6 Table i. lResearch Design

|_Approach_<br>|_Treatments_<br>|_Classes_<br>_Leamers_|_CAAS_|
|---|---|---|---|
|INA<br>|PhonologicalAwareness(PA)|2<br>50|10random|
|(Government)||(25perclass)|(5eachclass)|
||Rapid Reading(RR)|2<br>50<br>|10random<br>|
|||(25perclass)|(5**eachclass)**|
||RR**+**PA|2<br>50<br>|10random|
|||(25perclass)|(5each class)|
||Control|3<br>75<br>|15random|
|||(25per class)|(5eachclass)|
|OSIEO<br>|Phonological Awareness(PA)|2<br>50|10random|
|(SwissNGO)|a<br>|(25perclass)<br> <br>|(5each class)<br>|
||**RapidReading**(RR)|2<br>50|10random|
|||(25perclass)<br>|(5each class)|
||RR+PA|2<br>50<br>|10random|
|||(25perclass)|(5eachclass)|
||Control|3<br>75|15random|
|||(25perclass)|(5each class)|
|**Total**||18<br>250|90|

## **Total**

> Teacher training. The first challenge was to train 24 teachers in carrying out the methods. Training was done over four days (January 8-12, 2001) at the Manegdbzanga center of Nomgana. The teachers were paid an honorarium for their attendance as well as a small stipend for implementing the experimental methods. The rationale for all methods was explained, and videotapes

> were shown, which had been recorded during the operation of the "literacy laboratory." Then the

> teachers, many of them themselves graduates of literacy classes, were asked to perform the tasks.

> They found the training very interesting but also very brief. A refresher training would have been

> useful, but for logistical reasons, it was never carried out. It would have been helpful to measure teacher performance and use it as explanatory variable in the treatment and control groups, but time did not permit this procedure.

A random sample of learners was pretested through the CAAS. It was determiined that most could not read at all, although a few recognized a few letters. Eighty-one percent of them had not been to school at all, while most of the remaining 18 percent reported attending for one year. Thus, no pretest paper-and-pencil test was applied. Also, the assumption was made that experimental and control groups were similar at the beginning of treatment, allowing a comparison of the post-test results only. The number of years of school correlated only .09 with final reading scores. Because Burkina Faso has a literacy rate of only about 20 percent, it was unlikely for participants to learn reading outside formal or nonformal classrooms.

# C. IMPLEMENTING INSTRUCTION

# Subjects

> The subjects for the experimental part of the study were 425 participants of literacy classes.

> There were more females (295) than males (130) enrolled in the classes and there tended to be a wide

> range in ages with the youngest enrollee 7 years of age and the oldest reportedly 50 years of age. The mean reported age of the learners was 20. Forty-two percent of the learners were married and 32 percent were single. One hundred thirty five of the learners reported they had at least one child. The number of children the learners reported having ranged from 1 to 9. About 78 percent had never been

> to school, and about 22 percent of the learners had some previous formal schooling. The shortest time

> attendance penod was 1 year, and the longest was 3 years (Table 2). Twenty-eight learners reported