Instruction of citizenship education in selected secondary schools in Vihiga county , Kenya

The purpose of this study was to investigate the instructional practices used among teachers and students in teaching Citizenship Education through History and Government at the secondary school level. The study adopted qualitative research with a multiple case study design. Data was collected using Observation schedules, interview schedule and focus group discussion guide. Data was analyzed using grounded theory and constant comparative technique. The finding of the study revealed the domination of classroom activities over outdoor activities. The study recommends for a curriculum review to introduce competence learning that will enhance the use of both classroom and outdoor activities. © 2017 Elixir All rights reserved. Elixir Soc. Sci. 107 (2017) 47203-47208 Social Science Available online at www.elixirpublishers. com (Elixir International Journal) Dingili Rodgers et al./ Elixir Soc. Sci. 107 (2017) 47203-47208 47204 2) To find out factors that influences the selection and use of instructional practices in Citizenship Education at the secondary level Research Questions This study aimed at answering the following research questions: 1) What are the instructional practices used in teaching Citizenship Education at the secondary level? 2) What are the factors that influence the selection of the instructional practices used in teaching Citizenship Education at the secondary level? Research Methodology The study adopted qualitative research method, and a multiple case study design. It focused on four secondary schools in Vihiga County, Kenya. It employed the maximum variation strategy (Bloom & Crabtree, 2006) to select a school each from the following categories of schools; national, county, sub-county and private schools. The number of participants in the study was limited to 170 students and 4 teachers of History and Government. This was done to allow for the selection of “information-rich cases” (Patton, 1990, p. 169), which would enhance in-depth study. Purposive sampling was used to select the participants for this study. The participants real names were not used for this study instead pseudonyms (School “A”; School “B”; School “C” and School “D”, -for schools-and P1; P2; P3for students) were used to protect the confidentiality and anonymity of the respondents. In this study, data collection and analysis was developed together in an iterative process (as shown in fig 1) so as to allow for research findings that were more grounded on empirical evidence. Data collection methods included: observation schedules, interview schedule and focus group discussion guide. The collected data was then transcribed, coded and categorized in order to inform the next focus group discussions and interviews. Data analysis was done inductively using grounded theory techniques through the constant comparative technique (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993). According to Charmaz (2000 p. 515) the constant comparative method of analysis refers to, “a data analysis method of: comparing different participants‟ views, situations, actions, accounts, and experiences; comparing data from the same individuals with themselves at different points in time; comparing incident with incident; comparing data with category; and comparing a category with other categories. ” Finally the trustworthiness of the study was established through: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In particular, techniques such as; prolonged engagement in the field, persistent observation, triangulation and peer debriefing were used to establish credibility while transferability was achieved through thick description of the phenomenon. An audit trail was kept in order to ensure dependability as the research journal guaranteed confirmability. Figure.1 Findings and Discussions The findings are discussed below according to the research questions (RQs). RQ1 What are the instructional practices used in teaching Citizenship Education at the secondary level? The study, reported domination of classroom activities over outdoor activities. In particular, the study revealed that writing activities, verbal activities, inquiry activities and discussion activities were the main classroom activities. Moreover, it was found out that teacher dominated in the instructional processes. The teacher played the role of an initiator rather than a facilitator of learning. For instance, the teacher initiated the verbal activities through explanations, clarifications and questions. Furthermore, it was both observed and reported that teachers played a key role in both the inquiry and discussion activities by grouping and assigning students with tasks to research on. In particular, a teacher of History and Government in School B reported that, he was the one who carried out research, generated notes and dictated them to the students. According to this teacher this activity (him carrying out research, generating notes and dictating notes) would lead to uniformity in notes among the students, something that could not be achieved if students were to be left to research and write notes on their own. It should however, be noted that, students were actively involved in generating their own notes in the other three of the four schools (schools, A; C; and D). The students‟ notes were later complemented with notes taken during teacher led class discussions. This findings reinforced earlier findings by Shiundu (1980) and Imbundu and Poipoi (2013) which noted that, History and Government classrooms were dominated by instructional methods such as; lecture, discussion, question and answer, reading maps and text books and note-taking. In particular, Ogutu (1984-85) had earlier established that chalk and talk, question and answer, and discussion were the most Dingili Rodgers et al./ Elixir Soc. Sci. 107 (2017) 47203-47208 47205 popular instructional practices used by teachers of History and Government, and this was confirmed in this study. Concerning the outdoor instructional activities, this study found out that these activities were also being utilized in teaching of Citizenship Education, although to a limited extent when compared to classroom instructional activities. The main outdoor instructional activities cited across the four cases were debates and role playing. Concerning debates, all the four cases reported of carrying out debates. These debates were often centered on contemporary issues such as; drug abuse, terrorism, and devolved government. However, there existed difference in the frequency of carrying out the debates with some schools reporting that they carried out debates on weekly basis (School B, C and D) whereas one school had only had a debate session once a year (School A). School C unlike the other three schools reported that, its student participated in regional debate contest where they emerged victorious as revealed in the student focus group excerpt: P1: Also on debates we have been able to attend national debate contest and it has given us more vision of how people out there debate. We have had an opportunity to watch good debaters. And we are happy to report that in the recent Nzoia region contest we were able to emerge number one. of those who represented our school three are in this class and all of them take History and Government, I being one of them. Across the four schools (cases) it was reported that prefects were elected by the students. The election process differed among the schools with some reporting „absolute democracy‟ -for example school C where elections were conducted by Independent Elections and Boundaries Commission (I.E.B.C. the body permitted to conduct elections in Kenya) while others reported „guided democracy‟for example school D where voting was through acclamation and at times winners were robbed of their victory in favour of less popular candidates but who were friendly to the school administration. According to Nasibi and Kiio (2005), the instructional practice in which the students try to clarify a situation by acting out roles of the participants in the situation is referred to as role playing. Therefore the students in the four schools role-played the roles of electoral officials and voters. It should however be noted that, across the four cases the students failed to link the outdoor instructional practices to the instructional process of Citizenship Education through History and Government. Moreover, it was observed that form four History and Government student in school D through role playing drafted a school budget while learning the topic, “Public Revenue and Expenditure. ” It was further discovered that, field trips were being used in three of the four schools (schools B, C, D). These field trips were organized on annual basis due limited funds and time. In contrast, no use of fieldtrips was reported in school A. Students complained of that money donated for a fieldtrip by the area member of county assembly was converted to carter for break time porridge. Similar findings were revealed when studying the use of symposia in instructing Citizenship Education. It was found that, three of the four schools (schools B, C, D) only used symposia at the fourth form level. This was in line with school tradition that had scheduled the symposia to be a fourth form activity. On the contrary, the use of symposia was impossible in school A, due to inadequate funds. Further, the study established that reading of newspaper was undertaken by students of schools B, C, and D. However, students in school A complained that they had no access to newspapers for the school in the school library. A further closer look at the data collected revealed that watching of documentaries was only used in two of the four schools (School B and C), while service learning was only recorded in school C. K.I.E (2002), recommends that outdoor study approaches such as: visitations, report writing, inquiry, discussion, role playing, dramatization, deb