Evaluation of the Secondary Preparatory School Program As Compared to Freshman Program. The Case of Aau And Addis Ababa Secondary Preparatory Schools.

No Thumbnail Available

Date

2014-06

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Addis Ababa University

Abstract

This study evaluated the extent to which the preparatory school program can substitute the freshman program. It also explored significant differences between the preparatory program and the fresh man program in putting into effect the objectives of the program. The study designed in line of evaluation research through which descriptive research methods employed, to this end discrepancy model is used. Data is collected from six faculties of AAU and four secondary preparatOlY schools. Accordingly 327 preparatory origin university students, 34 university instructors, 183 preparatory school students, 67 preparatory school teachers, and one official from ministry of education. A total of 616(94. 7% of the intended) respondents were involved in the study. Appropriate statistical tools like percentage, one sampled t-tesl and ANOVA were used to determine Ihe significance difference between the preparalory school program and fresh man program. Beside, Ihese slalistical results fleshed by qualitative discussion of the data oblained through inlerview, indirect observation and openended ilems provided in line with Ihe questionnaire. The resull of Ihe sludy indicated Ihal the freshman program is significantly differenl from the preparatOlY program. First, Ihe university teachers those who were giving Ihe freshman program are by far better than the preparatory school teachers. The over all performance of leachers in both schools wilh mean values (4.04 and 3.98) for university and preparalory school teachers respeclively show significant difference and ensures as the formers one are by far beller Ihan their counter pari. Second, the facililies and services put at Ihe disposal of Ihe students and in turn for the success of Ihe program are significantly different. The mean values (2.10 and 1.96) for university and preparalory indicated a significanl difference among Ihese two schools. The Fvalue (5.20) ensured its significant difference at P-:;0.05 critical value, even, in preparalory schools Ihe available facililies and services are not handled properly and used effectively as opposed to its counter part. As a result of the previous two issues the preparation of Ihe students in preparalory schools were and/or are nol significanl. Allhough the result of Ihe self- perceived competence is above the test value, the response of the university leachers (rated below Ihe test value), preparatory school direclors and teachers are to the contrOly. Even Ihe sludents Ihem selves al times describe their preparalion as it is inadequale because of Ihe absence of competent teachers and lack of facililies and services pul at their disposal. In conclusion, the preparalion that students have made in preparatory schools is not up to the standard and as a resull il is difficull 10 say the preparalory school program could subslitute the fresh man program. Thus, it is possible to recommend Ihat the competency level of leachers in preparalOlY school program should be enhanced; schools musl be enriched with the required facilities and services and must develop the habit of carrying out praclical activilies. Lasl but not leasl, crealing awareness among sludents to be compelenl enough and successful in their future career is a must.

Description

Keywords

Evaluation of the Secondary Preparatory School Program

Citation