Learning Achievement at the Grade 4 Level in the Interactive Radio 
Instruction (IRI) Centres: Report on the Comparative Study of the Basic 
Competencies in English and Mathematics in the IRI Centres and GRZ 
Schools
The Examinations Council of Zambia on Behalf of the Education Broadcasting 
Services (EBS) 
W.M. Kapamabwe
May 2003
Contract GS-10F-0112J 
Task Order No. 690-M-00-02-00001-00 
EMIS and Related Activities
American Institutes for Research 
USAID/Zambia
SO2: Improved quality of basic education for more school-aged children 
IR 2.3: Improved information for education decision making processes
This document was created using Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional 
Submitted by:
American Institutes for Research 
1000 Thomas Jefferson St. NW 
Washington, DC 20007
Phone: 202.403.5000/Fax: 202.403.5979
www.air.org
Learning Achievement at the Grade 4 Level in the Interactive Radio 
Instruction (IRI) Centres
Report
On 
The Comparative Study of the Basic Competencies in English and 
Mathematics in the IRI Centres and GRZ Schools 
The Examinations Council of Zambia on Behalf of the Education 
Broadcasting Services (EBS)
Ministry of Education
Lusaka 
Report Prepared By 
W.M. Kapamabwe & M. Chilala (ECZ), F.Lubinda (EBS) and
D.Garavaglia (AIR) 
1
Part One: Introduction
1.1. Background to the IRI Programme 
Interactive Radio Instruction is a methodology of education delivery by 
 radio. The emphasis of IRI is on audience involvement and marks a 
change from earlier forms of education. 
In the past, although the radio was used for instructional purposes, it 
usually followed the traditional class room form of education. The 
teacher taught while the students just listened. There was very little 
pupil participation. 
In the IRI methodology, emphasis is on interaction between the radio
teacher and the learners. Research has shown that learning is 
more effective when students are involved in the learning process. 
The other important aspect of IRI is the presence of a mentor who is a 
link between the radio teacher and the children. 
IRI has been used the world over to solve different problems. It 
started in Nicaragua where the radio was used to improve the quality
of teaching Mathematics. It was successful. IRI was used in Bolivia
to teach mothers early child hood education. It was also used in south 
Africa and Swaziland to teach Literacy. In all these countries IRI was 
successful. In Zambia IRI is being used to increase access to education 
for out of school children. 
However, whatever the purpose of IRI the underlying principles are the 
same. It is highly interactive, it involves learners in a variety of activities such as 
games drills, stories, physical activities, songs and many others. 
There is also the aspect of translation of unfamiliar or new concepts in 
a local language. The other characteristic is that IRI lessons are evaluated (formative 
evaluation) before they are broadcast. This allows for an improvement of programmes. 
2
2.0. IRI IN ZAMBIA 
IRI was introduced in Zambia in the year 2000. This was as a result of many children 
who were out of school. At the time of the introduction of IRI, 750,000 children were 
out-of-school, including orphans. This became a source of concern to Government 
which has the obligation of offering basic Education to all children of school going age. 
The National Policy on Education entitled ‘Educating our future’ emphasises
Government’s recognition of the basic right of every Zambian to good quality 
education. However, Government alone with it’s limited resources can not achieve this
goal. There is need to explore other avenues such as distance Education especially 
the use of radio. This mode of learning is cheaper and captures a wide audience. It 
was for this reason that the Ministry of Education, through Educational Broadcasting 
Services was tasked with the responsibility of producing Educational radio programmes 
popularly known as ‘Learning at Taonga Market. The concept of a market serves as a 
rich and ideal setting for interaction in a market situation. 
The programme started as a pilot project in July 2000. It was officially opened by 
the then Minister of Education Brigadier General Godfrey Miyanda. 
As pointed out the programme started as a Pilot in Lusaka, Chilanga and Chongwe. 
There were only 15 centres then. Later the programme was extended to all the 
Provinces in the country. There are now about 400 centres through out the country, 
with approximately 12,000 children receiving IRI lessons. 
Some of the obligations of Government are to produce the programmes, provide 
student requisites such as books, pencils, board, chalk, pay for air time as well as 
teachers. 
The communities were expected to provide shelter or meeting places, radios and 
mentors as well as support for them. However, there is an increasing lack of support 
for mentors by the communities. This is attributed to high poverty levels by the local 
communities.
There is, therefore, need for NGOs, Church Organisations and other Community 
Based Organisations to support IRI centres. Incorporating all pedagogical principles 
much govern IRI these include distributed learning which is a technique of arranging 
teaching items in such a way that there systematic repetition of the same in 
subsequent programmes, lessons are also supposed to include active, learning 
3
activities and there should be interactivity. IRI lessons are subjected to vigorous 
formative evaluation, whose results provide information which is fed into future
programmes and past programmes. 
2.1. LESSON REVIEW AND RECORDING 
The lesson are also reviewed by a team of reviewers for quality and appropriateness of 
content before broadcast. 
Recording of programmes is done at EBS and Radio actors are hired on contract 
present radio lessons.
Producers guide the radio recording process in the studio. The studio uses a variety of 
media and modern equipment. 
2.2. ORGANISATION OF GRADE 4 IRI PROGRAMMES 
Interactive radio lessons are broadcast daily using the Zambia National Broadcasting 
Radio 2 channel. Each lesson is 30 minutes in duration. Grade four radio lessons are 
divided into two areas – English/Social Studies and life skills, the other one is 
Mathematics/Science and Life skills. 
2.3. DESIGN PROCESS 
The lessons confirm to the IRI standard design process which starts
with making the design document which is a collection of activities that 
will be carried out in the production of an IRI programme. The 
document consists of the scope and sequence of topics to be taught, it 
also contains a profile of radio characters, Master plans for each lesson 
and radio scripts. 
2.4. WRITERS/PRODUCERS
Lessons are written by a team of writers/producers who have extensive teaching 
experience and have been trained in the IRI methodology. Each lesson is carefully 
planned, and incorporates interactive radio instruction pedagogical principles these 
include active learning, distributed learning techniques, rigorous formative evaluation, 
and different formats of presenting of learning items like drama, stories, drills, games, 
songs and chants. Educational Broadcasting Services management is responsible for 
organising mentor training. Some producers/writers are also part of the training team. 
4
2.5. OUTREACH ACTIVITIES 
Education Broadcasting Services through it’s out reach unit collaborates with 
communities, NGO’S, churches and donor agencies working with Interactive Radio 
Instruction learning centres in various parts of the country. 
2.6. CALENDAR/TIME TABLE
The grade four programmes are broadcast twice daily. The Maths/Science is
broadcast from 11:00 hours to 11:30 hours the programme is repeated in the afternoon 
from 15:00 hours to 15:30 hours. English and Social Studies broadcast starts at 11:30 
to 12:00 hours the same programme is repeated in the afternoon from 16:00 hours to 
16:30 hours. Two hundred programmes are broadcast covering a period of 20 weeks. 
5
1.4 Organisation of IRI 
1.5 Objectives of the Comparative Study
Background
The Interactive Radio Instruction (IRI) is a methodology of teaching through radio
which requires learners to participate actively during the lesson. Learners take part in 
the activities just as they do in a regular classroom. 
In spite of some obvious differences between the regular IRI programme for Grade 4 
aims at fulfilling the 4 GRZ syllabus in 6 months. 
It has been claimed that the learners produced by the IRI programme are just as good 
as those produced by the GRZ regular schools. 
In an effort to evaluate the effectiveness of the IRI programme, it was decided that
validated competence tests in English and Mathematics be administered to the pupils 
at the grade 4 level in both the IRI and GRZ regular schools. 
This comparative study has objectives: 
1. To assess the learning achievement levels of the IRI and GRZ Grade 4 learners 
in Maths and English.
2. To compare the learning achievement levels of the IRI and the GRZ grade 4 
learners in Maths and English. 
3. To evaluate the learning conditions in the IRI centres. 
Part Two: Study Design 
2.0 STUDY DESIGN 
2.1 Sampling Procedures 
2.1.1 The sampling units for this study were 970 children who were about to 
complete their Grade 4 work in the IRI centres and 842 Grade 5 pupils
who had completed their Grade 4 work in 2002. The IRI pupils 
completed their Grade 4 - six months’ coursework on January 16th 2003. 
2.1.2 The 970 children from the IRI centres were sampled from 15 districts and 
51 centres. 
2.1.3 The 842 children from the GRZ schools were sampled from 7 provinces, 
17 districts and 43 schools. 
6
Table 1.0 and Table 2.0 show the province name, district name, number of boys and girls for 
the different centres and schools respectively. 
Table 1.0: IRI Sampled Centres 
No. Province District Centre Name Female Male No. of 
Pupils
Ndola Twapia A
Chipulukusu 
Nkhwazi 
Kaloko
Twapia
10
10
10
7
11
10
10
10
13
9
20
20
20
20
20
1. Copperbelt 
Chingola Kapisha Taonga A 
Chigayo 
Kapisha Taonga B 
10
6
10
14
20
20
Chipata Changu
Mshawa 
Makangila 
7
5
7
3
10
11
10
15
18
2. Eastern 
Nyimba Tigwilizane 
Kakonkho
Kayongo 
9
10
17
11
10
3
20
20
20
Lusaka Bajleni 
Kamanga 
Chainda
Garden
Kaunda Square 
8
9
10
11
15
12
11
10
9
5
20
20
20
20
20
Chongwe Chibengele
Mwachilele
Shiyala
Ngwerere
6
12
4
11
14
8
16
9
20
20
20
20
Kafue Sinu 
Linda
10
4
10
7
20
11
3. Lusaka
Luangwa Chitope 6 14 20
4. Northern Kasama Kasama Village 
Musenga
Mulambe
Mponda
Luyeye 
9
6
12
6
10
11
12
8
14
10
20
18
19
20
20
Monze Singonya 
Chona
Hampongo
Chipembele
Cheelo
Naluca
Hanamaila 
Namakube
9
3
5
13
15
5
8
4
6
10
8
17
14
10
21
6
15
13
13
30
29
15
29
10
5. Southern
Choma Kanchomba
Choompa
Kasikili 
11
15
4
9
1
11
20
16
15
6. Western Mongu Kapulanga 
Limulunga 
11
8
9
4
20
12
7. Luapula Mansa Chitondo 
Mutima
8
7
12
13
20
20
8. Central Mkushi Itala 11 9 20
9. North-western Solwezi Chalalankuba
Bukwansho 
Katoka
Chawama
8 
13
6 
12
12
7
14
8
20
20
20
20
TOTAL 401 459 970
7
Table 2.0: GRZ Sampled Centres 
No. Province District Centre Name Female Male No. of 
Pupils
Ndola Twapia
Twalubuka
Mwabombeni
Nkhwazi 
9
9
20
10
11
11
-
10
20
20
20
20
Chingola Luano
New Mushishima
10 10 20
1. Copperbelt 
Kitwe Twatasha 
Ipusukilo 
Riverain
11
10
9
9
10
11
20
20
20
Chipata J.M. Cronje 
Hillside
Makangila 
10
10
8
10
10
13
20
20
20
Nyimba Mulira 
Chankanga
8
8
12
12
20
20
2. Eastern 
Petauke Mizyu 
Kabvumbe 
9
8
11
12
20
20
Lusaka Bajleni 
Twatasha 
Kanyama 
Vera Chiluba
St. Patricks
9
9
10
10
19
11
11
10
10
1
20
20
20
20
20
Chongwe Mulola
Nyangwenya
Ellensdale 
9
10
11
11
10
9
20
20
20
3. Lusaka
Kafue Mutendere 11 9 20
Kasama Mubanga Chipoya 16 11 20
Mpika Kabale 
Malambwa 
10
10
10
10
20
20
4. Northern 
Isoka Chiwanda 10 10 20
5. Southern Monze Namakube 
Chipembele
Chona
Naluca
Singonya 
8
10
7
10
10
12
10
13
10
10
20
20
20
20
20
Choma Kanchomba
Kasikili 
Choompa
13
7
10
7
13
10
20
20
20
6. Western Mongu Kanyonyo 
Mongu Basic 
13
7
7
13
20
20
7. Central Kapiri-Mposhi Hill-side 
Kapili 
Angelina Tembo 
7
9
19
13
11
1
20
20
20
TOTAL 396 365 842
2.2 Test Administration 
2.2.1 Test Instruments 
The curriculum areas tested in all the schools and the IRI centres were 
Mathematics, English paper 2 (Reading and Writing) and English Paper 
1B (Listening and Speaking). 
In English Reading and Writing, the pupils ability was assessed through 
comprehension and the ability to respond to written passages. As for the 
Listening and Speaking Interviews, the pupils responded to the spoken 
words through an oral interview. 
8
The Mathematics paper tested the pupil’s knowledge, comprehension 
and application in the domains of sets, notation and numeration, addition
and subtraction, multiplication, division, number patterns, money, 
fractions and shapes and measurement. 
The test development process was a collaborative effort between ECZ, 
AIR and EBS. The stages involved in test development are as follows: 
(i) AIR reviews the Grade 4 items in English and Mathematics 
submitted by the ECZ 
(ii) ECZ compiles pre-testing test papers in English and Mathematics 
using the reviewed test items. 
(iii) ECZ/EBS pre-tests the two versions of each test papers. 
(iv) ECZ compiles the draft test papers by excluding items that 
performed badly in the pre-test. 
(v) ECZ consults AIR to review the draft test papers. EBS also 
reviewed the test papers 
(vi) ECZ adopts the reviewed test papers. 
Test Administration Procedures 
The tests were administered by officers from the ECZ and EBS as well as the DIPs from the
sampled districts. 
A briefing on test administration guidelines was conducted for the EBS officers and DIPs in 
Lusaka. 
After the briefing, the DIPs ECZ and EBS officers went to the centres in mid January 2003. 
The test administrators followed the following steps in conducting the competence tests: 
(i) Filling-in the questionnaire about the background information about the center. 
(ii) Selecting the 20 pupils. 
(iii) Assigning the pupils with the pupil numbers or codes; the numbers ranged from 
1 to 20. 
(iv) Filling-in the pupils’ particulars such as: province name and code, district name and 
code, center name and code, pupil name and code, sex, age and location. 
(v) After filling-in the pupils’ particulars, the test administrators should administer the 
Nemeracy Test. The manner of administering should involve the test administrators 
reading the questions for the pupils and thereafter asking them to write the answers. 
(vi) Following the Maths test was the English paper 2 (Reading and Writing). The same 
particulars earlier filled-in by the pupils on the Numeracy Test paper cover page, 
should be filled-in on the English Test paper. 
(vii) The English Paper – (Listening and Speaking) was the third test to be administered. It 
was essentially an interview. The interview was an individual test and each of the 20
pupils took 10 to 15 minutes to complete the interview. 
9
Whilst the testing in the IRI centres was done in January, the testing in the GRZ 
schools was done at Grade 5 level and in March owing to three reasons: 
(i) The programme for the grade 4 IRI was completed in January. 
(ii) The tests were administered to the Grade 5s rather than Grade 4s because the
Grade 5s were deemed to have completed the Grade 4 work and the 2003 
Grade 4s were just in their first term.
(iii) The GRZ school term began later in mid-February. 
Criteria for Performance Analysis
The main criteria for analyzing performance will be the total marks obtained on the whole test 
papers and the marks also obtained per topic (objective) of the test paper. 
The specifications for the test papers were developed by both the ECZ and the AIR
consultant. The constitution of the test paper first involved an extensive review of the 
Specifications for Mathematics. 
Table:
No. Topics Knowledge Comprehension Application No. of 
Questions 
1 Sets 3 
2 Notation and Numeration 2 
3 Addition and Subtraction 5 
4 Multiplication 5
5 Division 5 
6 Number Patterns 2
7 Decimal Measures 1
8 Shapes and
Measurements 
4
9 Fractions 3
TOTALS 30
The test items that had been used for the Grade 4 Basic Competence Tests. The
Mathematics test consisted of 30 non-multiple choice items. 20 of the questions used 
numerals and simple mathematical symbols only; the remaining 10 questions required basic 
reading – literacy though a very basic level. The items that were presented in form of word 
problems were No. 9, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26 and 27. All of the numerical concepts and 
procedures used in the test were taken from the textbooks and materials used for Grade 4. 
The mathematics paper tested the pupils’ knowledge, comprehension and application in the
domains or topics of sets, notation and numeration, addition and subtraction, multiplication, 
division, number patterns, decimal measures, shapes and measurements and fractions. The 
table above shows the mark distribution under the different domains and cognitive skills. 
10
Table: Test Blue Print for Grade 4 English paper 2 (Reading and Writing) 
Grade 4 Literacy: Revised Test Blue Print 
Specifications Knowledge Understanding Application Analysis Synthesis TOTAL 
READING
Alphabet 3 - - - - 3
Phonics 3 - - - - 3
Sight
Vocabulary
4 - - - - 4
Comprehension - 4 4 1 1 10
WRITING
Spelling 3 - 3
Punctuation - 3 3 
Composition - 2 - 1 1 4
TOTAL 13 6 7 2 2 30
Like the specifications for Mathematics, the English Paper 2 (Reading and Writing) were
drawn up by language specialists from the Examinations Council of Zambia (ECZ) and the 
Curriculum Development Centre (CDC) and then later reviewed by the American Institutes for 
Research assessment experts. Collectively, the items sought to test the pupils’ ability to 
recognize and use each letter of the alphabet, recognize and use simple spelling patterns, 
recognize and read simple words including plurals, read simple sentences, understand the 
meaning of simple words and understand the meaning of simple sentences. The English 
Reading and Writing Test also sought to test the pupils’ ability to write each letter of the 
alphabet, write and spell simple words, write simple sentences and punctuating their writing 
using capital letters, full stops, commas and question marks. 
The paper had 30 marks. There were three questions on the alphabet, three questions on the 
phonics, four questions on the sight vocabulary, four questions on comprehension application,
one question on comprehension analysis, one question on comprehension synthesis, one 
question on composition synthesis, one question on composition analysis, three questions on 
spellings, three questions on punctuation and two questions on composition understanding. 
11
Table: Test Blue Print for English paper 1 (Listening and Speaking)
Question 
number Topic Allocated 
marks 
Mark Obtained Sub-Total 
1 –2 About Themselves 2 
3 About Their Family 1 
4 –5 Giving Instructions 2 
6 – 7 Giving Directions 2 
8 Performing Tasks – Action 1 
9 Performing Tasks – Touch 1
10 Performing Tasks – Movement 1 
11 Performing Tasks – Sound 1
12 – 13 Using Language Socially 2
Part A (Listening)
14 - 15 Making choices and Correcting
False Statements 
2
16 - 17 Time-Table 2
18 - 20 Home Scene Picture 3
Part B (Speaking) 
Total 20 
Paper 1 was a Listening and Speaking paper. Altogether, there were 20 questions. 15 
questions were on Listening and 5 questions were on Spelling. Table: shows the specific 
individual questions that were used for the different categories of items under Listening and 
Speaking. 
Questionnaire About The Centre 
A questionnaire was used to gather background information about the IRI Centres. The 
same questionnaire was used to capture some information about some of the GRZ schools. 
The questionnaire captured information about the location of the centres; whether or not they 
were found in rural, urban or peri-urban. The other aspects investigated were: type of 
building, condition of center, availability of radios, usability of radios, availability of batteries, 
mentor’s education level, mentor’s type of training received, availability of teaching materials, 
condition of the chalkboard, attendance by pupils in the center and the number of days in a 
term the mentor was absent due to illness, workshops or other conflicts. 
Data Analysis
The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyse the data in 
different ways. The mean scores were used to describe the data generally. The ANOVAs
(Analysis of Variance) were run so as to be able to calculate significance tests on the 
performance data. The statistics allowed us to determine whether there was statistical 
significance across the groups.
Basic frequencies were calculated to show the various features and characteristics of the 
sampled IRI centres and GRZ schools. 
12
The test performance by mean scores were correlated with the other variables such as type of 
school, gender, location and age by making cross-tabulations in the SPSS. 
Limitations 
There were a number of limitations that were connected to the study: 
! The IRI centres and the GRZ schools were tested at different times. 
! The sample sizes for the IRI and GRZ were different. 
! While the IRI Grade 4 pupils were tested in January, the grade targeted in the GRZ 
schools were the 2002 Grade 4s who were in their second month in Grade 5. This was 
done because the pupils were being tested on the Grade 4 work content. 
Report Design 
This report is divided into six parts. The first part is the introduction and it deals with the 
description of the IRI programme and its objectives. The objectives of the comparative study 
are also outlined in the introduction. The second part deals with the Study Design. The third 
part deals with the description of the characteristics of the IRI Centres and the GRZ schools. 
Part four is concerned with the study Findings in Mathematics for both the IRI and GRZ 
schools. Pat five deals with the Study findings in English. Part six deals with the study 
findings in Listening and Speaking. Lastly, part seven discusses the general conclusions from 
the findings and the recommendations. 
Part Four: Results from the Mathematics Test 
4.1 Introduction 
The results from the Mathematics test will be analysed under five main headings; overall 
mean mark for the two types of schools, mean scores for the different Maths. Sub-topics for 
both the IRI centres and the GRZ schools. 
4.2 Overall Mathematics Mean Scores for IRI Centres and GRZ Schools 
Table: Overall Maths Mean Scores for IRI and GRZ Schools 
Median Overall Mean Scores S.D 
Schools 14.5 13.98 (46.6%) 5.77 
IRI Centres 18.0 17.1 (57%) 6.9 
Overall 16.0 15.6 (52%) 6.6 
The table above shows that in Mathematics, the overall mean score for both the IRI and GRZ 
was 15.6 out of the maximum of 30. This represented a percentage of 52%. 
The results show a significant difference in the mean scores with the IRI Centres having a 
higher mean score of 17.1 (57%) than the GRZ Schools with a mean score of 13.98 (46%). 
13
The Median scores showed that half ;of the pupils in the IRI centres had 18 or fewer correct 
responses out of 30 and the pupils in the GRZ schools had 14.5 or fewer correct responses 
out of 30.
4.3 Sub-Topic Maths Mean Scores for the IRI Centres and GRZ Schools 
Table: Subtopic Maths Mean Scores for IRI and GRZ Schools 
No. of valid cases
Maximum
for Sub￾Topic
Mean Performance Mean % Median 
Sub-Topic
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
School 
IRI Centre
and GRZ 
Schools
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
Schools
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
Schools
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
Schools
Sets 970 842 3 2.48 2.2 83% 73% 3.0 2.0 
Notation 
and
Numeration 
970 842 2 1.0 0.86 50% 43% 1.0 1.0 
Addition 
and
Subtraction 
970 842 5 3.37 3.36 67.4% 67.2% 4.0 4.0 
Multiplication 970 842 5 2.58 2.22 52% 44.4% 3.0 2.0 
Division 970 842 5 2.84 2.28 57% 46% 3.0 2.0 
Number
Patterns 970 842 2 1.09 0.91 55% 46% 1.0 1.0 
Decimal
Measures 970 842 1 0.37 0.34 37% 34% 0 0 
Shapes and
Measureme
nts
970 842 4 1.55 0.72 39% 18% 1.0 0.5 
Fractions 970 842 3 1.76 1.15 59% 38% 2.0 1.0 
Grand 
Total 970 30 17.11 13.98 57% 46.6% 18.0 14.5 
Performance in Numeracy By Sub-Topics 
The analysis of the mean scores per subject or sub-topi8c is provided in a comparative 
manner for the IRI centres and the GRZ Schools. The analysis is based on Table – given
above. 
Sets
The maximum marks for the sub-topic on sets was 3 marks. The overall mean score for both 
the IRI and GRZ Schools was 2.35. A comparative ;analysis indicates that the IRI (2.48) 
performed significantly better than the GRZ (2.2). Half of the IRI pupils obtained full marks of 
3 or less. Half of the GRZ pupils obtained two marks or lower out of three. 
Notation and Numeration 
There were two questions on notation and numeration making for the full marks of (2). 
Comparatively speaking, there was a significant difference in performance between the IRI 
Centres and the GRZ schools. The overall mean mark was 0.94. The IRI pupils performed 
14
better than their counterparts from the GRZ Schools with the mean scores of 1.0 and 0.86 
respectively. Half of pupils from both the IRI Centres and GRZ obtained 1 mark or less. 
Addition and Subtraction 
There were five questions under addition and subtraction contributing five (5) marks. There 
was no significant difference in performance between the IRI pupils and the GRZ pupils. With 
the overall mean at 3.36, the IRI obtained 3.37 and the GRZ obtained 3.36. The result shows 
that both the IRI pupils and the GRZ pupils have the same basic understanding and 
application of the concept of addition and subtraction. Half of the pupils from both the GRZ 
and IRI obtained 4 marks or less. 
Multiplication
There were five test items on multiplication. The maximum marks were five (5). There was a 
significant difference in performance between the IRI and GRZ pupils. The overall mean
score was 2.41. The IRI pupils performed better than their counterparts in the GRAZ Schools
with mean scores of 2.58 and 2.22 respectively. Whereas half of the IRI pupils got 3 marks or 
less, half of the GRZ pupils obtained 2 marks or less. 
Division 
There were five test items on division. The maximum marks were five (5). The difference in 
performance between the IRI and the GRZ schools was significant. The overall mean score 
for both types was 2.58 out of 5. A comparative analysis indicates that the IRI school pupils 
performed better than their counterparts from the GRZ in understanding and applying the 
concept of division. The mean marks for the IRI centres was 2.84 with a median of 3.0. the 
mean mark for the GRZ schools was 2.28 with a median of 2.0. 
Number Patterns 
There were two test items on the number patterns. The maximum marks for the subtopic was
two. The overall mean score was 1.01 and the median was 1.0. The IRI Centres performed 
significantly better than the GRZ Schools. The mean score for a the IRI Centres was 1.09 
and the mean score for the GRZ Schools was 0.91. Half of both the IRI and GRZ children 
obtained 1 mark of les. 
Decimal Measures 
There was one question on the decimal measures. The maximum mark for the decimal 
measures subtopic was 1. The overall mean score was 0.35. There was no significant 
difference in performance between the IRI Centres and the GRZ school.
15
Shapes and measurement
There were four questions on shapes and Measurements. The maximum marks were four.
The overall mean score was 1.1672. The overall median score was also 1.0. The difference 
in performance between the IRI Centres and the GRZ schools was very significant. While th 
IRI centres obtained a mean score of 1.55, the GRZ schools obtained a mean score of 0.72. 
50% of the IRI pupils obtained 1 mark or less while 50% of the GRZ pupils obtained 0.5 
marks.
Fractions 
The test had three items on fractions. The maximum marks were three (3). The overall mean 
score was 1.48. The difference in performance between the IRI and GRZ schools was
significant. The IRI Centres obtained a mean score of 1.76 while the GRZ schools obtained a 
mean score of 1.15. Half of the IRI pupils obtained two marks or less while half of the GRZ 
schools’ pupils obtained 1 mark or less. 
Part Five: Results from the English paper 2 Test (Reading and Writing)
5.1 Introduction 
The English Paper 2 was divided into twelve (12) parts which mainly tested reading and
writing. The twelve parts were: Alphabet, phonics, sight vocabulary, comprehension 
understanding, comprehension application, comprehension analysis, comprehension 
synthesis, composition synthesis, composition analysis, spelling, punctuation and composition
understanding. 
5.2 Overall English Paper 2 (Reading and Writing) Mean Scores for the IRI Centres 
and GRZ Schools.
Overall Mean Scores S.D Median 
Schools 14.0 7.58 15
IRI Centres 15.19 8.45 16 
Overall 15.05 8.05 15.5 
The table above shows that in English Paper 2, the overall mean score for both the IRI nd 
GRZ schools was 15.5 out of the maximum of 30. This represented 51.6%. As can be seen 
from the table, there was no significant difference in performance between the IRI and the 
GRZ schools. While half of the IRI pupils obtained 16 marks or less, the GRZ pupils obtained 
15 marks or less. 
16
5.3 Sub -Topic Mean Scores for English Paper 2 for the IRI Centres and GRZ
Schools. 
Table: Subtopic English Paper 2 Mean Scores for IRI and GRZ Schools 
No. of valid
cases
Maximum
for Sub￾Topic
Mean 
Performance Mean % Median 
Sub-Topic
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
School 
IRI Centre
and GRZ 
Schools
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
Schools
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
Schools
IRI
Centre 
GRZ
Schools
Alphabet 970 842 3 2.05 2.14 68% 71% 3.0 2.0 
Phonics 970 842 3 1.3 1.4 43% 46.6% 1.0 1.0 
Sight
Vocabulary
970 842 4 2.52 2.53 63% 63% 3.0 3.0 
Comprehension
Understanding 
970 842 4 2.34 2.36 58.5% 59% 2.0 2.0 
Comprehension
Application 
970 842 4 1.9 1.73 47.5% 47.5% 2.0 2.0 
Comprehension
Analysis 970 842 1 0.48 0.41 48% 41% 0.0 0.0 
Comprehension
Synthesis 970 842 1 0.49 0.44 49% 44% 0.0 0.0 
Composition
Synthesis 970 842 1 0.18 0.20 18% 20% 0.0 0.0 
Composition
Analysis 970 842 1 0 0.12 0% 12% 0.0 0.0 
Spellings 970 842 3 2.55 1.93 85% 64% 2.0 2.0 
Punctuation 970 842 3 0.4 0.33 13% 11% 0.0 0.0 
Composition
Understanding 
970 842 2 1.16 1.12 58% 56% 1.0 1.0 
Grand Total 1,812 30 15.19 14.9 50.6% 49.6% 15.50 
Performance in the English 2 (Reading and Writing Paper) 
Alphabet 
There were three questions on the alphabet. The questions required the pupils to recognize 
and identify the letters of the alphabet. The maximum marks were three. The overall mean 
score was 2.09 and the median of 2.0. There was no significant difference in performance
between the IRI and GRZ pupils. The GRZ pupils obtained a mean of 2.14 while the IRI 
schools obtained 2.05. The GRZ had a medium of 2 while the IRI had a medium of 3.0. 
Phonics
There were three questions on phonics which required pupils to write three words with the 
sound “sh” in them, either at the beginning, middle or end. The maximum marks were three. 
The overall mean score obtained was s1.39. There was no significant different in 
performance between the IRI and the GRZ pupils. While the GRZ obtained 1.4, the IRI pupils
obtained a mean score of 1.37. The median for both the IRI and GRZ was the same 1.0. 
17
Sight Vocabulary
There were four questions that required the pupils to fill-in the space in the sentences, using 
any of the words that were given. The maximum marks provided for were four (4). The 
overall mean score obtained was 2.52. The GRZ schools obtained 2.53 and the IRI centres
obtained 2.52. The difference in performance was not significant. 
Comprehension (Understanding) 
The question had four maximum marks. The pupils were requested to fill-in the blanks of a 
passage using the information given in a timetable. The overall mean score obtained was 
2.3. There was no significant difference in the performance between the IRI and GRZ pupils. 
The IRI obtained a mean score of 2.3 while the GRZ obtained a mean score of 2.36. 
Comprehension (Application) 
There were four questions. They were all based on the passage. The questions involved
understanding the meanings of some actions in the passage, finding synonym, ordering 
events and rewriting a sentence. 
The maximum marks were four. The overall mean score obtained was 1.87. There was a
significant difference in performance between the IRI Centres and the GRZ schools. The IRI 
Centres had a better performance with a mean score of 1.99 while the GRZ schools had
mean score of 1.73. This could mean that the IRI pupils had better skills of application in 
relation to the given passage on this test. 
Comprehension (Analysis) 
The question on Analysis (Comprehension) required the children to analyse the passage so 
as to get the answer to the question. The difference in performance was not significantly 
different between the IRI centres and the GRZ schools. The overall mean score was 0.45. 
the GRZ schools obtained 0.4138 while the IRI centres obtained 0.489. 
Comprehension (Synthesis) 
The question on synthesis (Comprehension) was based on the passage. The pupils were 
expected to build-up (synthesise) the answer from the passage. There was no significant
difference in performance between the IRI Centres and the GRZ schools. The overall mean
score was 0.4735. The IRI Centres obtained 0.4943 while the GRZ schools obtained 0.4138. 
Composition (Synthesis) 
The question required the children to write a sentence explaining the answer based on the 
information in the passage. The overall mean score was 0.47. There was no significant 
difference in the performance between the IRI Centres and the GRZ schools. The IRI 
Centres obtained 0.19 and the GRZ schools obtained 0.21.
18
Composition (Analysis) 
The question on composition (Analysis) requested the children to write a sentence explaining 
why they thought an action occurred based on the information in the passage. The overall 
mean score was 0.11. There was no significant difference in performance between the IRI 
Centres and the GRZ schools. The IRI obtained 0 while the GRZ obtained 0.13. 
Spellings 
There were three questions on spellings in which the children were requested to choose or 
circle one word which was spelled correctly from a set of four words. The maximum marks 
was 3. The overall mean score was 2.27. There was a significant difference in performance 
between the IRI Centres and the GRZ schools. . The IRI Centres obtained 2.56 and the GRZ
schools obtained 1.93. The results further show that the two types of schools had the same 
median of 2.0. 
Punctuation 
There were three questions on Punctuation. The pupils were requested to rewrite the words 
in the sentences by using capital letters, commas, full stops., apostrophes, question marks 
and exclamation marks. The maximum marks were 3. The difference in performance was 
significant. The overall mean score out of a maximum of three (3) was 0.37. This reflected a 
performance of 12%. The IRI centres obtained 0.40 while the GRZ schools obtained 0.33. 
Composition (Understanding) 
There were two questions on writing (Composition) which required understanding. One 
question required the pupils of put sentences in order to form a short paragraph while the 
other question required the pupils to complete a sentence based on a picture of a ball. The 
overall mean score was 1.14. The difference in performance between the IRI centres and the 
GRZ schools was not significant. The IRI centres obtained 1.16 while the GRZ schools
obtained 1.12.
Part Six: Results From English Paper 1 (Listening and Speaking) 
Part Six had two sections. Section 1 was on Listening and it had 15 questions. Section 2 
was on speaking and had 5 questions.
Section 1: Listening
This section required the pupils to demonstrate their understanding of the spoken word by
answering general questions about themselves or their family, following instructions in 
completing a simple task, giving clear directions for finding a place within their school grounds 
and performing simple tasks. 
19
! General Questions 
There were 7 General Questions on the pupils, about their families, giving instructions 
and giving directions. The maximum marks were 7. The overall mean score obtained 
was 4.3. There was no significant difference in performance between the IRI Centres 
and GRZ Schools. The median for IRI Centres was 4.0 while the GRZ’s was 4.5. 
! Performance Tasks 
There were 4 questions on performance tasks that were based on action, touch, 
movement and sound. The maximum marks were four (4). The overall mean score 
was 2.95. There was a significant difference in performance as the IRI centres had a 
better performance with a mean score of 3.11 while the GRZ school scored 2.77. The 
median for the IRI Centres was 4.0 while the GRZ schools had 3.0. 
! Using Language Socially 
There were two questions on using language socially which involved the pupils 
showing how they would greet a friend or classmate if they met somewhere. The 
maximum marks were 2.0. The overall mean score was 0.80. The difference in 
performance between the IRI and GRZ was not significant. The IRI obtained a mean 
score of 0.78 while the GRZ schools obtained 0.82. 
! Making Choices and Correcting False Statements 
There were two questions in this section that requested the pupils to respond to two 
questions which required making choices between given things or correcting a 
statement. The maximum marks were 2.0. The overall mean score was 0.87. There 
was a significant difference in performance between the two types of learning 
environments. While the IRI Centres obtained 0.7648, the GRZ Schools showed more 
competence in the listening aspect on making choices and correcting false statements. 
Section 2: Speaking 
This section required the pupils to demonstrate their vocabulary and pronunciation by 
answering questions about a picture and talking about a picture. The section also elicited 
pupils’ responses about a timetable. The maximum marks were 5. The overall mean score 
was 2.37. There was a significant difference between the two types of schools. The GRZ 
schools performed relatively better with a mean score of 2.70 while the IRI Centres obtained 
2.08. The result shows that the GRZ pupils are better at the spoken English language than 
the IRI pupils. 
20
Grand Total Listening and Speaking 
Listening Speaking Grand Total
Max Mean Median Max Mean Median Max Mean Median 
IRI 20 16 17 5 4 4 20 11 12
GRZ 20 16 17 5 3.9 4 20 12 13
20 16 17 5 4 4 20 12 12.5
Total Listening 
There was no significant difference in performance between the IRI and GRZ in Listening. 
Both the IRI and GRZ got a mean percentage of 80%. 
Total Speaking 
The performance by the IRI and the GRZ was not significantly different. While the IRI had a 
mean percentage of 78%, the GRZ’s mean percent was 80%. 
Grand Total for English Paper 1: Listening and Speaking 
There no significant difference between the two types of schools. The GRZ schools had a 
mean percent of 65% whereas the IRI had a mean percent of 60%