1). 
 18,892 print materials for classroom packages 
 5,637 print materials for ECACP packages 
Learning and Teaching Materials Developed, Produced and Distributed
Description Details
Classroom Packages for Preschool, Standard 1 
and Standard 2 
(Tucheze Tujifunze materials)
1. Audio devices (2) with programs: 78 Preschool; 
99 Standard 1; 99 Standard 2 
2. TuTu Preschool Mentor’s Guide
3. TuTu St. 1 Teacher’s Guide
4. TuTu St. 2 Teacher’s Guide
5. Sounds in the Night (story book)
6. Classroom Posters
7. TuTu Learning Kits
ECACP Student Teacher (Participant) Package 1. IRI Teacher’s Guide
2. Teacher’s Introduction to SDLM 
3. SDLM: Cognitive Development
4. SDLM: Brain Development
5. SDLM: Language Development
6. SDLM: 6 Aspects of the Child
7. Sounds in the Night (storybook)
8. Technology User’s Guide
ECACP Trainer’s Package 1. to 9. Same as above (Teacher’s) 
10. IRI Trainers 
11. Trainer’s Introduction to SDLM
12. Trainer’s SDLM: Cognitive 
13 Trainer’s SDLM: Brain 
14. Trainer’s SDLM: Language 
15. Trainer’s SDLM: 6 Aspects 
16. Equipment User’s Guide
17. Tucheze Tujifunze Songbook
18. Tucheze Tujifunze Songs CD
19. Verification Sheets IRI
20. Verification Sheets SDLM
21. List of ECD Resources-Zanzibar
Technology and Materials Packages for Trainer 
Center
1. Pico Projectors (2) 
2. IPod with videos uploaded
3. Solar chargers
4. Itrip (for connecting to frequency)
5. Windup speakers
6. Lifeplayer radio
7. Sounds in the Night (story book)
8. Tucheze Tujifunze Song Book
9. Tucheze Tujifunze Songs CD
10. Posters
11. ELTP (English) Trainer’s Guide
30
 1,752 wind-up, solar radios and portable audio players (with integrated Mp3s) for 
schools and TuTu Centers
 14 technology and materials kits for Teacher Centers 
Although all Teacher Centers surveyed noted that they still have the video kits, and were initially 
trained, they were largely un-used as the ECACP training is just starting to be rolled out in 2014. 
As the Teacher Centers have not been actively using the technology there may be some 
functionality issues in addition to a need to re-train staff how to use the technology. In regards 
to the print materials, no new materials have been printed and distributed to the existing 179 
centers since 2011, only to the new 51 centers. As in any learning setting, print materials need 
to be regularly printed and distributed each year to replace lost and worn-out texts, which has 
not been done. According to the questionnaires of formal teachers and TuTu Center mentors, 
learner workbooks were no longer accessible to students; zero of 17 teachers and only 3 of the 
10 mentors had copies. Of the Mentor/Teacher’s Guides, all of the mentors had the preschool 
guide and 70% still had a Standard 1 Guide, whereas over three-quarters of the teachers 
reported having their respective guides. All of the mentors reported that they still had the 
children’s stories and learner kit materials available. 
MONITORING & EVALUATION
10. Monitoring 
Prior to 2011, there were six appointed coordinators who oversaw non-formal and formal 
programming in Micheweni and North A districts. These coordinators were seconded from 
MoEVT (some part-time, others full-time) and paid by RISE. The coordinators were primarily 
MoEVT teachers and Teacher Center Subject Advisors. In 
addition to the coordinators within the district, a central RISE 
M&E Coordinator was employed to oversee all the district 
coordinators from the main office. He was seconded from the 
MoEVT Statistics Department and worked with the 
Department of Administration and Personnel. The M&E 
Coordinator was also responsible for coordinating evaluation 
activities and testing, and was trained extensively under RISE 
and ZTUR to do basic analysis support and train data 
collectors. This seven-person monitoring team was 
responsible for ensuring that each participating RISE center 
and formal school received monitoring visits each quarter. 
They were also responsible for ensuring fidelity of 
implementation in the TuTu Centers and schools, supporting 
mentors pedagogically and observing their classroom 
instruction, monitoring student attendance per their enrollment (monthly attendance rate), and 
31
helping roll ECACP out. Under RISE and ZTUR, coordinators were given stipends for transport 
and mobile phone credit, and the lead coordinator was given access to vehicle transport. 
One of the major challenges since 2011 has been ensuring the on-going monitoring of TuTu
Centers and schools. Although there are still six coordinators overseeing TuTu centers and 
schools in the two districts, all of whom are fully employed by MoEVT, they do not have 
sufficient resources to visit each center or school quarterly or follow-up on the phone. At the 
central level, there are now three M&E coordinators in the eLearning Division, which is the 
addition of one staff member, but they too lack access to a vehicle to monitor centers and 
schools, beyond providing the basic mentor payments. Without a vehicle, the team relies on 
public transport or availability of MoEVT vehicles; getting to Pemba is even more difficult as it 
involves a boat or airplane ride. Therefore M&E coordinators are able to visit Pemba only one 
to two times a year. As was noted under the training section, without resources and 
commitment provided for monitoring of centers and schools, the quality of programming will 
likely decline. 
11. Evaluation 
Until this evaluation was executed, no additional evaluation activities had taken place since the 
project handover in 2011. However, as the M&E Coordinator was trained to lead testing and 
evaluation activities under RISE and still holds the same position in the eLearning Division, the 
division has the capacity to engage in future assessments. Additionally, as many of the trained 
MoEVT data collectors from the district offices and Teacher Centers are still in the same 
positions, implementing evaluations can be cost-effective with this support of this team. 
CHALLENGES MOVING FORWARD 
Although the institutionalization and sustainability of RISE and ZTUR has been significant, there 
are a number of challenges to the continued quality and lasting effect of the program activities. 
These challenges are detailed in the table below. 
TABLE 6. CHALLENGES TO SUSTAINABILITY OF INSTITUTONALIZED RISE/ZTUR ACTIVITIES 
Challenge Details
 Audio devices: no 
maintenance and replacement 
of equipment has taken place 
 50% of treatment schools had functioning radios
 Some schools have rigged ways to fix their radios
 MoEVT is working on procuring more radios for 
new centers but has no plans for fixing the old 
radios
32
 Training: no follow-up or 
support to old and new 
educators
 Only 2 new trainings have been held since 2011, 
and teacher turnover/transfer is high 
 Trainings are in place for 51 new sites/districts, but 
no follow-up trainings planned for old sites
 Lesson Timetable/Curriculum 
changes: 
Programming needs to be 
adapted
 Formal schools are not using the programs as 
intended, as it has not been integrated into the 
new, denser timetable
 eLearning is developing more programs, but there 
is no strategy for how to integrate these into the 
timetable
 Materials: no new materials 
have been printed or 
distributed to replace lost or 
worn-out materials
 No new materials distributions have been made 
since 2011, but they will be distributed to 51 new 
sites
 There are no plans at present to print and 
distribute materials to former centers and schools
 Monitoring: poor follow-up
and inspection of existing 
schools and sites
 Inspectors are supposed to visit TuTu centers and 
schools, but this doesn’t happen systematically
 eLearning has an M&E unit, but limited resources 
 Monitoring has been more effective in Pemba than 
Unguja
 Lack of permanent structures 
for 8 of 179 TuTu Centers still 
meeting under trees: lack of 
financial resources committed
by MoEVT and communities
 Lack of physical structures results in no schooling 
during the rainy reason
 Convincing parents to send their children to non￾formal schools is more difficult when there is no 
permanent structure 
 Lack of collaboration with 
Inclusive Education Unit
 Materials have not been adapted for learners with 
special needs
 Teachers and mentors are not trained to support
special needs children 
 Although officially the Inclusive Education Unit is 
collaborating with mLearning, no concrete actions 
or activities have taken place
CONCLUSION: INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY
The goal of achieving a Ministry-integrated program that could be sustained after the RISE/ZTUR 
projects closed has been achieved. A trained staff is in place, an extensive inventory of 
materials exists, there is policy support for the approach, 179 communities have been sensitized 
to ECD, and a play-based learning model in place in non-formal centers and schools. The ECACP 
program will be rolled out fully during 2015, although it is too soon to assess the efficiency of 
implementation and the outcomes of the trainings. 
33
The major challenges to continued quality implementation lie in maintaining both access to and 
quality of materials and programming. Maintenance and replacement of radios and 
broadcasting are major barriers to listenership. A lack of printing and distribution of new 
materials, and limitations on the resources committed to regular trainings and monitoring, 
greatly affect the quality and fidelity of implementation. Data do show that the activities appear 
to have been more actively implemented and monitored in Pemba, which is consistent with 
reports during the implementation of RISE. This suggests that there is more community support 
within this region, even though they have fewer resources for the coordination and monitoring 
of activities than in Unguja (one less coordinator, and no eLearning Division in close proximity). 
Despite the major logistical and coordination challenges, which are commonplace when donor￾funded projects are transferred to an institution, the eLearning Division has been strategic about 
moving its work forward with the support and guidance of the MoEVT leadership. They have 
made conscious and noble efforts to sustain and scale-up RISE and ZTUR activities and to 
ultimately ensure that their policy goals related to early childhood development are advanced. 
The fact that the eLearning team is still in place in 2014 is testimony to MoEVT’s commitment, 
as they have been sought out for subsequent development projects on a number of occasions. 
The insistence of the MoEVT leadership that the division remains cohesive, as it was created 
under the RISE and ZTUR projects, has ensured the sustainability of the team and their work. 
 
Head teachers, teachers and mentors all expressed the continuing importance of the Tucheze 
Tujifunze programming. Mentors have continued to facilitate classes, despite poor access to the 
programs and materials, even in resource lean circumstances. When asked about the value of 
the programs, mentors noted that when the programs where regularly broadcast, truancy was 
low at their centers as the programs provided an incentive for learners to attend and to engage 
in math, language and life skills lessons and gave them a foundation for school they wouldn’t 
otherwise receive. While the formal school community did not express the same level of 
commitment to sustaining the Tucheze Tujifunze programs, the fact that a number of teachers 
were still using the programs despite a lack of official support shows that there is still interest 
and motivation at the school level. 
34
FINDINGS: LEARNER PERFORMANCE 
The second evaluation question this study aimed to explore is whether learners that 
participated in IAI (Tucheze Tujifunze) programming performed higher at the end of their 
primary cycle than those that did not participate. In other words, had RISE students maintained 
their advantage over their comparison peers in the years since 2008? 
Quantitative analysis was performed to look at learner performance on a Standard 7 exam that 
tested performance in literacy, Kiswahili and English, and math. Given that the exposure of 
students in the treatment group to non-formal education, IAI and formal school, students in the 
2014 sample were re-categorized from their original 2008 groupings into three groups: 
 RISE formal schools group: These are students that continue to be enrolled in 
government primary school classrooms. At the time of the 2008 study, these students 
were in a formal Standard 1 (RISE Formal Model) class led by a certified teacher who 
received additional training in IRI lessons and pedagogy. Classroom teachers used IRI 
lessons and activities to complement and supplement their instruction. 
 RISE mixed (non-formal) group: These students were part of the non-formal 
intervention group and all received IRI in non-formal settings (under a tree), or attended 
IRI pre-school. There was a small group of students (Combination Model in the 2008) 
that received non-formal programming in addition to receiving IAI in their Standard 1 
classroom. In summary, this group combines students that comprised the RISE Non￾formal Model and Combination model that was used in 2008. 
 Comparison: Students that have similar characteristics to those students attending 
formal schools, but who have not been exposed to RISE’s IRI programs.
STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
SEX AND AGE OF LEARNERS IN 2014 
The 2014 study team was able to locate more girls than boys from the original 2008 sample. Of 
all study students tested in 2014, 62.1% were girls. In 2008, 55% of the study students were 
girls. Attrition among boys was higher than among girls in all study groups, as can be seen in 
Figure 3. In both 2008 and 2014, RISE non-formal and combined groups had a higher proportion 
of girls than the RISE formal school model group. 
35
FIGURE 2. SEX OF SAMPLE AND BY GROUP (N=904) 
FIGURE 3. AGE OF SAMPLED LEARNERS IN 2014 (N=901) 
Figure 4 shows the distribution of sampled learners by age. As this follow-up study was 
conducted six years after the initial study in 2008, students were expected to be in Standard 7, 
in which the standard age is between 12 and 14. As seen in the figure, ages vary, although RISE 
formal school students were found to be of very similar age with the comparison group 
students: 45% of students in both groups were 14 years old, and about a third of students in 
both groups were over age of 14. RISE mixed group students were, on average, a year younger 
than their peers from the formal school group. The median age in the RISE formal group and in 
2%
6%
24%
40%
25%
3%
0%
0%
0%
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
RISE mixed group students, 
by age
1%
0%
3%
25%
45%
19%
5%
1%
0%
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Comparison group 
students, by age
Male
37.9%
Female
62.1%
Sample by sex, 2014
boys, 41.8%
boys, 51.0%
boys, 37.5%
boys, 43.2%
boys, 33.3%
boys, 42.0%
boys, 37.3%
girls, 58.2%
girls, 49.0%
girls, 62.5%
girls, 56.8%
girls, 66.7%
girls, 58.0%
girls, 62.7%
Comparison 2014
Comparison 2008
RISE formal 2014
RISE formal 2008
RISE mixed 2014
RISE non-formal 2008
RISE combination 2008
Sample by sex and study group
1%
1%
5%
17%
45%
20%
8%
3%
1%
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
RISE formal school 
students, by age
36
the comparison group was 14, the median age among RISE mixed group was 13 years old. Age 
distributions were consistent across sex and island (Pemba and Unguja). 
GRADE LEVEL OF STUDY PARTICIPANTS 
Current Grade Level. In the 2014 follow-up study, students were asked what grade they were 
currently in. Students were expected to be in Standard 7 if they had continued their education 
without interruptions or repeating grades. The figure below shows the grade level of sampled 
students. Despite the fact that all students were in Standard One (grade 1) in 2008, many 
students have experienced grade repetitions and/or interruptions, causing them to fall behind 
their peers. As seen in Figure 5, only 51.7% of students in the sample reported that they were in 
Standard 7. More than a third of students were currently in Standard 6; the remaining 13.5% 
reported that they were in Standard 5. 
When compared by intervention model, there were substantial differences in the current grade 
level of sampled learners. Figure 5 shows grade levels for each intervention model: RISE Formal 
Group, RISE Mixed (Non-formal Models) Group of intervention, and comparison group (non-RISE 
participants). 
FIGURE 4. STUDENT BREAKDOWN BY STANDARD AND GROUP 
Standard 5, 
7.1%
Standard 5, 
4.8%
Standard 5
4.8%
Standard 5
31.8%
Standard 6
34.7%
Standard 6
30.4%
Standard 6
26.8%
Standard 6
49.4%
Standard 7
51.7%
Standard 7
62.5%
Standard 7
68.4%
Standard 7
18.4%
All students
(n=903)
Comparison
(non-IRI
participants)
(n=352)
RISE formal
schools (n=291)
RISE mixed
(n=261)
37
Students from the RISE mixed (non-formal and combination) group were targeted to receive IRI 
intervention through non￾formal education or through 
pre-school in 2008 because 
they came from disadvantaged 
backgrounds, including low 
levels of parental education, 
high poverty, and interruption 
in schooling. This trend appears 
to have continued, as shown in 
Figure 6. When surveyed in 
2014, students from the 
combination group were almost 
twice as likely to report having had interruptions of over a month in their schooling as students 
from RISE formal school intervention group, and nearly 50% more likely than comparison group 
students. The majority of these students are in Standard 5 and 6, with nearly half in Standard 6 
and one third in Standard 5. Only 18.4% of students in the Mixed Group are in Standard 7.
Overall, there appears to be a strong relationship between the age and the grade of study 
participants, as shown in Figure 7. The majority of students in Standard 5 were found to be 12 or 
13 year old, in Standard 6 they were 13 and 14 year old, and in Standard 7 nearly half was 14 
year old, and the majority of the rest were either 13 or 15 year old. 
FIGURE 6. AGE OF SAMPLED LEARNERS IN 2014, BY STANDARD (N=901) 
Preschool Education. Students were asked whether they had attended preschool prior to 
Standard One, as it was expected that participation in preschool education would provide 
students with a head start in developing literacy and numeracy. When compared by group, 
more students in the RISE intervention (formal and non-formal) groups have received preschool 
5%
10%
29%
30%
19%
5%
1%
0%
1%
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Age of students, Std. 5
1%
2%
12%
37%
35%
9%
4%
1%
0%
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Age of students, Std. 6
0%
0%
2%
19%
47%
22%
7%
2%
0%
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Age of students, Std. 7
FIGURE 5. PERCENT OF STUDENTS REPORTING HAVING HAD 
INTERRUPTIONS OF OVER A MONTH IN THEIR EDUCATION (2014)
13.7%
10.8%
18.3%
Comparison
(non-IRI
participants)
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
38
education than RISE formal school model students, a statistically significant difference (p<.001). 
As seen in the figure below, students in the RISE Mixed (Non-formal and Combination Model) 
group have the largest percentage of students with preschool education (79.1%); this is likely 
due to the fact that these students were exposed to preschool education through the RISE 
Project, while the formal model started RISE programming in Standard 1.
FIGURE 7. PRESCHOOL EDUCATION (N=887) 
READING AT HOME
Parental literacy is an important predictor of child’s academic success. During 2014 data 
collection, students filled out a detailed questionnaire that asked them about their reading 
habits, as well as about their parents’ literacy level. More than half of the students in the study 
reported that their parents were literate. Levels of parental literacy varied between participants 
from formal schools and from RISE mixed intervention models. Among the latter, about 15% 
fewer students reported having a literate mother and a literate father, as shown in Figure 9. 
FIGURE 8. PARENTAL LITERACY REPORTED BY STUDY STUDENTS 
Students were asked whether they read anything at home or outside of school. The majority 
(85%) of students reported that read the Qur’an every day or every week. Similarly, the majority 
of students reported that they read at home; 61.4% read a book every day or every week and 
27.6% read a book a few times a month. Newspapers were read less frequently, with 64% of 
students responding that they read the newspaper at least a few times a month. More than 
Yes, 19.9%
Yes, 40.6%
Yes, 79.1%
No, 61.7%
No, 43.7%
No, 
5.9%
Don't Know, 
18.4%
Don't Know,
15.7%
Don't Know, 
15.0%
Comparison
group (n=352)
RISE formal
schools
(n=291)
RISE mixed
(n=261)
mother literate, 66.8%
mother literate, 64.0%
mother literate, 50.2%
father literate, 70.2%
father literate, 73.7%
father literate, 59.3%
Comparison group
(n=352)
RISE formal schools
(n=291)
RISE mixed (n=261)
39
three-quarters of students reported that they do not read on the internet. Results were 
consistent across group, gender and location, as shown in figure 10. 
FIGURE 9. FREQUENCY OF READING VARIOUS MATERIALS AT HOME 
ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
Longitudinally tracked students were tested again in 2014, six years following the completion of 
the intervention in which they had participated. Students were tested in literacy (in Kiswahili 
and in English) and in math, to investigate whether students that participated in RISE IAI 
programming (either in preschool or Standard One) perform higher on literacy and math 
assessments than those that did not participate. The tests were developed by the evaluation 
team and were based on the end of the primary cycle standards in Tanzania (Standard 7). 
Findings are presented below. 
SUMMARY OF LITERACY AND MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE 
This analysis compares the performance of comparison group students with RISE intervention 
students (Formal Model and Mixed (non-formal) Model) on grade level assessments in reading 
and math in 2008 and in 2014. From the 2008 assessment, results of 604 longitudinally tracked 
comparison group students were compared with 555 RISE Formal Group students and 524 RISE 
37%
33%
37%
10%
9%
14%
3%
2%
4%
44%
47%
47%
75%
81%
76%
32%
38%
27%
28%
26%
29%
11%
13%
12%
40%
38%
26%
16%
8%
14%
31%
28%
36%
62%
65%
57%
86%
85%
84%
16%
15%
27%
9%
11%
10%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
newspapers
books
Qur'an
magazines
Internet
never sometimes often
40
Mixed Group students. From the 2014 assessment, only results of students in Standard 7 were 
included in the analysis, since the test aimed to measure grade-specific competencies and would 
not be appropriate for learners in lower grades. After removing Standard 5 and 6 students from 
the analysis, 220 comparison group students, 198 RISE Formal Group students, and 49 RISE 
Mixed Group students were included in the analysis. 
The analysis of gain differences between RISE intervention (formal and non-formal) students 
and comparison group students on the Standard 1 Assessment in 2008 revealed that RISE 
Formal Group students gained statistically significantly more than their counterparts from the 
comparison group between the baseline in February/March 2008 and endline in February 2014. 
The only test in which RISE Mixed Group students gained less than the comparison group was 
English. 
FIGURE 10. RISE INTERVENTION AND COMPARISON GROUP GAINS ON STANDARD 1 TEST BETWEEN BASELINE (FEB 
2008) AND ENDLINE (NOV 2008) 
The difference in gains between the baseline and the endline for RISE intervention (Formal and 
Mixed Groups) students and the comparison group students was statistically significant. Table 7 
shows the results of statistical analysis, including the t value and the effect size. 
TABLE 7. EFFECT SIZE OF GAIN SCORES OF RISE STUDENTS OVER COMPARISON GROUP STUDENTS, STANDARD 1 
RISE formal school students’ gains 
over comparison group students’ 
gains
RISE mixed group students’ gains 
over comparison group students’ 
gains
t Cohen’s d r t Cohen’s d r
5%
10%
5%
12%
7%
5%
11%
10%
8%
comparison (n=604), 
23%
RISE formal (n=555), 
46%
RISE mixed (n=524), 
29%
comparison, 44%
RISE formal, 52%
RISE mixed, 35%
comparison, 31%
RISE formal, 41%
RISE mixed, 32%
32%
9%
26%
11%
20%
24%
14%
23%
Kiswahili
English
Math
STANDARD 1
Baseline Feb 2008
41
Kiswahili 12.965 0.762 0.35 4.716 0.281 0.14
English 10.415 0.613 0.29 n/s
Math 7.457 0.438 0.21 2.807 0.167 0.08
n/s = not significant 
These results clearly demonstrate that the RISE Project was highly effective in improving 
academic achievement of Formal Group students, and beneficial for RISE Mixed Group students, 
within the lifespan of the project. But did the program have a lasting effect on the participating 
students? The assessment of 2014 measured the reading and math competencies of former RISE 
participants, as well as their comparison group counterparts. Results of the 2014 assessment 
showed that RISE Formal Group students still outperformed comparison group students, in all 
three tested subjects, six years after the end of the intervention. These results were found to be 
statistically significant at the p<.001 level. No significant difference was found between RISE 
Mixed (Non-formal) Group performance and the comparison group, which performed at 
approximately the same levels in 2014. 
FIGURE 11. AVERAGE STANDARD 7 TEST RESULTS, 2014 
The difference in scores between the RISE Formal Group students and the comparison group 
students was statistically significant. Table 8 shows the results of t test statistical analysis and 
the effect size. 
TABLE 8. EFFECT SIZE OF SCORES OF RISE STUDENTS OVER COMPARISON GROUP STUDENTS, STANDARD 7 
RISE formal school students’ scores 
over comparison group students’ 
scores
comparison, 34%
comparison, 14%
comparison, 3%
RISE formal, 39%
RISE formal, 18%
RISE formal, 6%
RISE mixed, 32%
RISE mixed, 14%
RISE mixed, 4%
Kiswahili
English
Math
42
t Cohen’s d r
Kiswahili 2.077 .204 .101
English 3.690 .362 .178
Math 2.939 .288 .143
Analysis showed a substantially larger number of students that scored zero on the Standard 7 
assessment among comparison group and RISE Mixed Group than RISE Formal Group students. 
The difference in zero scores is statistically significant at p<.001 level for Kiswahili and English 
tests. On the math test, the difference is statistically significant at p<.1 level. The difference in 
zero scores between RISE mixed group and the comparison group is not statistically significant. 
A higher proportion of RISE Formal Group students was also found to score over 20% correct on 
all three tests, compared to the comparison group and the RISE Mixed Group. 
FIGURE 12. 2014 ASSESSMENT: PERCENT OF STUDENTS WITH ZERO SCORES AND GROUPED RESULTS, BY TEST
zero, 8%
zero, 3%
zero, 6%
zero, 17%
zero, 6%
zero, 12%
zero, 65%
zero, 57%
zero, 73%
<20 pct
26%
<20 pct
24%
<20 pct
29%
<20 pct
61%
<20 pct
64%
<20 pct
69%
<20 pct
32%
<20 pct
36%
<20 pct
22%
20-60 pct
51%
20-60 pct
57%
20-60 pct
57%
20-60 pct
22%
20-60 pct
29%
20-60 pct
18%
20-60 pct
3%
20-60 pct
5%
20-60 pct
4%
60-100 pct
15%
60-100 pct
17%
60-100 pct
8%
60-100 pct
0%
60-100 pct
1%
60-100 pct
0%
60-100 pct
2%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
Kiswahili
English
Math
STANDARD 7
43
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS BY SEX 
Nearly twice as many Standard 7 girls than boys participated in 2014 assessment. The table 
below shows the distribution by gender and study group. 
TABLE 9. 2014 ASSESSMENT PARTICIPANTS BY GENDER 
Boys Girls Total
Comparison 
group
Count 82 138 220
% 37.3% 62.7% 100.0%
RISE Formal 
Group
Count 62 136 198
% 31.3% 68.7% 100.0%
RISE Mixed 
Group
Count 15 34 49
% 30.6% 69.4% 100.0%
TOTAL
Count 159 308 467
% 34.0% 66.0% 100.0%
Results of data analysis showed that within the two intervention groups, as well as within the 
comparison group, there were some differences in performance between girls and boys. In the 
RISE intervention groups, boys scored higher than girls on the Standard 7 assessment (except 
the Kiswahili test, on which the RISE mixed group girls scored higher than boys). Among the 
comparison group students, girls scored higher than boys, although the difference is not 
statistically significant and can be due to chance variation in the sample. This is similar to results 
in 2008 assessment, when results were similar for both boys and girls 
FIGURE 13.TOTAL PERCENT CORRECT, BY SEX 
male
30%
male
41%
male
31%
female
36%
female
37%
female
33%
Comparison
group
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
Std. 7 Kiswahili
male
11%
male
20%
male
15%
female
15%
female
17%
female
13%
Comparison
group
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
Std. 7 English
male
3%
male
8%
male
8%
female
4%
female
5%
female
2%
Comparison
group
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
Std. 7 Math
44
KISWAHILI LITERACY PERFORMANCE 
To assess the literacy of students in Standard 7, students were tested on Kiswahili reading 
competency in five areas: reading comprehension, identifying opposites, grammar (parts of 
speech), plural words and free writing. Overall students performed the best in writing words in 
plurals and reading comprehension. Tests results also showed that students performed the 
worst in free writing, in which they were graded on their response to the question and on 
sentence structure, as well as spelling, grammar and punctuation. 
FIGURE 14. AVERAGE PERCENT CORRECT ON KISWAHILI SUBTESTS, BY GROUP 
As shown in Figure 15, when analyzed by group, RISE Formal Group students performed the best 
of the three study groups in all areas, except free writing and antonyms. Comparison group 
students outperformed other students on free writing part of the assessment. The difference 
male
21%
male
48%
male
27%
female
28%
female
51%
female
30%
Comparison
group
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
Std. 1 Kiswahili
male
42%
male
53%
male
33%
female
46%
female
54%
female
34%
Comparison
group
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
Std. 1 English
male
32%
male
41%
male
26%
female
32%
female
42%
female
29%
Comparison
group
RISE formal
schools
RISE mixed
Std. 1 Math
49% 38% 38%
30% 34% 38%
21% 22% 30%
63%67% 71%
8% 15% 21%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Reading 
comprehention
Antonyms
Comparison RISE Mixed RISE Formal
Grammar 
Plurals
Free writing
45
between groups was found to be statistically significant at p<.05 level, except for the antonyms 
subtest where no statistically significant differences were detected. 
ENGLISH LITERACY PERFORMANCE 
Students were tested in four areas of English language: 
 ability to form a question (e.g., for a sentence “I like mangos”, what would be a 
corresponding question?) 
 ability to understand a written sentence (e.g., “The sun rises from the west” – true or 
false?) 
 ability to understand a text and answer questions associated with the text 
 ability to write a few sentences on a given topic that are grammatically correct 
All tested students performed poorly on the English language assessment. The portion of the 
test that students did the best on was the ability to understand a written sentence and provide 
an answer as to whether the sentence was true or false. However, even on this portion of the 
test students did not perform very well: since each question required a “true” or “false” answer, 
there is a 50% chance that the student would get a correct answer by chance. The average 
correct was, however, only 41%. 
Students in all study groups performed poorly on the English assessment, although the RISE 
Formal Group students did better than their counterparts from the comparison group or from 
the RISE Mixed Group. Figure 16 shows the results, by subtest and study group. 
FIGURE 15. ENGLISH SUBTESTS AVERAGE PERCENT CORRECT, BY GROUP 
1% 5%
1%
43% 39% 42%
7% 10% 14%
1%
0%
0%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Grammar (writing 
questions)
Vocabulary questions
(true/false)
Comparison RISE mixed RISE formal schools
Reading 
comprehension 
questions
Free writing
46
MATH PERFORMANCE 
The math portion of the assessment was intended to test grade-level competencies, such as 
basic number manipulations (include large numbers as well as decimals), foundations of algebra 
and geometry, and fractions. Students were presented with 10 tasks. Students did poorly on all 
tasks, with the best result for the simple subtraction problem. However, students from the RISE 
Formal Group did better than their counterparts on nine out of ten questions. The figure below 
shows results grouped by type of math problem. 
FIGURE 16. MATH SUBTESTS AVERAGE PERCENT CORRECT, BY GROUP
The results are presented for each item in the table below. 
TABLE 10. MATH ASSESSMENT RESULTS, BY ITEM AND STUDY GROUP 
2014 ASSESSMENT MATH PROBLEM PERCENT OF STUDENTS WITH CORRECT ANSWERS
1. 0.1 x 100
2. 400,000 ÷ 1,000 
1.5% 3.9% 5.2%
0.9% 1.1% 1.4%
0.4% 0.5% 1.6%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%
Computations (5 items)
Geometry (2 items)
Comparison RISE Mixed RISE formal schools
Other (3 items: algebra, 
percentile and ratio 
computations)
8%
13%
8%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
9%
12%
8%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
47
3. 3,547 - 19 
4. Katika mlinganyo 2(2p-7)=31-5p thamani ya p ni
5. Tafuta (-8) – (+4)
6. Shehia ya Pangawe ina watu 4000. Ikiwa 40% ni 
wanawake, 35% ni wanaume, na waliobakia ni 
watoto, tafuta idadi ya watoto waliopo katika 
shehia hiyo. 
7. Katika mchoro ufuatao, tafuta thamani ya ‘x’
8. Mwalimu aliwapa Jaku na Jokha vitabu 100 na 
akawaambia wavigawe katika mafungu mawili kwa 
uwiano wa 1:4. Baada ya kuvigawa, kila fungu 
lilikuwa na vitabu vingapi? 
9. Kibati cha kutilia taka kina urefu wa sm 10 na nusu 
kipenyo cha sm 2. Ikiwa kibati hicho 
kitazungushiwa karatasi pembeni, eneo la karatasi 
hiyo litakuwa ngapi?
 
10. Rahisisha: 2¼ ÷ ¾ x ⅜ + 1½
29%
32%
16%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
3%
9%
2%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
4%
7%
4%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
0%
2%
0%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
3%
5%
0%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
0%
3%
2%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
0%
1%
0%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
1%
5%
8%
comparison
RISE formal
RISE mixed
sm 5 
sm x cm
sm 4
sm 10
48
DISCUSSION
To help us better understand why some students perform better on the standardized 
assessment, and some perform worse, the study considered information about students’ 
background. To what extent did students from literate households achieve higher test scores? 
Did attending preschool have an effect on test results in Standard 7? Was schooling interruption 
a factor in student performance? 
Bivariate correlation41 analysis showed that parental literacy was associated with better scores 
on the reading test, in both Kiswahili and in English. Interruptions of a month or more were 
found to be negatively associated with scores: students who experienced such interruptions 
were found to be scoring statistically significantly lower than their peers who did not experience 
such interruptions, in all three tested areas. Students who said they read books and the Qur’an 
were found to have higher results in all three tested areas, although an association between 
reading books and higher math scores was weak. Attending preschools was found to be 
statistically significantly associated with higher scores in math and English, but only among 
students who were in Standard 7 (that is, students who were in the appropriate grade, given 
their Standard 1 status in 2008). 
Table 11 shows the results of the statistical analysis. 
TABLE 11. BIVARIATE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENT BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS AND TEST RESULTS 
Kiswahili English Math
Attending preschool n/s .099* (7 grade 
students only)
.125* (7 grade 
students only)
Interruptions of schooling for over a 
month
-.210** -.175** -.102**
Mother literate .221** .128** .079*
Father literate .256** .151** .076*
Reading books regularly .296** .229** .138**
Reading Qur’an regularly .274** .161** .071*
Other variables included in the analysis did not appear to have association with the student 
performance on the assessment. 
 
41 “Correlation” is a statistical term that describes a degree of relationship between two variables. Two variables are 
considered correlated when a change in one is associated with a change in another. Correlation does not presume 
causation since a change in both variables might be caused by the third variable. Correlation coefficient ranges 
between 0 and 1, with higher value denoting stronger relationship. Correlations in a range between .1 and .3 are 
considered rather weak, in a range between .4 and .6 are considered moderate, and above .6 are considered strong.
49
CONCLUSION: LEARNER PERFORMANCE 
The 2014 student assessment found that RISE Formal Group students performed significantly 
better on standardized grade-level assessments in Kiswahili, English and math, compared to 
their counterparts from the comparison group and from the RISE mixed group. Six years after 
the intervention, RISE Formal Group students demonstrated a better mastery of grade-level 
concepts. However, the overall performance level in English and math was found to be very low 
among all study groups. 
The RISE intervention appears to have contributed to sustained advantages for the formal 
school students who participated in the program. Unfortunately, not enough students from the 
non-formal or combined programs could be traced to enable the drawing of strong conclusions 
about the effect of the program on those populations. A significant portion of RISE Mixed Group 
students either could not be found for inclusion in the study, or had repeated grades and thus 
could not be included in the analysis. Since those students were particularly disadvantaged, due 
to very low parental literacy or due to poverty, they were an important focus of RISE Project, 
and determination of the long-term benefit of the program to their academic performance 
would be helpful in informing policy decisions about how to target continued program 
development through the eLearning Division of the MoEVT. Additional follow up or tracer 
studies that focus particularly on this group of students would be beneficial. 
50
CONCLUSION 
Despite logistical and coordination challenges, which are common when donor-funded projects 
are transferred to an official counterpart institution, the MoEVT’s goal of using RISE and ZTUR as 
the foundation for long-term improvements in early education in Zanzibar has largely been 
achieved. The eLearning Division has been strategic about moving its work forward with the 
support and guidance of the MoEVT leadership. They have made conscious and noble efforts to 
sustain and scale-up RISE and ZTUR activities and to ultimately ensure that their policy goals 
related to early childhood development are advanced. The insistence of the MoEVT leadership 
that the division remains cohesive, as it was created under the RISE and ZTUR projects, has 
ensured the sustainability of the team and their work, and encouraged the confidence of new 
partners who can substantially contribute to continued development of the early education 
sector. 
In addition, the RISE model of intervention has demonstrated sustained positive effects on 
students who participated in the programs, providing them with an advantage in academic 
performance 6 years after their initial performance was assessed. This is particularly true for 
students in the RISE Formal Group. However, the assessed achievement of both RISE and 
comparison participants was still relatively low, when compared to national expectations for 
grade-level performance in Standard 7. Clearly, as identified in the Zanzibar Education Policy and 
Zanzibar Education Development Plan, work remains to be done to increase the percentage of 
Zanzibari students who meet performance standards across pre-primary and primary education. 
Additional tracer research on the impact of the RISE programming model on the most 
disadvantaged students (those in the RISE non formal group) would also help ensure the 
greatest possible impact on that group as programming continues to evolve. 
Given the Zanzibari context, interactive audio programming (IAI) remains a viable and useful 
intervention format for increasing access to high-quality early education, particularly in the most 
challenged districts. Careful attention will need to be paid to the mechanisms necessary for 
continuing to ensure the quality of TuTu programming (specifically: maintenance of hardware; 
thoughtful integration of the programs into the increasingly dense school timetable; the 
provision of continuous support and professional development for teachers and mentors; and 
sufficient and effective monitoring and evaluation of programs as they are rolled out). With 
additional investment in these quality assurance processes, and the continued commitment of 
the MoEVT to the work of the eLearning Division, the improvements begun under RISE and ZTUR 
can continue to be built upon and sustained.
51
REFERENCES 
Downie, Bruce and Peter Mwaura. (January, 2010) Building Capacity for Pre-School Teaching: A 
Status Assessment and Recommendations for Teacher Training Programming. Reported 
was commissioned by the ZTUR project, with direct support from USAID. 
ILO. (2008). Good Practices on Social Protection and Coping Strategies used by Low Income 
Women Workers in the Informal Economy in Zanzibar to Mitigate Against Social and 
Economic Risks, 6. Accessed on November 2, 2014. 
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---
gender/documents/publication/wcms_098172.pdf. 
Kilimanjaro International. (February 18, 2011). Radio Capacity in Zanzibar. 
Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT). (2006). Education Policy. Revolutionary 
Government of Zanzibar. 
Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MoEVT), Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.
(2007). Zanzibar Education Development Programme (ZEDP) 2008/2009 2015/16 Draft 
3. p.58
Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. (2013). 
Zanzibar EMIS office under the Department of Policy, Planning and Research (DPPR). 
Ministry of Education and Vocational Training website (access July 21, 2014). 
http://www.moez.go.tz/index.php?cq=dept&dept=10
National Bureau of Statistics, United Republic of Tanzania. (2013). Population and Housing 
Census 2012. pp. vii 
Office of Chief Government Statistician, Zanzibar. (May 2010). Socio-Economic Survey, p. 49, 59.
Tanzania Millennium Development Goals. (September 2011). Country Report on the Millennium 
Development Goals. Dar es Salaam, p. 16 
USAID/Tanzania (2009).USAID/Tanzania Education Strategy for Improving the Quality of 
Education FY 2009-2012, p. 2 
Zanzinet (access August 8, 2014), “About Zanzibar,” 
http://www.zanzinet.org/zanzibar/visiwa.html 
52
APPENDIX: LEARNING AND TEACHING 
MATERIALS
TABLE 12. LEARNING AND TEACHING MATERIALS DEVELOPED, PRODUCED AND DISTRIBUTED UNDER RISE 
# Produced Description Details # Distributed
276 IAI Programs 78 Preschool, 99 Standard 1, 99 Standard 2 837 total aired
3 Mentor’s Guides Preschool, Standard 1 and 2 795
1 Songbook Songs for children in English and Swahili 
covering literacy, math, language and life 
skills
8400
2 Learner Workbooks Standard 1 and 2 8400
4 Flashcard Sets Numeracy, alphabet, shapes and animals 748sets 
4 Story Cards Pictures and text 748cards
1 Classroom poster set 6 pages (English Alphabet, Kiswahili 
Alphabet, Body Parts, Domestic Animals, 
Wild Animals and Marine Environment)
800
1 Learning Kit Colored cubes and dices, string, seeds, 
seashells, cloth, chalk, slates, rope, sticks, 
bottle tops, numeracy and literacy flash 
cards, exercise books, pencils
190
1 Teaching Kit Chalkboard, chalk, tape measure, scissors, 
cards and paper, rubber bands, story cards 
and story books
180
Radios Lifeline wind-up and solar charged 591
10 Story Books Zanzibar story books for children (10 titles) 
donated by Rotary Club
975
10 Story Books Zanzibar story books for children (7 titles) 1000
53
TABLE 13. LEARNING AND TEACHING MATERIALS DEVELOPED, PRODUCED AND DISTRIBUTED UNDER ZTUR 
Materials
# Printed
Total Needed
NTRC
11 TC
MoEVT HQ
MoEVT IAI Vuga
Benjamin Mkapa
MoEVT Pemba
248 Primary
31 Pre-schools
EDC
Central Library
ZMRC
Other NGOs
TuTu Pre-school Mentors 
Guide 321 321 2 33 1 1 249 31 1 2 1
Std 1 Teacher's Guides 321 321 2 33 2 1 249 31 1 2
Std 2 Teacher's Guides 324 224 2 33 5 1 149 31 1 2
Std 1 Learner Books 309 309 2 33 21 1 249 1 2
Std 2 Learner Books 489 489 2 33 21 1 429 1 2
Children Storybook 1000 1000 19 319 1 59 1 1 498 93 5 2 1 1
TuTu Kits 13 13 1 11 1
Lifeline radio (Hybrid 
with MP3s) 652 652 5 77 1 5 1 1 498 62 1 1
IAI Trainer's guides 50 50 9 33 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
IAI Teachers' guides 350 300 9 275 1 8 1 1 1 2 1 1
SDLM Introduction for 
Trainers 50 50 9 33 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
SDLM Introduction for 
Teachers 350 300 9 275 1 8 1 1 1 2 1 1
SDLM Trainer's Guides (4 
topics) 50 50 9 33 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
SDLM Teachers' guides 
(4 topics) 350 300 9 275 1 8 1 1 1 2 1 1
Verification sheets 
(SDLM) 1000 1000 18 924 1 53 1 1 1 1
Verification sheets (IAI) 1000 1000 18 924 1 53 1 1 1 1
Video Equipment User 
Guide 50 50 9 33 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
Lifeplayer Radio User 
Guide 1050 1050 23 385 3 67 3 3 498 62 3 3
CDs 500 500 19 319 11 106 5 5 23 2 1 9
ECD L & T Inventory 60 60 9 33 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 10
Songbooks 350 350 19 319 1 5 1 1 1 2 1
ELTP Module* 50 50 9 33 1 2 1 1 1 2
IPod 14 14 1 12 1
Pico projector + extra 
batteries 14 14 1 12 1
Windup Speakers 24 24 1 22 1
ZTUR bags 400 400 23 330 7 29 2 2 2 2 3
IPod + I trip* 10 10 1
Pico projector + extra 
batteries* 10 10 1