TEACHING IN THE WINDOW OF HOPE EVALUATION REPORT Prepared By Judith Oki and Sam William Phiri for the Community Health and Nutrition, Gender, Education Support-2 (CHANGES2) Program June 2009                                                                                                    Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Table of Contents i. Abbreviations and Acronyms…………………..………….………..…………………………………….…4 ii. Acknowledgements………………………………………..………………………………………………....6 1. Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Introduction and Overview......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Key Findings................................................................................................................................................................ 8 1.3 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................................. 9 1.4 Recommendations.................................................................................................................................................... 10 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................11 2 Background Information.....................................................................................................................................11 2.1 HIV&AIDS in Zambia................................................................................................................................................12 2.2 Ministry of Education Policy .................................................................................................................................... 12 3 Overview of ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’........................................................................................13 3.1 Teaching in the Window of Hope (TWH) Development Process ....................................................................... 14 3.1.1 Approach and Materials Roll-out ............................................................................................................................ 14 3.1.2 Supplementary Materials and Videos .................................................................................................................... 15 4 Purpose of the Evaluation..................................................................................................................................15 5 Methodology ...........................................................................................................................................................16 5.1 Evaluation Design..................................................................................................................................................... 16 5.2 Sample ....................................................................................................................................................................... 16 5.3 Evaluation Methodology........................................................................................................................................... 17 5.4 Data Collection Tools ............................................................................................................................................... 17 5.5 Review of Literature.................................................................................................................................................. 18 5.6 Time-frame ................................................................................................................................................................ 18 6 Limitations ...............................................................................................................................................................18 7 Findings....................................................................................................................................................................19 7.1 Responsiveness to MOE Needs: Approach, Content and Development Process ......................................... 19 7.2 Development of Teaching in the Window of Hope (TWH) .................................................................................. 20 7.3 Impact and Effective Use of TWH by Tutors......................................................................................................... 21 7.3.1 Tutors’ Perceptions of the Role of Primary School Teachers............................................................................. 21 7.3.2 Role of the College in Preparing Primary School Teachers ............................................................................... 21 7.3.3 Integration of HIV Prevention in Study Areas by Tutors...................................................................................... 22 7.3.4 Promotion of Open Dialogue on Campus.............................................................................................................. 22 7.3.5 Use of Videos and CD Supplementary Materials ................................................................................................. 23 7.4 Impact and Use of TWH Materials by Student-teachers ..................................................................................... 24 8 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................29 9 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................32 Appendices References Page 2 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Disclaimer This report does not reflect the views of the American Institute for Research (AIR) or the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), but is an Evaluation of the ‘‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’’ supported by CHANGES2 based on discussions and interviews with stakeholders and data collected from secondary sources. Page 3 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 . Abbreviations and Acronyms AIR American Institute for Research CDC Curriculum Development Centre CHANGES2 Community Health and Nutrition, Gender and Education Support-2 CoE College of Education CTS Creative and Technology Studies DHS Demographic Health Survey DRC District Resource Center EA Expressive Arts ES Education Studies FGD Focus Group Discussion HIV+ HIV-positive LLE Literacy and Language Education MoE Ministry of Education MoH Ministry of Health NGO Non-Governmental Organization OVC Orphans and other Vulnerable Children PEO Provincial Education Officer PEPFAR President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief PESO Provincial Education Standards Officer PLA Participatory Learning for Action PRC Provincial Resource Center RC Resource Center RAPIDS Reaching AIDS-affected People with Integrated Development and Support SCP School-Community Partnership SHN School Health and Nutrition SIC School In-Service Coordinator SPRINT School Program of In-service for a Term SPW Students’ Partnerships Worldwide TA Technical Advisor SSME Social Spiritual and Moral Education TGM Teacher Group Meeting TOT Training of Trainers TWH ‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’ USAID United States Agency for International Development Page 4 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Sites Visited Table 2: Integration of HIV Prevention by Tutors Table 3: Integrating HIV Prevention by Student-teachers Table 4: Students’ Responses Table 5: Scheduled Activities LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix I: Questionnaires Appendix II: Other Players Appendix III: Names of Schools/ Organizations and Individuals Contacted Page 5 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Acknowledgements The Consultants would like to recognize the staff of the Teacher Education Department (TED) of the Ministry of Education (MoE) and the Technical Advisors of CHANGES2 for their vision in creating “‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’” and for shaping the objectives of this Evaluation. The team would also like to thank the college administrators and tutors of Charles Lwanga, Kasama, and Malcolm Moffat Colleges of Education (CoE) and the head teachers and mentors at the practice teaching sites (Charles Lwanga, Monze Town, Tagore, Malama, Mubanga Chipoya, Miselo Kapika, Kamwala and Boma basic schools) for their invaluable assistance in helping us accomplish the objectives of this Evaluation review. Finally, the team would like to thank the student-teachers who shared their college and classroom experiences and their hopes for an ‘HIV free generation!’ Page 6 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 1. Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction and Overview This report describes an external, qualitative evaluation of an approach to training pre-service teachers to promote HIV prevention among school children aged 5-14 years. The development of the approach was a needs-based, collaborative effort of the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Community Health and Nutrition, Gender and Education Support-2 (CHANGES2) program supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). ‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’ (TWH) is an approach and a set of materials that reflect integration of HIV&AIDS across the curriculum, promoting age appropriate knowledge and skills through learner-centered activities. The approach and materials built on existing MOE structures, engaged relevant representatives for all aspects of development, pilot testing, revision and implementation at scale, i.e. at all Basic Colleges of Education (COE). The evaluation focused on four thematic areas: ƒ Responsiveness to MOE needs: program, content and development process ƒ Impact/effective use by tutors: of materials, classroom application, open dialogue and personal prevention strategies for tutors and students ƒ Impact/effective use by student-teachers: assignments, materials, classroom application, own prevention behavior ƒ Implementation strategy for rolling-out and supporting use of TWH approach and materials. The methodology was qualitative, relying on focus group discussions (FGDs), in-depth interviews (IDIs), and classroom observations of student-teachers. The sample was limited to three colleges where implementation was generally sound, based on monitoring and support visits conducted in 2008. The final selection of Charles Lwanga, Malcolm Moffat and Kasama reflected those criteria and colleges that were relatively stable and accessible. This approach allowed the evaluation team to spend two days per college, working at the college and in two or three student practice teaching sites. The sample was deliberately small to allow the team to follow implementation from the college to the basic school classroom. Page 7 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 1.2 Key Findings Key findings in the areas of investigations included: 1.2.1 ‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’ responds to the Ministry of Education’s articulated goals of protecting the Window of Hope (children aged 5-14 years); integrating HIV&AIDS across the curriculum; preventing HIV infection among staff and students at all levels; and promoting learner-centered teaching practices. 1.2.2 Inclusion and participation in the development of TWH from initial identification of need through national level implementation has been representative, reflecting all required technical inputs as well as those of key stakeholders. CHANGES2 has modeled the need for technical input from teacher education and HIV&AIDS experts. 1.2.3 Tutors report that the approach and materials have been used to integrate HIV&AIDS across the curriculum practically. Tutors in each study area could describe a specific example of a topic and a related HIV&AIDS prevention message, approach, skill and a way to teach that. There was some hope that the use of TWH recommended participatory, learner centered methods would spill over to other topics. Unfortunately, there was no evidence of this. Tutors report a degree of comfort in openly discussing sexual behavior with students, although there was little to no discussion of adolescent sexuality. Most discussions of that topic were student￾led, based on research assignments and presentations. Some, not all tutors are comfortable in that area. Research assignments as well as other TWH-derived activities are assigned to students, in groups for presentation in class. No specific assignments were made for the student teaching practice period, other than a reflection assignment at Charles Lwanga focusing on the Window of Hope. Tutors report that working with the materials gives them cause to reflect on their own behavior and prevention strategies. 1.2.4 Students’ reports are similar, but students are able to provide more concrete examples of how HIV&AIDS has been integrated across the study areas, and feel much more confident and comfortable discussing sexual behavior among themselves. They have also highly valued the role plays and other activities that feature in the TWH manual. Like their tutors, students have reflected on their own behavior, noting that they also have the peer educators from Student Partnership Worldwide (SPW) and the weekly assembly to explore HIV&AIDS and risk factors. Classroom observations highlighted the range of interpretations of “integrating HIV&AIDS” into study areas; including the older model of taking a few minutes at the beginning of class to do an HIV&AIDS related activity. Unfortunately, head teachers and mentors do not have the tools to adequately support and monitor students’ integration. Page 8 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 1.2.5 Implementation and roll-out of the approach and materials as a pre-service model has been excellent from design and orientation of tutors through monitoring and support visits at colleges. The monitoring and support visits to colleges have been valued and have created momentum. College leadership, headquarters and CHANGE 2 support and individual champions among college staff have been the primary drivers of this momentum. Similar support to student teachers at practice sites is lacking as are plans to maintain momentum and expand the number and sharing of additional sample lessons. 1.2.6 Printed materials are in widespread use and demand; use of electronic media is limited by the equipment, power supply and human capacity. Tutors and teachers are interested in having more materials, more sample lessons, more activities and imply that they are recipients of these materials rather than producers. 1.3 Conclusions 1.3.1 ‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’ is an appropriate approach to integrating HIV&AIDS education in pre-service teacher training. Positioned as an approach rather than program models integration and promotes institutionalization. Materials are technically sound and user-friendly, with printed versions more readily accessible than electronic ones. There remains a need to create a sense of responsibility and build the skills of tutors and teachers to develop new activities for use in the classroom; and to actively mentor and support student-teachers who are beginning their practice and who are committed to protecting the Window of Hope. 1.3.2 The use and effectiveness of the TWH approach has been enhanced by the presence of other programs being implemented by agencies such as RAPIDS and SPW. 1.3.3 The approach has promoted college-wide dialogue on culturally sensitive issues of sexual behavior including harmful practices, gender and cross-generational and transactional sex. Dialogue has been initiated among students to a high degree; among tutors, to some degree; and between tutors and students to an increasing degree. 1.3.4 TWH has provided tutors and student-teachers with concrete examples and experiences in integrating HIV&AIDS across the curriculum, using participatory methods. 1.3.5 Student-teachers in practice need early and focused support as they work to integrate HIV&AIDS across the curriculum and to use participatory methods while on teaching practice. Page 9 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 1.3.6 Tutors, and in-service teachers need additional information, performance expectations and possibly skills to ensure that TWH as a concept is fully operationalized. It is likely that one year of monitoring and support from headquarters (and CHANGES2) is enough to launch the approach but that more review is needed for quality assurance and sustained implementation. 1.3.7 TWH has also required tutors and student-teachers to reflect on their own attitudes and behaviors regarding HIV&AIDS prevention, positive living and creating discrimination-free schools. Cross generational and transactional sex remain topics that when posed to tutors elicit some nervous, self conscious laughter. 1.4 Recommendations 1.4.1 Extend the length of the tutor orientation program to include sessions in which tutors actually develop their own integrated activities and develop/ review a checklist for meaningful integration. 1.4.2 Continue development and dissemination of lesson plans that reflect meaningful integration of HIV&AIDS. This is especially needed in Mathematics and Creative Technology Studies. Develop a checklist for meaningful integration and introduce it to tutors during the orientation for TWH. 1.4.3 Increase expectations at colleges and schools for the use of TWH approach and materials for pre-service teacher education. This might include a monitoring and support tool for use at colleges to monitor tutors; a similar tool for use during the student practice teaching term that focuses on integration and life skills; an orientation program for mentors and/or head teachers currently serving at student teaching practice sites; expanded dialogue about cross generational and transactional sex; gender; and HIV&AIDS prevention among college tutors, linked to the MOE workplace program. 1.4.4 Build the professional skills of tutors, principals, head teachers and mentors to support the application of skills and concepts required to teach in the Window of Hope in the basic school classroom. 1.4.5 Provide public professional recognition for individual educators who excel at TWH and produce new materials and reflections on practice. 1.4.6 Add community mapping of HIV&AIDS services/programs to the student-teacher guide to promote linkages 1.4.7 Continue the CHANGES2 practice of working with existing MOE structures and providing technical assistance in both Teacher Education and HIV&AIDS. Page 10 of 42                               Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 2 Introduction CHANGES2 is a Zambia Ministry of Education (MoE)-support program which strengthens teachers’ professional skills, with a special focus on HIV&AIDS prevention and mitigation. CHANGES2 receives funding from the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) for HIV&AIDS prevention for youth and care and support for Orphans and other Vulnerable Children (OVCs). CHANGES2 commissioned an external evaluation of its efforts to promote HIV prevention education in Grades 1-7, reaching children between the ages of 5-14 years, known as “‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’”. The MoE focused on pre-service training of teachers, infusing critical knowledge, skills and attitudes throughout the program of study at teacher training colleges and providing teaching resources for college tutors and student-teachers. The evaluation was conducted from 25 May-12 June 2009 by two Consultants. This report describes the background, process, findings, conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation. 2.1Background Information 2.1.1 HIV&AIDA in Zambia Zambia is one of the poorest nations in the world. With a prevalence rate of 14%, the country is disproportionately affected by the HIV and AIDS pandemic. The prevalence of other sexually transmitted infections, multiple sexual relationships; low condom use, cultural practices, gender inequality and poverty have all contributed to the increasing numbers of people affected by HIV&AIDS. The HIV&AIDS epidemic has affected all aspects of social and economic growth in Zambia. It has devastated individual families, weakened all areas of the public sector, and threatened long-term national development. Despite some evidence that the epidemic may have started to stabilize, there is still an urgent need for an integrated response from all sectors as the epidemic remains an overwhelming development challenge in the country. High prevalence rates are fueled by early initiation of sex, unprotected sex, concurrent sexual partnerships, low incidence of condom use, sexual violence against women, and poverty that forces women and girls to sell sex for food, good grades, gifts, or money. Page 11 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 2.1.2 Ministry of Education Policy The Ministry of Education policy states that the current HIV&AIDS situation adds to the complexity of health issues in education. The effects on education are many. AIDS-affected families may devote so much of their limited resources to the care of a sick individual that they may not be able to afford the costs associated with school participation, or they may withdraw a child from school to help look after the patient or to undertake domestic chores or supplementary income-related activities that otherwise an adult would have discharged. A related issue is the prospect that the burden of family support will tend to fall increasingly on the young. Already it is reported that more than 7% of Zambia's households are without any adult member, being headed by boys or girls aged 14 or less. To carry this responsibility, such children will need to leave school adequately equipped with useful skills, a perspective that has far-reaching consequences for the school curriculum. A further dimension of the HIV&AIDS problem is the fact that teachers fall within the education and age groups that are most vulnerable to infection. The profession has already seen the loss of many of its members and may lose many more. Such losses make it increasingly difficult to ensure that existing schools are fully staffed by qualified teachers, and reduce the potential for extending educational provision to all eligible children. This consideration underscores how important it is that the Ministry adopts a variety of strategies aimed at increasing the supply of qualified teachers. Given the magnitude of the crisis that HIV&AIDS has brought into the lives of individuals and of the country, the education system has a serious obligation to cooperate with all other bodies in stemming the spread of HIV. As one of the major socializing forces in society, MoE has a grave obligation to educate the young on this matter, providing knowledge, fostering awareness, promoting life-asserting attitudes. It also has an obligation to those who work in the sector, heightening their awareness and strengthening their determination and efforts to remain uninfected. The Ministry has a further responsibility towards those who are already infected, helping them in a compassionate manner, to live positively. This latter responsibility is all the more grave and delicate in relation to school-going children who are HIV&AIDS infected. In view of the magnitude of the personal problem that HIV&AIDS potentially poses for every teacher, the Ministry states, in its policy document that it will introduce counseling in the workplace. The aim will be to prevent HIV infection and to help those already infected to live positively. Page 12 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Under HIV&AIDS and the curriculum, the National Policy for Management and Mitigation of HIV&AIDS in the education sector states that HIV&AIDS prevention information and life skills will be mainstreamed into existing curricula and offered across all levels of education. Appropriate learner and teacher support materials which are gender sensitive will be developed to support HIV&AIDS curriculum interventions. It further states that through in-service and pre-service programs, educators will be prepared to effectively integrate HIV prevention messages into existing curriculum policy. While the national and MOE policy documents make pronouncements relating to what should be done, the ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ approach was designed to define ‘how’ the integration of HIV prevention could be done. 3 Overview of ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ ‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ is an approach and a collection of resource materials designed for use in the pre-service education of Basic School Teachers. It follows and moves beyond three in-service efforts to promote HIV prevention in basic schools, specifically, “Interactive Methodologies Manual for HIV&AIDS Prevention in Zambian Schools”; Life Skills workbooks for learners and teachers; and the updated SPRINT manual. ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ also supports three of the MOE strategies for the prevention and mitigation of HIV&AIDS in the education sector, namely: ƒ Protecting the “Window of Hope”, i.e., youth aged 5-14 who are largely HIV free and easily reached at schools; ƒ Preventing HIV transmission among learners and staff (in this case, the Window of Hope, student-teachers and college tutors) ƒ Integrating HIV across the curriculum rather than introducing it as a separate subject. The approach and the materials build on current, evidence-based practices in reproductive health and sex education, moving beyond facts to strategies for individual prevention behavior and collective action through dialogue on harmful sexual practices. It further recognizes the opportunity and responsibility of primary school teachers to promote these strategies and of college tutors to prepare their student-teachers to do the same. Page 13 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 3.1 Teaching in the Window of Hope (TWH) Development Process A highly participatory development process was employed to promote ownership and build comfort with the topics over time. The MoE Teacher Education Department (TED), supported by CHANGES2 led this development process, bringing on board staff of the Curriculum Development Center (CDC), representatives of the colleges, and HIV&AIDS specialists. The joint leadership of CHANGES2 Senior Teacher Development Advisor and Senior HIV&AIDS Advisor provided concrete experiences in collaboration and integration of these specialties. An initial pilot was based on needs identified in more than 100 classroom observations in basic schools, looking for evidence of meaningful integration of HIV&AIDS, age appropriate messages, and participatory, skills based learning strategies. A set of materials was developed and introduced in four colleges on a pilot basis. Following an intensive review of the results of the year long pilot, the final set of materials was produced and included a Tutor’s Guide and a Student-Teacher’s Guide. Also, in response to expressed need, supplementary materials were developed to further demonstrate integration within the basic school curriculum and/or provide additional facts about HIV prevention. Materials were provided to colleges in printed and electronic copies, as were several videos to be used with student-teachers. 3.1.1 Approach and Materials Roll-out The approach and materials were rolled out through a cascade that began with a three day program of induction for Heads of Section (HoS) from each college. These Heads returned to their colleges to provide the induction for all tutors. Staff of CHANGES2 and the MOE participated in some of the college based induction programs and conducted monitoring and support visits. The Student-teacher’s Guide is organized by College Study Area, and provides the rationale for ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ as well as participatory activities that can be used n classrooms in the various study areas. In this way, TWH moves beyond the Interactive Methodologies and Life Skills materials to a concrete application to the curriculum. It is the first tool in the hands of student-teachers for meaningful integration of HIV in each learning area of the basic education syllabus. The Tutor’s Guide is similarly organized, with supplementary notes for tutors as facilitators of the student-teachers’ learning and practice. The “notes to facilitators” and “preparing to teach” elements of each chapter are intended to provide tutors with additional motivators, linkages to critical learning theory, and instructions that help them link the materials to student practice. Page 14 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 3.1.2 Supplementary Materials and Videos The supplementary materials and videos provide additional resources and stimuli for use by tutors and teachers. The supplementary materials and videos were provided in soft copy for duplication and use through college libraries and computer labs. Several outcomes were envisioned, including: ƒ HIV prevention education would be integrated into all the COE study areas and examinable. ƒ Dialogue around harmful social norms, gender and sexuality would become more open ƒ Participatory teaching styles would be used by tutors, perhaps even spilling over from HIV education into other topics. ƒ Topics which were formerly taboo, such as multiple concurrent partnerships, adolescent sexuality and intergenerational sex, would be analyzed. ƒ Student-teachers would be given relevant assignments related to TWH, both during their course work and when they go for practice teaching that go beyond the recitation of facts about HIV and involve some level of analysis and creative thinking. This was an ambitious agenda, in a setting where student-teachers are largely “instructed” on teaching rather than enabled to teach; where participatory methods are presented rather than experienced. HIV&AIDS prevention and the mandate to integrate across the curriculum provided an opportunity to begin to address these more basic challenges as participation and dialogue are crucial to skills based HIV prevention education. 4 Purpose of the Evaluation The purpose of this evaluation was to assess and document the effectiveness of the development and implementation of TWH. Proposed areas of inquiry included the following: ƒ Does TWH respond to MOE needs? ƒ How do MOE TESS staff see TWH fitting into the proposed diploma and degree programs which MOE are moving toward? ƒ Does TWH respond to the needs of student-teachers? ƒ Was the process of development of TWH perceived to be inclusive? ƒ What impact has TWH had on the classroom practices of tutors? ƒ What impact has TWH had on the ability of tutors to open up dialogue among student￾teachers? ƒ What impact has TWH had on student-teachers perceived ability to implement HIV prevention education in the classroom ƒ Are the TWH materials useful? If so, how? Page 15 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 ƒ How do tutors see TWH fitting into the proposed diploma and degree programs which colleges are moving toward? As the development of the diploma course materials for ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ was well underway, there was less emphasis on that topic during the evaluation. The revised areas of focus then included: ƒ Responsiveness to MOE needs: program, content and development process ƒ Impact/effective use by tutors: of materials, classroom application, open dialogue and personal prevention strategies for tutors and students. ƒ Impact/effective use by student-teachers: assignments, materials, classroom application, own prevention behavior ƒ Implementation strategy for rolling out and supporting use of TWH approach and materials. 5 Methodology 5.1 Evaluation Design The evaluation employed qualitative methods while quantitative data was collected from secondary sources. The data collected was used to analyze perceptions of college principals and tutors and their student-teachers regarding the contribution of TWH in the prevention of sexual transmission of HIV. 2.1 Sample The evaluation sample included 3 of the 10 participating COEs and 8 teaching practice sites in Central, Copperbelt and Southern provinces. Colleges were selected based on the results of monitoring visits as reported by MOE and CHANGES2 and recommendations of the MOE Teacher Education Department. The team wanted to visit colleges that had been fairly strong or showing good promise in implementation and a representative range of field conditions. David Livingstone and Mansa were highly recommended but administrative and logistical challenges prevailed and the team focused on Charles Lwanga, Malcolm Moffat and Kasama. Focusing on a few colleges allowed the Evaluators to follow the approach from the original orientation of Heads of Sections (HOS) to the classrooms where student-teachers practiced. Page 16 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Table 1: Sites Visited Province Ministry of Education HQ Colleges of Education Teaching Practice Sites Lusaka Province 1 - - Southern Province - Charles Lwanga College of Education 1. Charles Lwanga Basic School 2. Monze Town Basic School 3. Tagore Basic School Northern Province - Kasama College of Education 1. Mubanga Chipoya Basic School 2. Malama Basic School Central Province - Malcolm Moffat College of Education 1. Miselo Kapika Basic School 2. Kamwala Basic School 3. Boma Basic School The Evaluators interviewed four College Administrators and 8 Basic School Head Teachers. Focus Groups were conducted with a total of 26 tutors from the three colleges. First Year Students (8) were interviewed at college and Second Years (24) at their practice teaching sites. The Evaluators were invited to observe student-teachers at three of the practice sites. 5.2 Evaluation Methodology Collection of data was done through Focus Group Discussions (FGD), In-depth Interviews (IDI) and direct observation of student-teachers. Ministry of Education personnel were interviewed individually, as were College Principals. Tutors were interviewed as groups representing all study areas; student teaches were interviewed individually at the first college, and subsequently in groups, enabling the Evaluators to assess firsthand the comfort level of student-teachers in discussing sexual matters openly among themselves. At two of the colleges, first year students were interviewed on campus, and their second year colleagues interviewed at practice teaching sites. Three student-teachers agreed to have their lessons observed as they “integrated” HIV&AIDS messages into the study area of the lesson. 5.4 Data Collection Tools Questionnaires, attached to this report as Appendix II, were used as interview guides for either FGD or IDI. Data from student-teachers and lecturers were mainly collected through FGD while IDI was used for MOE staff, COE administrators and Head Teachers. Page 17 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 5.5 Review of Literature The following literature was availed to the Evaluators by CHANGES2 for their perusal fourteen days before the commencement of the evaluation. a) TWH Student-teacher Handbook b) TWH Tutor’s Guide c) TWH Materials Supplement d) Findings from the Implementation of HIV&AIDS Teacher Education Course (HATEC) at Four Colleges in 2007 e) Report on the implementation of ‘‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’: HIV&AIDS Education for Zambian Teachers in Colleges of Education’ November, 2008 f) ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’: The Possibilities and Challenges of College HIV&AIDS Education- A paper presented by CHANGES2 at the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES) Conference in March, 2009 in the U.S. As further background, the Evaluators also perused the following Government of Zambia publications: a) National Policy for the Management and Mitigation of HIV&AIDS in the Education Sector, 2003 b) Ministry of Education, HIV&AIDS Strategic Plan 2001-2005 c) Ministry of Education HIV&AIDS Abridged Strategic Plan 2006-2007 d) Interactive Methodologies Manual for HIV&AIDS Prevention in Zambian Schools, 1st Edition, e) HIV AIDS Guidelines for Educators, 2003 f) National HIV and AIDS Strategic Framework 2006-2010, May 2006 g) MoE Education Policy ‘Educating Our Future’ 5.6 Time-frame The evaluation took place between May 25 and June 11, 2009 with a total of six days allocated to field work at the three colleges and related practice teaching sites. . 6 Limitations The evaluation coincided with industrial action by public service workers in the education sector. The teachers’ strike in Southern and Central provinces affected the flow of the school day and the availability of student-teachers and school administrators who were trying to maintain learning during the teachers’ union declared strike. Page 18 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 The intensity of the field work enabled the team to visit three colleges and 2-3 practice teaching sites per college. However, the two days per college did not allow enough time to observe tutors in the classroom which might have been a good addition to the tutor interviews and student reports. As discussed under item 5.5, the evaluation was conducted on a limited sample size. This should not be viewed as a limitation of the method as this was the selected approach to follow the use of materials from the induction of the tutors to the use by student-teachers in classrooms. 7 Findings 7.1 Responsiveness to MOE Needs: Approach, Content and Development Process The Teacher Education Department (TED) recognizes the significant contribution of ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ towards integrating HIV prevention in all study areas and in providing examples of good practice in the promotion of participatory, learner-centered teaching methods. Over the past several years, qualifications for college tutors have increased, resulting in a predominance of secondary trained teachers functioning as tutors. One result is that they have tended to specialize in a study area with less emphasis on pedagogy in general, and less experience with the learner-centered approaches that are promoted for primary school learners. TWH links their expertise in a study area with learner-centered approaches and HIV&AIDS prevention messages. The organization of the approach around study areas makes the HIV&AIDS messages more accessible to college tutors than say the Interactive Methodologies Manual, produced in 2003. The Interactive Methodologies Manual, which was cited as useful by student-teachers of Charles Lwanga, was organized in six thematic areas: psycho-social life skills; gender and reproductive health; sexually transmitted infections; alcohol, drugs and substance abuse; HV/AIDS; and advocacy, and designated for specific age groups ranging from Grade 1-Grade 12. Though recognized for its value in methods and HIV prevention, it was not explicitly linked to curriculum and focused far beyond the Window of Hope. “‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’” is linked to curriculum while reinforcing age appropriate, learner-centered methods for in-school youth aged 5-14. Officials at MOE also noted that the format of TWH is easy to review and/or change. This is evidenced by the relatively rapid adaptation of the materials for diploma level student-teachers. Organization by study area allows inclusion of additional study areas or key topics, such as knowledge of the child, and direct linkage of activities and methods to this topic, within the diploma curriculum. Page 19 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Tutors and student-teachers can articulate the role of the primary teacher in promoting HIV prevention in the Window of Hope. They describe the role as one of educating and empowering learners and serving as a role model. All students and many tutors note that using the TWH materials has caused them to reflect on their own behavior regarding sexual behavior. One female student-teacher now feels that she will have sex when she is ready; one male student￾teacher reports that he now knows that he must help his girlfriend get ready for sex and not expect her to be ready because he is. Tutors were not as forthcoming with such endorsements, but most agreed that they had at least reflected on their own sexual behavior. Both students and tutors report having discussions about the role of intergenerational or transactional sex in HIV transmission, while acknowledging that the practice of sexually transmitted grades has not been completely eliminated. 7.2 Development of Teaching in the Window of Hope (TWH) The collaborative relationship between the MOE champions of TWH in the Teacher Education Department and CHANGES2 staff was evidenced by their accessibility on a public holiday and the speed with which they followed through on agreed upon actions during the consultants’ entry meeting and throughout the evaluation. It was the result of a longer term collaboration to develop, disseminate, monitor and support the use of TWH in the Colleges of Education. There was significant representation of college staff as well as MOE headquarters staff from TED and CDC in the development and pilot testing of the materials for ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’. Even though respondents in Southern Province felt that the process of developing TWH was inclusive, they contended that wider participation could have been achieved with the inclusion of traditional leaders and other community representatives. College staff in Central and Northern provinces indicated that they would have liked to have been included in the development of the materials. They acknowledged that they were represented on the development team and did not report being misrepresented. Student-teachers in Southern Province reported that some students who had since graduated participated in the development of TWH. The leadership of the Teacher Education Department, the inclusion of Colleges of Education, and the representation of the Curriculum Development Center were critical. They helped ensure that the materials were suitable for use by tutors and student-teachers and consistent with current curriculum and curriculum development practices of the MOE. Monitoring and support visits by MOE and CHANGES2 staff provided direct and immediate feedback to and from colleges during the roll out of the materials. Page 20 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 This was responsive to the immediate need to get materials out and into the hands of pre-service teachers, but fell short of becoming fully institutionalized into the standards and performance measures used by the Ministry of Education for colleges and for basic schools. MOE has appealed to CHANGES2 for assistance in developing performance indicators to measure progress toward integration of HIV across the curriculum. Such indicators or standards would also help to infuse the TWH approach further at the school level, as head teachers and serving teachers would also be expected to contribute to meeting the standards at school level. 7.3 Impact and Effective Use of TWH by Tutors 7.3.1 Tutors’ Perceptions of the Role of Primary School Teachers Tutors perceived primary school teachers as surrogate parents to their learners. They observed that the learners spent more time with their teachers than they did with their parents. They also said learners believed in whatever their teachers said; hence they needed to be exemplary role models. They added that the primary school teachers occupied a very crucial part in the lives of the children aged 5 – 14 as these come into primary school knowing little or nothing but leave having known a lot and even being sexually active. Hence they reasoned that primary school teachers should be able to nurture these children and help them remain HIV negative by giving them information on HIV&AIDS; sensitize them on the dangers of the disease and teach them how they could prevent being infected. They also were expected to teach them life skills. 7.3.2 Role of the College in Preparing Primary School Teachers Tutors reported that colleges of education molded student-teachers so that they could become good educators and role models. As the student-teachers entered colleges, they were subjected to a 10 days induction course during which issues such as adolescent sexuality, intergenerational sex and multiple concurrent sexual relationships were discussed. They were also asked to watch films based on personal experiences with HIV (infection and prevention) and reflect on their personal lives. The tutors reported that they were incorporating HIV prevention in all the study areas and expected their students to do the same as they went out for teaching practice. Leadership practices at Charles Lwanga and Kasama Colleges provide some insights to implementation support. At Charles Lwanga, the newly appointed Principal, a former lecturer, kept a hand in TWH activities. Student-teachers felt “honored” that the principal himself gave them an assignment to reflect on how they were reaching the Window of Hope and on maintaining their own Window of Hope. This direct contact is motivating for the students. Page 21 of 42                                   Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 The newly appointed Acting Principal at Kasama was in the process of returning schemes of work that did not reflect HIV&AIDS integration. This is a good example of monitoring and support for quality of instruction and implementation. Tutors at Malcolm Moffat, acknowledged the role of SPW in promoting peer education. The three colleges also reported that they invited resource persons from other institutions like Ministry of Health, University of Zambia and NGOs to discuss HIV prevention with their students. 7.3.3 Integration of HIV Prevention in Study Areas by Tutors Table 2: Integration by Tutors STUDY AREA TOPIC/HIV LINKAGE METHODS USED BY TUTORS LINKAGE TO ‘‘TEACHING IN THE WINDOW OF HOPE’’ MATERIALS Education Studies Life Skills Child development and socialization Lectures and discussions Bridge Activity SSME Negotiation skills Family life Story on Mutimba Science HIV transmission and prevention under reproductive health Lectures Quizzes Math: Subtraction, percentages and sets Lectures LLE: Vocabulary: words use in stigmatization and discrimination Discussions and lectures Crossing the Bridge CTS: Nutrition for HIV+, safety rules EA: Physical activity for prevention and positive living; Physical education Music, dance and drama. Poster design The topics and integration points noted above are consistent with those cited by students, although students had more examples. 7.3.4 Promotion of Open Dialogue on Campus In colleges of education, tutors said TWH had given them reason for emphasizing HIV prevention. Tutors reported that the approach helped them become more open amongst themselves and with their students in once considered hard-to-discuss topics like harmful social norms, concurrent multiple sexual partners and intergenerational sex. Tutors and students were asked about topics discussed in peer groups and between tutors and students. Page 22 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Tutors discussed multiple concurrent partnerships and intergenerational sex amongst themselves and with students. These discussions were largely in the context of student induction, Education Studies and SSME. They did not discuss adolescent sexuality among themselves or with students which is consistent with student reports that the Reproductive Health topics in Science Studies are largely handled through student research and presentation. 7.3.5 Use of Videos and CD Supplementary Materials Both tutors and student-teachers said videos were being used in teaching and sensitizing on prevention of HIV. Videos were generally viewed during evenings or during the weekly assembly. They reported that the most popular videos were ‘The Silent Epidemic and Emma’s Story’, which were not part of the TWH package. “Yesterday” and “Yellow Card” were the two most frequently mentioned videos provided by CHANGES2 in support of TWH. Tutors at Charles Lwanga College reported that their video players were unable to play the DVDs supplied by CHANGES2. The team was not able to verify this because the power was off. At Kasama and Malcolm Moffat, both tutors and students reported that they watched a number of videos. However, they could not easily remember the ones supplied by CHANGES2. The Evaluators had to mention some story lines for them to remember that they had watched at least two namely Yellow Card and Yesterday. No college had installed the CD supplementary materials on their computers. This prompted the Evaluators to ensure that the installation was done during the evaluation exercise. This encounter with the computer systems at colleges raised other issues about the reliability of computer based materials. Connectivity becomes an additional constraint to internet based research. While all colleges have some computers for tutors and students they are either insufficient in number or underutilized. This issue is beyond the scope of this evaluation other than its impact on the attempt to deliver and promote the use of materials in soft copy. Head teachers and teachers at the visited basic schools reported that they did not know anything about ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’. As an intervention, the Evaluators installed the CD supplementary materials at the basic schools that had a functioning computer. (Tagore Basic, Monze Town Basic, Kamwala Basic). Page 23 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 7.4 Impact and Use of TWH Materials by Student-teachers 7.4.1 Student Perceptions of the Role of Primary Teachers in Promoting HIV Prevention, and How College Experience Prepared Them First and second year students described the role of the primary teacher as one of educating their learners about the dangers of HIV, teaching them about HIV and how it is transmitted, and imparting the life skills to prevent it. Students described life skills as including self confidence, assertiveness and decision making. They noted that the college prepared them for these roles in many ways including their induction; research assignments in all subjects related to HIV, using TWH and other materials; class activities and debates; peer-educators; and weekly assemblies. The induction programs at all colleges help students to assess the risks of sexual activity with fellow students they may not know well, including the possible transmission of HIV. Students are also advised that the code of conduct for tutors and teachers prohibits sexual relations between students and teachers/tutors. All three colleges report a weekly program on HIV&AIDS that promotes awareness, life skills and dialogue about the practices that put students at risk. These weekly assemblies are also occasions for student debates, discussion of films and peer education. The SPW program for peer educators has been well received by students both those who are trained as peer educators and others. These activities help student-teachers acquire the knowledge and confidence to begin promoting HIV prevention with their basic school learners. 7.4.2 Promotion of Open Dialogue on Sexual Behavior and HIV First and second year students noted that dialogue about critical issues of sexual behavior related to HIV&AIDS was part and parcel of their college experience from the induction program through their student teaching. Through induction programs, peer education and the integrated approach to HIV prevention across study areas, students reported a high degree of comfort discussing harmful social norms that increase vulnerability to HIV infection, gender issues, sexuality, cross generational and transactional sex, and multiple concurrent partners. Students report a high degree of openness and comfort among themselves, due in large part to the presence of the Student Partnership Worldwide peer education program, which is described in more detail in Appendix III. Debates and research have also enabled students to become more comfortable with these topics.. While tutors report a degree of comfort and the most passionate advocates speak of the imperative of such dialogue, students note that not all tutors are comfortable with these topics. Those who are comfortable are well known to students who are at ease discussing these issues with the tutors. However, students are clearly very actively engaged in open discussions relating to sexual behavior and HIV. Page 24 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 7.4.3 Integration of HIV&AIDS across Study Areas at College and use of Participatory Methods for HIV-related Lessons First and second year students also report that HIV lessons have been integrated across the curriculum and can cite specific examples for each subject area and activities reflecting varying degrees of learner focus. Not all examples are directly from ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’, though TWH is cited as a primary resource for HIV integration assignments that students have been given by their tutors. Specifically, students cite the following examples of integration: Table 3: Integration by Students STUDY AREA TOPIC/HIV LINKAGE METHODS USED BY TUTORS AS REPORTED BY STUDENT￾TEACHERS LINKAGE TO ‘‘TEACHING IN THE WINDOW OF HOPE’’ MATERIALS Education Studies Child Development/PMTCT Age Appropriate Life Skill Essay on impact of stigma Bridge Activity SSME Caring for Each Other/ Values Clarification, Stigma, HBC and OVCs Food Security/HIV related poverty and transactional sex as consequences Analyzing Stories Values Clarification Activity Role Play Anna, Mutimba, Katuna Agree/Disagree Science Reproductive Health/Sex, STIs, HIV facts, transmission and prevention. Washing hands, good and bad touches Research, quizzes, guest speakers Demonstration Math: Sets: Infected/affected Statistics/trends in HIV Magic Squares/invisible virus; can’t tell who is HIV+ Lectures, research LLE: Reading comprehension; writing skills; vocabulary including words that stigmatize. Read/analyze/discuss Debates and Essays; Vocabulary, Brenda’s Fate, Crossing the Bridge, CTS: Nutrition for HIV+, safety rules EA: Physical activity for prevention and positive living; Kick the ball demo; poster design; music and drama. Poster design 7.4.4 Assignments made to Students from TWH Students described independent study, research and practice lessons as the assignments that were given to them by the tutors from TWH. Generally, students worked in teams, and presented their findings to the class, often using materials from TWH. Page 25 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Student responses to the requirements of the assignments are presented below: Table 4: Students’ Responses Requirement Y/N Comment Recite facts? Y Especially research and debates Analyze factors that influence sexual behavior? Y Especially role plays Discuss sexual behavior among themselves? Y Peer Education Sessions with SPW as well as class discussions and assignment prep. Promote age appropriate discussion with learners? Y Assignments made for grade levels Develop participatory activities for students? Y Especially when using Interactive Methods Manual or TWH Use TWH materials Y Extensively used Use of TWH videos and CD ROM N Few videos used by tutors or students; CD materials either not installed or students unaware. Reflect on your own behavior? Y Especially role plays, peer education session and because they are role models. Evidence from practice teaching: The Evaluators observed three student-teachers practicing in basic schools. In each case, the students presented an “integrated” lesson with the potential for a high degree of participation by the students. Each lesson had a plan on file that had been marked by a mentor teacher, though there was no classroom observation to review the execution of the plan. In the first case, the observed lesson was a science/hygiene lesson for Grade 2 students. The teacher added good and bad touches to a lesson on hand-washing. The lesson plan had been marked by the mentor teacher, and described the hand-washing and HIV&AIDS related objectives. The activities for both hand-washing and touches were primarily teacher statement followed by student mimicking. At the end of the lesson, the student-teacher asked two children to come forward (one girl, one boy) and demonstrated parts of each body that should not be touched by strangers. Both the hand-washing and the demonstration of touches could have been done by the learners rather than the teacher. Learners might have also been presented with the opportunity to demonstrate what they might say/do when confronted with bad touches. This feedback was provided to the student-teacher who acknowledged that she was a bit hesitant to touch the students herself, and that having them touch themselves in demonstration might be a better way to handle the situation. Page 26 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 The second lesson was a Grade 5 SDS lesson. In a revision of previous work, the student￾teacher asked a series of questions that linked HIV&AIDS and food security, with challenges ranging from special nutritional needs of HIV+ people; consequences of loss of productivity, labor, time and educational opportunities in the face of HIV&AIDS and subsequent poverty. She went on to remind students that poverty could lead to stealing and even prostitution. The class next performed a role play of a rich businessman who proposed to a school girl. The girl accepted because her family was poor; the man developed HIV and died, leaving his family and the girl’s in dire straits. The learners’ interpretations of the roles and the response of their fellow learners (boisterous laughter) revealed a high degree of familiarity with the example. The teacher moved the discussion to the consequences to the families of the man’s death, for his own family and that of the girl. The teacher asked learners what they could do to avoid HIV&AIDS. Their responses included: abstain; no sleeping together of boys and girls; concentrate on our books; share information with our friends; tell our parents when someone proposes. The teacher’s energy was high and the class responded well to her energy as well as to the role play. The teacher concluded by saying that she wanted the children to grow up healthy and HIV free. The third lesson was a literacy lesson for a mixed Grade 5/6 class. The teacher led and students joined in singing “We Are Going to the Station” as they moved to a reading mat, sitting on the floor around the seated teacher. The teacher read a few pages from “Wasting Our Future”. The teacher reads a few pages, checking from time to time to see if the learners can recall what was read. After what seems a very few minutes, the teacher puts the book away and engages learners in group specific activities from their text books. She works with one group. The Evaluators later learned that the story is read in small pieces to maintain interest and that the teacher was working with the slowest group, while others worked independently. Each group then presented their work, and the class was concluded. Because the part of the story that was read was so brief, there was no opportunity to discuss or analyze an HIV&AIDS related issue from the story. Page 27 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 These examples illustrate the range of interpretations of “integration” across the curriculum, with the most successful or meaningful integration in the second lesson. No classroom observations had been done yet at any practice teaching site and while there is some value in letting student￾teachers settle in, the practice of late observation provides an opportunity for student-teachers to develop weak teaching practices early on. In the first instance, the student-teacher, unsure of how much ‘touching of learners’ she could actually do in the classroom, had no one to turn to for advice; in the second instance, the lesson was well executed and HIV well managed in terms of its economic consequences and the social norms that drove it. This lesson might have been a good example/experience for a mentor teacher to observe so as to pass on the example to other student-teachers. The final lesson was an example of some of the earlier efforts to :”include” rather than integrate, HIV&AIDS in lessons Mentors do not have specific guidelines for observation regarding the integration of HIV&AIDS across the curriculum, though most are aware of the policy and the SPRINT materials on HIV&AIDS. The ability of mentors to observe student-teachers was further hampered by the teachers’ strike. All senior teachers and student-teachers needed to teach in order to maintain learning at the schools. 7.5 Strategy for Implementing the TWH Approach and Rolling-out the Materials The materials that were developed after the pilot at the four colleges were introduced nationally through three orientation workshops conducted by MOE and CHANGES2 staff. HOSs, who composed most of the sample were trained in the use of the materials over a three day period, and asked to replicate the process with their colleagues at the college. Several reported the participation of the CHANGES2 team in the college based orientation. The orientation provided an overview of the approach and materials; demonstrated the use of the videos through a viewing and subsequent discussion, on the film and on its potential use in the classroom. The bulk of the orientation was individual preparation by tutors to demonstrate activities from the Tutor’s Guide, linking them to activities in the Student-teacher’s Guide. HOS’s largely reviewed the guides with their colleagues, and most tutors then asked students to research and present various activities from the Student-teacher’s Guide. The sections titled “Preparing to Teach” were not mentioned by tutors nor were such teaching tips reported by student-teachers. Among students and tutors there was recognition of two of the videos provided by CHANGES2, namely Yesterday and Yellow Card. Tutors also mentioned Emma’s Story and Silent Epidemic though they were not among the TWH materials. The soft copies of the guides and the supplementary materials were not installed on staff or student computers in any college. Charles Lwanga was the only college where the existence of the CD was acknowledged. The Evaluators installed the CD materials at the other two colleges and at schools where there was interest and equipment. Page 28 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 The Principal Education Officer-TED has also ensured that the CDs are in the District Resource Centers, having personally installed them at each DRC. He has taken the time to introduce the materials to the DRCCs, who are responsible for in-service training of basic school teachers. MOE and CHANGES2 staff made monitoring and support visits to the colleges following the orientation of the tutors to the materials and approach. These early monitoring visits revealed that tutors were often describing or discussing activities rather than conducting them in their classrooms, and that student-teachers’ perceptions of the use of participatory methods differed from that of their tutors. During this evaluation tutors and students report more use of the TWH manuals and activities, evidenced by their ability to cite specific example of how they integrated HIV&AIDS into their study areas, with specific examples of activities that were implemented in their classrooms. Though there was still a trend toward tutor led discussion of activities, students were assigned to research HIV&AIDS topics and to present their results and/or practice lessons during class time. This enabled them to acquire research skills and information, to discuss critical HIV&AIDS and life skills related topics, and to practice conducting participatory activities in each of the study areas. 8 Conclusions ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ is an excellent approach to protecting youth aged 5-14 years by preparing pre-service teachers to provide age appropriate life skills and knowledge that promote HIV prevention. The materials that have been developed are technically sound, reflect current principles of reproductive health education and HIV&AIDS prevention for youth; and respond to the goals of the Ministry of Education for the mitigation and prevention of HIV in the sector. The approach incorporates the need to work within and strengthen the MOE teacher development system as it moves forward with prevention education. There remains work to be done to maximize the impact of this approach and the materials; to create a sense of responsibility and build the skills of tutors and teachers to develop new activities for use in the classroom; and to actively mentor and support student-teachers who are beginning their practice and w ho are committed to protecting the Window of Hope. The use and effectiveness of the TWH approach has been enhanced by the presence of other programs. Tutors, student-teachers and school administrators acknowledged the importance of other HIV prevention programs, notably Student Partnership Worldwide (SPW) and the USAID supported program, Reaching out to HIV Affected Persons with Integrated Development and Support (RAPIDS). Descriptions of these programs can be found in Appendix III. Page 29 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 It is probably safe to say that the use and effectiveness of TWH have been influenced by the presence of these and other programs/activities at schools and colleges, but that does not diminish the contribution of TWH to the MOE goal of protecting the Window of Hope. More specific conclusions are described below: 8.1 TWH addresses the needs of the Ministry of Education to protect the Window of Hope, integrate HIV&AIDS across the curriculum, and promote behavior change among staff and students at colleges and basic schools. TWH has provided a concrete approach to addressing several key elements of the MOE strategy on HIV&AIDS. It offers a way to train pre-service teachers to protect the Window of Hope, taking advantage of the “captive audience” of in-school youth. It has contributed significantly to the integration of HIV prevention in all study areas. The development of the approach and materials was inclusive, representing teacher educators, curriculum specialists and HIV&AIDS specialists. 8.2 The approach has promoted college wide dialogue on culturally sensitive issues related to sexual behavior including harmful practices, gender and cross- generational and transactional sex. Tutors and student-teachers have become more comfortable and confident in discussing any topic incidental to the prevention of sexual transmission of HIV. This has strengthened their ability to teach in the Window of Hope, prepare students for such teaching, for discussing HIV&AIDS related issues with parents and community members, and to reflect on their own approaches to preventing HIV infection. 8.3 TWH has provided tutors and student-teachers with concrete examples and experiences in integrating HIV&AIDS across the curriculum and using participatory methods to do so. Both groups report confidence in their ability to integrate HIV&AIDS across the curriculum and to use participatory, learner-centered activities when doing so. They also report feeling comfortable discussing critical issues related to HIV prevention in age appropriate ways and in having such discussions with community members. Many assignments at college have moved beyond the recitation of facts about HIV and involve some level of independent analysis and creative thinking. However, no specific assignments, guidelines, expectations have been established for the student practice teaching period. Page 30 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 8.4 Student-teachers in practice need early and focused support as they work to integrate HIV&AIDS across the curriculum and to use participatory methods while on teaching practice. They are working very hard to implement what they have learned about ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’ but are not adequately supported by school based or college staff as they begin their teaching practice. Tutors only monitor once per term and head teachers, senior teachers/mentors are not familiar with the principles and practices of TWH and though they mark lesson plans, they do not observe student-teachers until the third or fourth week in the classroom. Student-teachers are missing opportunities to acquire or be reinforced in good practices early on in the teaching practice term. 8.5 The design and implementation processes were participatory and included appropriate representation. As a pre-service training approach, the training, monitoring and support of tutors and pre-service students were appropriate. They did not however go far enough to ensure that the practices would be implemented and supported at the classroom level. Tutors, and in-service teachers need additional information, performance expectations and possibly skills to ensure that TWH as a concept is fully operationalized. Though it is likely that one year of monitoring and support from headquarters (and CHANGES2) is enough to launch the approach, it is not enough to institutionalize it. Additional input and support from headquarters, continuous support to colleges and from colleges to practice teaching sites will be needed for quality assurance, sustained implementation and institutionalization of the approach. 8.6 In addition to the challenges of monitoring and supporting student-teachers, there is an ongoing sense that the MOE needs to “finish” integrating HIV&AIDS across the curriculum. There is an implicit sense that SPRINT, TWH, Interactive Methodologies Manual, Life Skills, and the Sample Activities are only a beginning and that there is a need to integrate for other topics within study areas. Tutors and teachers in their request for more activities seem to feel removed from the process of generating new activities or approaches, while the MOE hope is that tutors and teachers will do this as part of their ongoing duties. 8.7 TWH has also required tutors and student-teachers to reflect on their own attitudes and behaviors regarding HIV&AIDS prevention, positive living and creating discrimination free schools. Though tutors were not as forthcoming, several student noted that the discussions and assignments related to TWH resulted in a shift in attitude toward people who are HIV+ and OVCs; and reconsideration of their own behavior and risk factors. Cross generational and transactional sex remain topics that when posed to tutors elicit some nervous, self conscious laughter. Page 31 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 9 Recommendations 9.1 Extend the length of the tutor orientation program to include sessions in which tutors actually develop their own integrated activities, review a checklist for meaningful integration. 9.2 Continue development and dissemination of lesson plans that reflect meaningful integration of HIV&AIDS. This is especially needed in Mathematics and Creative Technology Studies. Develop a rubric for meaningful integration and introduce it to tutors during the orientation for TWH. 9.3 Increase expectations at colleges and schools for the use of the TWH approach and materials for pre-service teacher education. This might include: a) Developing and introducing a monitoring and support tool for use by HOSs and principals to measure appropriate integration in the COE study areas, based on their direct observation of classrooms. b) Developing a similar tool for use during the student practice teaching term that focuses on integration and life skills. c) Engaging tutors in the development and implementation of an orientation program for mentors and/or head teachers currently serving at student teaching practice sites. Such an orientation would enable tutors to further internalize and demonstrate the approach and methods and leadership at basic schools to become familiar with the approach. During the orientation, school based staff can also be encouraged to include TWH in Teacher Group Meetings (TGMs) and other professional development events. d) Providing additional opportunities for dialogue about cross-generational and transactional sex; gender; and HIV&AIDS prevention among college tutors. This might be linked to the MOE workplace program, which is tasked with promoting prevention at all levels and in all institutions. 9.4 Build the professional skills of tutors, principals, head teachers and mentors to support the application of skills and concepts required to teach in the ‘Window of Hope’ in the basic school classroom: a) Workshop: Creating Meaningful Integration Activities for HIV&AIDS Across the Curriculum: This workshop would be open by application to tutors and senior teachers who were willing to attend the workshop, develop some materials, including role plays, games and lesson plans in the workshop; pilot test and modify the materials after use; and review a final collection of sample activities in their study area. Page 32 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 b) Take advantage of the ‘content’ expertise of tutors, and engage them in writing additional activities for COE study areas and basic school learning areas. Create the expectation that they will generate activities and that they will also teach their students to write activities for meaningful integration. Reward especially hard working tutor/writers with opportunities to conduct similar workshops at other colleges, participate in exchange visits to other colleges and/or to develop and conduct such a workshop with DRCCs and ZICs. The content expertise of the tutors plus the more direct school based experience of DRCCs and ZICs can help to accelerate the diffusion of the concepts and materials. c) Conduct an orientation for head teachers and mentors at student practice sites toward the end of the first term, in preparation for the placement of student-teachers, engage high performing tutors in the orientation of staff at student practice sites. In addition to an overview of the approach and materials, provide tutor-led opportunities for head teachers and mentors to dialogue about harmful sexual practices, intergenerational and transactional sex, multiple concurrent partners, sexuality and other critical topics. Provide them a tool for assessing meaningful integration that can be used when reviewing lesson plans and observing in the classroom. 9.5 Provide public professional recognition for individual educators such as opportunities to present their work at national or regional conferences. Explore the possibility of participation on a panel or poster session for PEPFAR Implementing Partner meetings. Seek funding for Zambia to take the lead in reviewing efforts, materials related to classroom-based, teacher-led prevention efforts in the region/sub region 9.6 Add a section on community mapping to the student-teacher guide to encourage student￾teachers to establish which other players are in the field doing something relevant to TWH with a view to forge alliances, identify additional resources and enhance collaboration and networking between school and community. 9.7 Continue the CHANGES2 practice of working with existing MOE structures and providing technical assistance in both Teacher Education and HIV&AIDS Page 33 of 42                         Description of Activity Days Develop Evaluation tools .5 Review the Evaluation tools with TA 1 Travel to Southern Province and visit Charles Lwanga COE 1 Visit Teaching Practice Sites 1 Travel back to Lusaka .5 Travel to Northern Province 1 Visit Kasama COE and teaching sites 1 Visited teaching sites .5 Traveled to Central Province .5 Visited Malcolm Moffat COE and visited some teaching practice sites 1 Visited some teaching sites .5 Return to Lusaka 1 Preparation for debrief .5 Presentation of lessons from the field .5 Preparation of the report 1 Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Table 5: Scheduled activities Page 34 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Appendix I: Names of Schools/ Organizations and Individuals Contacted CHANGES2 Dr. Joan Woods, HIV&AIDS Advisor Ministry of Education James Silwambwa, Chief Education Officer/TED Malinda Malinda, Principal Education Officer/TED Charles Lwanga College of Education Fr. Fred Kabwe, Principal Catherine B. Chipeta, A/Vice Principal Jonathan Hazela, HOS Moses Halimvwa, S/Lecturer Charles Mwawambala, S/Lecturer Siameja Trudy N, S/Lecturer B.S. Muyambango, A/HOS Practice Teaching Sites, Charles Lwanga COE Charles Lwanga Basic School Simutelo Godfrey-D/Head Mervis M. Ng’andu-S/Teacher Chikwa Darius-Student-teacher Nyendwa Patricia-Student-teacher Monze Town School Malamo R. Macha,H/Teacher Siamupa Jenipher,S/Teacher Mukambala, EK,D/Head Brenda Munkombwe-Student-teacher Tagore Basic School Eric Miyombo, Head Teacher Donic Nyimba-Student-teacher Christone Kesbenje-Student-teacher Kasama College of Education Zulu EM,A/Principal Matafwali M, A/V.Principal Hamachila V, HOS Maths Chumbu CN, HOS Technology Simbeya K.,HOS LLE Mulenga J.,A/HOS SSME Chanda SP, A/HOS Science Muswema M, A/HOS Education Nonde RC, HOS EA First Year Students: Chisase Lombe Muyuka Yvonne Nyirongo Mutale Practice Teaching Sites, Kasama College of Education Malama Basic School Mwenso SC, A/Deputy Head Sikaonga CZ,Senior Teacher Mutiti GCM, A/Senior Teacher Nakamba CB, Class Teacher/Mentor Chanda K, Student-teacher Mwaba B, Student-teacher Page 35 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Tembo E, Student-teacher Mate Mutonga, Student-teacher Chilando Stephens, Student-teacher Mubanga Chipoya Basic School Chansa Levy, Student-teacher Malcolm Moffat College of Education Sialombe Sylvester-Tutor on Duty, S/Lecturer SSME Siabasiye Lloyd-HOS/Science, Acting for Acting Vice Principal Kasimba K-S/Lecturer Lukanga VM-S/Lecturer Kaambila G-S/Lecturer Chuulu Rodgers-A/HOS/SSME Banda William-S/Lecturer Simaasa D. Chula-A/HOS ES Edward Banda-S/Lecturer Singogo Wayson G-S/Lecturer Kunda W Chabala-HOS Mubanza PC-S/Lecturer Mwaba S-S/Lecturer First Year Students Donalia Sakala Linda Muwowo Harry Simbaya Alick A. Mtonga Timothy K. Manoma Practice Teaching Sites, Malcolm Moffat College of Education Miselo Kapika Basic School Mrs. QC Chewe, Deputy H/Teacher Diyase Yvonne Makukula, Mentor Kaumba Doreen W,.Mentor Violet Sakuwaha, Student-teacher Kanyamuna Gloria, Student-teacher Sr, Judith Nkole, Student-teacher Mwewa Chisenga, Student-teacher, UNZA BA Candidate Miyoba Caroline, Student-teacher Michelo Shamu, Student-teacher Sharone Ngosa, Student-teacher, Daglory College Costencia Muntanga, Student-teacher Brenda Musonda, Student-teacher Mupanga Makukula, Student-teacher Kamwala Basic School Nsululu A.C. -Head Teacher Shang’omba Wendy-D/Head Teacher Simukonda Ared-Student-teacher* Nshindano Chewe-Student-teacher* Musonda Rosemary-Student-teacher, Mansa College Lungu Yobe-Student-teacher* Mwape Jonathan-Student-teacher* Tembo Samson-Student-teacher* Chileshe M Margaret-Student-teacher* Kampamba Pamela-Student-teacher* Boma Basic School Mrs. Daga, D/Head Teacher Mrs. Kayera, Senior Teacher Mwunga S. Josephine , 1st Senior Teacher Chisenga Solomon, Student-teacher Page 36 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Mangala Dickie, Student-teacher Muyuni Teddy, Student-teacher Nwansa Ontridah, Student-teacher* *Student-teachers who completed their college work prior to introduction of TWH Page 37 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Appendix II Questions for College Administrators Introduction • Team Members • Name/position of Administrator: • Purpose of evaluation We are seeking input from staff and tutors, first and second year student-teachers, and head teachers at schools where your students are placed. We are looking for evidence that the outcomes have been reached and how the TWH materials and implementation contributed to the outcomes. A. Some general questions 1. How do you see the role of primary school teachers in promoting HIV prevention among learners aged 5-14, i.e., in the Window of Hope? The purpose of this evaluation is to consider the extent to which Teaching in the Window of Hope has enabled College Tutors and Student Teachers to promote HIV prevention education. The expected outcomes of TWH are: • HIV prevention education would be integrated into all the COE study areas and examinable • Dialogue around harmful social norms, gender and sexuality would become more open (tutors/student teachers, student teachers/pupils and communities) • Topics which were taboo, such as multiple concurrent partnerships, adolescent sexuality and intergenerational sex, would be analyzed. • Participatory teaching styles would be used by tutors, perhaps even spilling over from HIV education into other topics. 2. How do you see the role of college tutors in two areas: o Promoting the prevention of HIV among student-teachers o Helping student-teachers acquire the knowledge, skills and confidence to promote HIV prevention among primary students aged 5-14, i.e., the Window of Hope? 3. How were you involved in the development of the TWH program and materials? 4. How were you involved in preparing tutors to implement the program? 5. What kind of monitoring support does the college provide to tutors as they implement TWH? 6. Which aspects of TWH have been easiest for tutors to implement? 7. Which aspects of TWH have been most difficult for tutors to implement? 8. What has been the response of the student-teachers to TWH? B. Questions regarding intended outcomes 1. Is HIV prevention education fully integrated into all the COE study areas? Yes__- N0___ Are there some areas where it has not yet been integrated? Which? Why hasn’t it been integrated in this area? 2. Has TWH promoted more open dialogue at college related to harmful social norms, gender and sexuality? Among tutors? Between tutors and student-teachers? What evidence is there of such dialogue? How has the college promoted discussion of sexual behavior between generations? 3. Which of the following topics have been discussed at the college in the past year in the context of preventing sexual transmission of HIV? Who has participated in the discussions? Which TWH materials have supported these discussions? (include print, film/video and CD ROM) Topic Discussion participants TWH Materials Used (type, title) Adolescent sexuality Multiple concurrent partnerships Intergenerational sex Page 38 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 4. TWH is designed for highly participatory methods. How have tutors and students responded to these methods? Have you seen any evidence that participatory teaching styles promoted in TWH have spilled over from HIV education into other topics? Can you provide a specific example? 5. What TWH assignments have been made to student-teachers: a. during their course work b. when they go for practice teaching 6. What do colleges expect from schools to ensure that TWH activities are implemented during practice teaching? C. Questions related to the evaluation objectives 1. How does TWH fit into the MOE overall strategy for HIV prevention, treatment, care and support for learners and staff? Into the college program? 2. How would you describe your role/contribution to the development of TWH? Were there other contributions that you might have made? Are there others who should have been involved? Who? How should they have been involved? 3. TWH has provided a tutors’ guide, student-teacher guide, videos and a CD with supplementary materials to be installed on all college computers. • Have the guides been provided to all tutors and students? • Which activities/content have been most useful/most often used by tutors? • How and how often are the videos used by tutors? Which videos have been used most often? (Yesterday, Yellow Card, More Time, Everyone’s Child, Window of Hope) • Have the supplementary materials on the CD been installed on all college computers? If not why not? • Do tutors and students have skills and access to be able to use them? (does college policy allow easy access?) • Which materials are most often used by tutors? 4. Have you noticed any changes in the tutors: are they discussing sexual behavior and HIV prevention with student-teachers? How comfortable are they? Which TWH activities/content have been helpful in this respect? How has TWH affected personal views and behavior vis-a-vis prevention of HIV for self, tutors/staff and your students? (ABC, partner reduction, transactional sex) 5. What current TWH activities/content will be most/least appropriate in diploma/degree program; what else might be included? 6. What support if any, do you as a college administrator need to promote the implementation of TWH in the college (all programs)? College:_____________________________________- Name/Title of Interviewee(s): Date: Page 39 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 Appendix III Other Players 1. Students’ Partnerships Worldwide (SPW) A brief inquiry on SPW revealed that the organization considers itself a global leader in supporting young people to address the urgent health, education, and environmental issues which affect their lives, communities, and countries. The organization set up a program in Zambia in January 2004. It seeks to work in collaboration with the Ministry of Education other stakeholders in the education sector to ensure that the SPW Zambia program is replicated in the rest of the country and recognized by MOE in the prevention of HIV amongst in-school youths. SPW Zambia operates two programs which have volunteers, namely School Health Education Program (SHEP) and Teachers AIDS Action Program (TAAP). SPW Volunteer Peer Educators (VPEs) are based in primary and secondary schools in Central Province. Some of the terms of reference of the volunteers include the following: • Teach timetabled, structured lessons for grades 5-12 covering topics such as teenage pregnancy, STIs, HIV and AIDS • Utilize non-formal and interactive techniques to develop life skills such as communication, assertiveness, and self-esteem • Organize sports, performing arts, and Youth Clubs with HIV and AIDS related themes • Improve access to informative materials by developing or establishing youth resource centers • Organize and run awareness-raising events in cooperation with local government and health professionals and teachers • Conduct Sexual and Reproductive Health (SRH) and life skills seminars for classes at teachers colleges • Facilitate various clubs which develop the life skills of student-teachers • Engage local organizations to respond to the needs of young people • Establish youth resource centers as safe spaces for student-teachers and youth to access youth-friendly health information SPW has also planned to place Teachers’ AIDS Action Program Volunteer Peer Educators in urban or per-urban areas in well-established teacher colleges of education. Page 40 of 42                         Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 2. Reaching AIDS-affected People with Integrated Development and Support (RAPIDS Kamwala Basic School reported that the school was implementing some activities under RAPIDS. RAPIDS is a consortium of six organizations that provides an integrated package of community￾based prevention, treatment and care support to orphans and vulnerable children and people living with HIV&AIDS in all nine provinces of Zambia. Consortium members include World Vision, Africare, CARE, Catholic Relief Services, the Salvation Army and the Expanded Church Response. RAPIDS has a network of 12,000 volunteer Zambian caregivers. Page 41 of 42                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Teaching in the Window of Hope Evaluation, May 2009 REFERENCES Ministry of Education, CHANGES2, Findings from the Implementation of HIV&AIDS Teacher Education Course (HATEC) at Four Colleges in 2007, January 2008 Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, National Policy on Education, ‘Educating Our Future’, 1996 Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, CHANGES2 Program, ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’, HIV&AIDS Education for Zambian Teachers, Student‐teacher Handbook, Draft, 2008 Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, CHANGES2 Program, ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’, Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, CHANGES2 Program, Sample HIV Prevention Activities for Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, National Policy for the Management and Mitigation of Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, Interactive Methodologies Manual for HIV&AIDS Prevention Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, National HIV and AIDS Strategic Framework 2006‐2010, May USAID/Zambia CHANGES2, Report on the Implementation of ‘‘Teaching in the Window of Hope’’: HIV&AIDS Education for Zambian Teachers in Colleges of Education, November 2008 HIV&AIDS Education for Zambian Teachers, Tutors Guide, 2008 Integration into Grades 1‐9 Subjects 2008 HIV&AIDS in the Education Sector, 2003 Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, HIV&AIDS Strategic Plan 2001‐2005 Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, and HIV&AIDS Abridged Strategic Plan 2006‐2007 in Zambian Schools, 1st Edition, 2003 Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Education, HIV AIDS Guidelines for Educators, 2003 2006 Page 42 of 42