ERNWACA Research Grants Programme

2010 edition

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PRESCHOOL EDUCATION AND PUPI LS’ INTELLECTUAL

MATURITY IN GHANA

Researchers

• MATTHEW SABBI • JULIETTE DUFIE BOATENG • FANNY ELLIS HAMMOND

Mentor : Professor Dominic Kofi Agyeman

Country GHANA

Research financed by

Education Research Network for West and Central Africa (ERNWACA)

With project support from UEMOA regional Centre of Excellence and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands

ii

DEDICATION This work is dedicated to our parents for their unflinching support and guidance

throughout our academic pursuits.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are forever grateful to the Educational Research Network for West and Central Africa (ERNWACA) for giving us the opportunity once more to participate in this Grant Research Programme which provided funding for every aspect of the study. The scientific mentor for the project Professor Dominic Kofi Agyeman has been instrumental in shaping every aspect of the study with comments and constructive criticisms. To him, we owe a debt of gratitude. We cannot forget the candid and relentless effort of our data collection assistants. Mr. Bruno Osafo, Department of History, UCC; Mr. Raymond Boasinke, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, UCC; and Mr. Emmanuel Asante, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, UCC were instrumental in data collection in the Central Region. Again, Mr. Emmanuel Frimpong Nketiah and Ms. Grace Affoah worked relentlessly in gathering data in the Ashanti Region. No financial reward could compensation for their commitment to this work. Mr. Stephen Owusu, School of Agriculture, and Mr. Kwame Awuah, service personnel, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, UCC deserve praise for their help during data processing. Individual contributions to specific team activities have been crucial to the completion of this study on schedule. The lead researcher, Mr. Matthew Sabbi, has been instrumental in organizing all aspects of the study from its inception to completion. Specific activities include pilot study, main study, data processing, analysis and report writing. Ms. Juliette Dufie Boateng deserves special praise for her role in the pilot study, Central Region data collection, processing of data and the report writing. She has been a wonderful team player. Ms. Fanny Ellis Hammond deserves the credit for her efforts in data collection in the Central and Ashanti regions and for her role in the preparation of this report. We are also grateful to Mr. Joshua Baku, General Secretary (ERNWACA-Ghana) for his constant reminders and commitment which helped in meeting the timeline for the study. Last but not least, we are also very grateful to all headteachers in the selected schools for granting permission for use of their facilities, pupils and staff in the study.

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study examined the factors that influence access to preschool education and the

intellectual outcomes of pupils with- and without preschool education. The study was conducted in the Central and Ashanti regions of Ghana. The study employed a mixed-bag of stratified, simple random, and purposive sampling techniques to select respondents for the study. Ex post facto research design was used to explore the preschool experiences and intellectual outcomes for 863 pupils in basic grades 2, 3, and 4 from eight (8) selected schools. Again, cross-sectional design was used to study the views of 29 teachers and preschool caregivers in the selected schools.

It was observed that access to preschool does not depend on physical location, parent/guardian income and educational levels. Academic performance of pupils does not seem to be influenced by preschool experience. However, the category of preschool education (private or rural) pupils’ experienced depends, to a large extent, on parents/guardians income level. Again, the type of preschool experience was predictive of intellectual maturity. It is recommended that preschool intervention programmes should target preschoolers from poor socio-economic levels to improve upon their intellectual maturity.

RÉSUMÉ

Cette étude a examiné les facteurs qui influent sur l'accès à l'éducation préscolaire et les résultats des élèves au monde avec et sans l'éducation préscolaire. L'étude a été menée dans les régions centrale et Ashanti du Ghana. L'étude a utilisé un fourre-tout de stratifié, aléatoire simple, et téléologique des techniques d'échantillonnage pour sélectionner les répondants de l'étude. Ex post facto de recherche en design a été utilisé pour étudier les expériences d'âge préscolaire et les résultats intellectuelle pour 863 élèves des classes de base 2, 3 et 4 de huit (8) écoles sélectionnées. Encore une fois, la conception transversale a été utilisée pour étudier les vues des 29 enseignants et les soignants d'âge préscolaire dans les écoles sélectionnées.

Il a été observé que l'accès à l'éducation préscolaire ne dépend pas de l'emplacement physique, le revenu des parents / tuteurs et les niveaux d'enseignement. Le rendement scolaire des élèves ne semble pas être influencée par l'expérience d'âge préscolaire. Toutefois, la catégorie de l'éducation préscolaire (privé ou rural) des élèves expérimentés dépend, dans une large mesure, sur les parents / tuteurs niveau de revenu. Encore une fois, le type d'expérience d'âge préscolaire était un facteur prédictif de la maturité intellectuelle. Il est recommandé que les programmes d'intervention préscolaire devrait cibler enfants d'âge préscolaire de faibles niveaux socio-économiques pour améliorer leur maturité intellectuelle.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Content Page Dedication ii Acknowledgements iii Executive Summary iv Table of Contents v List of Figures and Tables vii Section One Introduction 1 Background 1 The Problem 1 Objective of the study 2 Hypothesis 2 Justification 3 Definition of Terms and Concepts 3 Organization of the Rest of the Study 3 Section Two Review of Literature 4 Introduction 4 Theoretical Consideration 4 Preschool Education: Nature and Scope 4

Trends in the provision of ECCE Programmes 5 Trends in the participation in ECCE Programmes 5 Nature of Preschool Education in Ghana 5

Preschool Education and Cognitive and Behavioural Outcomes 6 Determinants of Quality Preschool Education 6

Socio-Economic Status and Access 6 Preschool Curriculum, Pedagogy and Staffing 8 Conceptual Framework 9 Section Three Methodology 11 Introduction 11 Research Design 11 Choice of Study Areas 11 Target Population 11 Sample and Sampling Procedure 11 Data Collection Instruments and Procedures 12 Pilot Study 12 Data Collection Procedure 12 Variables and Measures 13 Data Processing and Analysis 13 Challenges Faced 14 Concluding Remarks 14 Section Four Socio-Demographic Profile of Respondents 15 Introduction 15 Sex and Age Distribution of Pupils 15 Pupils’ Spatial Location 15 Category of School attended by Pupils 16 Pupil’s Socio-Economic Status 16

Parent/Guardian Income Levels 17 Profile of Teachers/Caregivers 18 Sex of Teachers/Caregivers 18 Educational Achievement of Teachers/Caregiver 18

vi

Status of Teachers/Caregivers 19 Concluding Remarks 19 Section Five Pupils’ Socio-Economic Status, Preschool Experience and Performance Outcomes 20 Introduction 20 Preschool Experience 20 Category of Preschool attended by Pupils 20 Socio-Economic Status and Preschool Experience 21 Socio-Economic Status and Category of Preschool 21 Parents/Guardians Educational Level and Preschool Experience of Pupils 22 Pupils’ Performance Variables 23 Pupils’ Performance across Schools 23 Pupils’ Performance across Localities 24 Differences in Performance between Pupils with- and without Preschool Experience 25 Category of Preschool attended and Pupils’ Performance 25 Socio-Economic Levels and Pupils’ Performance 26 Concluding Remarks 27 Section Six Preschool Experience and Intellectual Maturity 28 Introduction 28 Pupils’ Level of Intellectual Maturity 28 Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity across School Categories 28 Intellectual maturity across Localities 29 Intellectual maturity across Regions 29 Preschool Experience and Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity 30 Category of Preschool attended and Intellectual Maturity of Pupils 31 Socio-Economic status and Intellectual Maturity of Pupils 31 Teachers’ Opinions on Pupils’ Preschool Experience and Outcomes 32 Caregivers’ Opinions on Curriculum and teaching Aids in their Facilities 34 Quality of Care provided in Preschools and Pupils’ Performance 34 Caregivers’ Opinions on Socio-Economic Status and Preschool Education 35 Improving Preschool Activities and Outcomes 35 Concluding Remarks 36 Section Seven Summary Conclusion and Recommendations 37 Introduction 37 Summary of Major Findings 37 Conclusions 37 Recommendations 38 References 39 Appendix 41

vii

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Titles Page Figure 1: Input-Output Model of Preschool Education in Ghana 10

Table 1: Summary of Respondents for the Study 12 Table 2: Age and Sex Distribution of Pupils by Region 15 Table 3: Category of School and Nature of Physical Location of Pupils by Region 16 Table 4: Nature of Physical Location and Parent/Guardian Occupation 17 Table 5: Rural-Urban Differentials in Parent/Guardian Levels 18 Table 6: Sex and Educational Achievement of Teachers/Caregivers 18 Table 7: Status of Teachers/Caregivers by School Category 19 Table 8: Nature of Physical Locality and Pupils’ Preschool Experience 20 Table 9: Nature of Physical Location and Category of Preschool Pupils’ Attended by Region 21 Table 10: Parents/Guardians Mean Annual Income and Pupils’ Preschool Experience 21 Table 11: Parents/Guardians Educational Level and Category of Preschool Pupils’ Attended 22 Table 12: Parents/Guardians Educational Level and Pupils’ Preschool Experience 23 Table 13: Pupils’ Performance by Category of School 24 Table 14: Pupils’ Academic Performance by Nature of Physical Location 24 Table 15: Preschool Experience and Pupils’ Academic Performance 25 Table 16: Category of Preschool attended and Pupils’ Academic Performance 26 Table 17: Parents/Guardians Income Level and Pupils’ Academic Performance 26 Table 18: Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity by Category of School 28 Table 19: Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity by Nature of Physical Locality 29 Table 20: Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity according to Region of Residence 30 Table 21: Pupils’ Preschool Experience and their Intellectual Maturity 30 Table 22: Category of Preschool Experience of Pupils’ and their Intellectual Maturity 31 Table 23: Parents/Guardians Income Level and Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity 32 Table 24: Teachers’ Opinion on Pupils’ Performance by category of School 33 Table 25: Teachers’ Opinion on Best Preschool for Pupils by Category of School 34 Table 26: Perceived Socio-Economic Status of Preschoolers by Category of Preschool 35 Table 27: Perceived Annual Income of Preschoolers’ Parents by Category of Preschool 35

1

SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION

Background to the Study

Education in all societies is an institution that socializes individuals to play expected roles (Agyeman, 1986; Forojalla, 1993). This crucial function performed by education is reflected in large sums of government expenditure on education across countries and regions. The problems of education in developing countries, however, persist. These range from inadequate personnel, poor infrastructure, poor skills learned and poor academic achievements, just to mention a few. Probably, the most crucial of these are poor academic achievement and intellectual development. This is because it is when learners develop appropriate intellectual capabilities that they may translate these abilities into useful ends (Cornell & Hartmann, 1998). Unfortunately, these intellectual outcomes from education rarely do occur in Africa.

One educational strategy that has received much support for developing requisite intellectual capacities for learners is early childhood care education also called preschool programme. Research evidence throws much light on the advantages associated with preschool programmes and its effects on intellectual development. Indeed, although some research findings suggest that extra instruction has little effect on the intellectual development of children from stimulating environments (e.g. Scarr, 1984), other findings are consistent on the gains derived from preschool programmes for children especially those from disadvantaged environments. Hunt (1982) observed that quality preschool programmes that offer individual attention increase children’s school readiness which decreases their likelihood of repeating a grade or being placed in special education. Zigler and Styfco (2001) further observed that preschool education provides a boost to the emotional intelligence i.e. creating better attitudes towards learning and thus reducing both school dropouts (Myers, 1992) and tendencies towards criminality (Reynold, Temple, Robertson, & Manri, 2001). Furthermore, Barnett (1992) observed the long-term cognitive effects of preschool education on achievement and school performance than intelligent quotient (IQ). For him, children with preschool experience enter school with richer experiences of problem-solving, learning strategies and other cognitive advantages which serve as the building blocks for the accumulation of more knowledge and skills in school. Ceci & Williams (1997) have suggested that schooling and intelligence contribute to each other. They argue that while higher intelligence is conducive to prolonged schooling, intelligence scores tend to rise during the school year and drop during recess.

In spite of the benefits of preschool programmes, researchers (e.g. Grantham-McGregor, 1983; and Pozner, 1983) have suggested that lower socio-economic status deprives most children in developing countries, such as Ghana, of access to these programmes as well as mentally stimulating materials such as toys, books, and other learning aids. Thus most children enter primary school with little or no preschool experience. This situation adversely affects their academic achievement and intellectual progress through their school to adult life. A thorough understanding of the nature of early childhood care programmes in Ghana should involve an investigation into access factors, determinants and outcomes of quality preschool education. The Problem

Ghana’s educational system has witnessed numerous reforms and reviews. In spite of the advantages associated with preschool education, little attention and commitment seem to have been given to these intervention programmes. Although the Six Dakar Goals/EFA Goals seek to expand and improve comprehensive early childhood care and education especially for the vulnerable and disadvantaged (UNESCO, 2002), attendance at preschool has not been encouraging. Indeed, the gross and net enrolment ratios stood at 41.6 percent and 27.2 percent respectively for the 2004/05 academic year (UNESCO,

2

2006). The preschool system provided in Ghana is classified under crèche for children under 2 years of age; daycare centers for 2-3 years children; nursery for those aged 3-4 years; and kindergarten for children aged 5. While the benefits from preschool have been acknowledged, there was no formal mandate for its provision prior to the beginning of the first grade of primary school until 2002 when the President’s Committee on Review of Education Reforms in Ghana (Anamuah-Mensah Committee) recommended the incorporation of kindergarten into primary education system (GoG, 2002). Prior to 2002, preschool education was neither free nor compulsory. According to UNESCO (2006), there were 5,441 public kindergartens and 3,742 registered private preschool facilities in Ghana in 1996 and again, in 1997, 427,000 children enrolled in public kindergartens while about 156, 000 pupils attended private preschool facilities. In particular, preschool education is yet to make an impact in the rural areas where the bulk of the population resides.

Patronage of preschool education programmes in Ghana, just like in other developing countries (Tashakkori, Haghighat, & Yousefi, 1988), is informed by several misconceptions and opinions. In Ghana, two schools of thought on preschool programmes are current. On the one hand, some parents believe that preschool programmes are not necessary because they are avenues for learning what could be learnt in primary school. The second view, on the other hand, obtains that due to poverty conditions, only children from affluent homes can afford the high cost of quality preschool education. Thus, most children, especially those from less affluent homes, enter primary school without any preschool experience. From these two standpoints, it is plausible that socio-economic status together with these beliefs may work to keep a number of children away from early childhood care programmes which may adversely work against the development of intellectual competencies that could have been harnessed for actual school work and performance.

It is against this backdrop of poor attitude towards preschool/early childhood care programmes that this study investigates the access, quality and outcomes of preschool education as part of the strategies for improving the human capital needs of Ghana. Objectives of the Study

The broad objective of the study is to examine the extent to which quality preschool education programmes influence the academic and intellectual achievement of children and to explain the discrepancy in access and achievements of children with- and without preschool experiences. Specifically, the study examines:

� The extent to which a child’s physical location affects their access to preschool education.

� The extent to which the socio-economic status of a child affects children’s access to preschool education.

� The extent to which the socio-economic status of a child affects the quality of preschool education a child receives.

� The extent to which preschool education prepares children for higher academic and intellectual achievements.

� Whether children with preschool experiences/education perform better than those without preschool experiences on both achievement and intelligent tests.

Hypotheses Based on the objectives of the study, the following hypotheses are treated:

H1: Pupils from urban families have greater access to preschool facilities than those from rural families H2: Pupils from affluent homes have greater access to preschool education than those from less affluent families.

3

H3: Pupils from affluent families have greater access to better preschool education than those from less affluent families. H4: Pupils with good private of preschool education have adequate intellectual maturity than those with public preschool education. H5: Pupils with preschool experiences perform better on intelligent and achievement tests than those with no preschool experiences. Justification

The problems of education in Ghana, like other developing countries, are numerous which find expression in poor intellectual and skill outcomes, unemployment, etc. among the youth. It has been suggested that the socio-economic status of families results in a discrepancy in educational outcomes in Ghana. Accordingly, Addae-Mensah (2000) has argued that education provided in Ghanaian schools has become a tool for social stratification such that the affluent can afford the best of educational materials for their wards and keep them in more prestigious schools. The opposite is true for the less affluent families who find it difficult meeting the educational needs of their children. Given the benefits and present interest in early childhood care, this study seeks to provide firsthand knowledge and pathways to early childhood care programmes in Ghana. The study will again, examine the nature of preschool curriculum and programmes and thus provide opportunity for improving the quality of preschool education. Last but not least, given the income levels of most Ghanaians, the study will seek alternative ways by which the Ministry of Education and other stakeholders involved in the provision of quality education could help children from lower socio-economic levels, especially those in the rural areas, to access preschool education in order to condition them for better higher education outcomes. Definition of Terms and Concepts Some of the key terms/concepts used in this study are explained below: Preschool Education: the type of pre-teaching and learning given to children before they enter basic schools. Quality Preschool Education: the type of preschool with adequate facilities and personnel for teaching appropriate skills to preschoolers. Urban versus Rural Areas: according to the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) (2002), any human settlement with a population of less than 5,000 people is designated rural while a settlement with a population of 5,000 and beyond is designated urban in the case of Ghana. Intellectual Maturity: development of children’s conceptual abilities to engage in abstract thinking (e.g. conception of different parts of the human figure). Academic Performance: a child’s performance on school achievement test. Organization of the Rest of the Study The rest of the study is organized as follows: Section two reviews extant literature on preschool and early intervention programmes from global, regional and local perspectives. Section three looks at the methodological procedure for selecting the sample and data for the study. Section four explores the profile of the pupils and their parents as well as the teachers and preschool caregivers. Section five discusses socio-economic status, preschool experience and pupils’ academic performance while Section six explores the relationship between socio-economic status, preschool experience and the intellectual abilities of pupils. Section seven provides the summary of the study, draws conclusions and makes recommendations.

4

SECTION TWO REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction This section examines three strands of literature: first, the effects of preschool

education and children’s school readiness are discussed. Second, the influence of socio-economic status and preschool outcomes (academic and intellectual) are discussed; and third, the pedagogical issues in preschool programmes are examined. Theoretical Consideration

The study is underpinned by the successful intelligence approach by Robert Sternberg (1999). Sternberg agreed with Gardner (1999) that individuals do not have an intelligence but instead have multiple intelligence, each relatively independent of others. Sternberg (1999) then distinguishes three aspects of intelligence namely; analytical (academic problem-solving) intelligence which assesses intelligence through tests through well-defined problems having a single right answer; creative intelligence which is expressed by the individuals reactive adaptation to novel situations and generating novel ideas; and practical intelligence which is required for everyday tasks that are frequently ill-defined with multiple solutions. Sternberg (1999) suggests that the multiple abilities can contribute to life successes and also the differing varieties of giftedness add spice to life and challenges for education. What this perspective brings to the fore is that the various constituencies of intelligence for each child may be unearthed and combined in various ways to lead to successful outcomes. Given the components of the early childhood care programmes, this study postulates that quality preschool education will unearth the successful (appropriate) intelligence of young children for use in subsequent academic and social life. Preschool Education: Nature and Scope

The concept of preschool education has now become a household phrase attracting the attention of a host of scholars who contribute to the debate regarding the nature, trend and outcomes of early childhood intervention programmes. With the onset of Head Start programme in the US, the concept has gradually diffused to the entire world such that governments have been striving to provide children with quality preschool education for both school readiness and also to improve upon their cognitive abilities. According to Greenberg (2004), the Head Start programme, a community-based two-week summer food programme, targeted children aged 3-5 years and their families by providing comprehensive services e.g. early childhood education, nutrition, health, special education and parental support programmes. The goal of the programme was to ensure that children who are at-risk for school failure (due to poverty, illness and family dysfunctions and mental challenges) can succeed upon entering kindergarten. The programme thus intended to close the achievement gap between children from low socio-economic status and those from higher socio-economic status and to give equal chance for such children to succeed in later academic activities.

The gains made from the Head Start programme have been impressive. In particular, it has been observed that the Head Start Children score higher than their same-age peers when compared to non-Head Start children from the same socio-economic status (Pigott & Israel, 2005). While this idea has been upheld and generally integrated into the educational systems of developed countries, the converse is true for developing countries especially sub-Saharan Africa. In these regions, findings suggest that the deteriorating conditions in the educational system and poverty have kept many children away from early childhood intervention programmes. It is in light of this that the United Nations at the turn of the Millennium placed emphasis on early childhood education to benefit children, especially those from developing countries. It was in this direction that the first of the Dakar Six Goals was committed to the development of early childhood education. The first of the six goals states: expanding and improving comprehensive early

5

childhood care and education, especially for the most vulnerable and disadvantages children (UNESCO, 2000; UNESCO, 2002).

The United Nations appreciate the benefits of early childhood care and education (ECCE) in that as it argues, ECCE has a strong and positive impact on further learning, in primary education and beyond. In the Brazilian PROAPE project, it was found that the total cost of schooling including the early learning programme itself, for pupils up to grade 2 of primary education, was 11% lower for those who participated in ECCE programmes than those who did not (UNSCO, 2002). This and other gains therefore stand to explain why there is increased demand for the provision of early intervention programmes. Trends in the Provision of ECCE Programmes

According to the UN, while in some regions, prior attention was focused on primary education with little attention on ECCE, other regions such as Eastern Europe and Latin America have relatively high proportions of young children attending various forms of pre-school or other care. The UN also acknowledges that preschool education has for a longtime been a privilege of urban dwellers holding jobs and ECCE is dominated by private provision. The UN reports that in regions where resources to address the ECCE need for children in disadvantaged areas are scarce (as found in developing countries), the strategies often result in informal ECCE activities. These are often home-based and rooted in indigenous traditions of child rearing. However, there are some institutionalized forms of ECCE i.e. preschool being an integral part of the regular education system.

Since, for most countries around the world, the field of ECCE is relatively new and uncharted area of learning, the UN has the challenge of developing strategies – formal and informal – that respond to specific socio-cultural and economic contexts in countries where governments are constrained in their ability to find resources for ECCE. Trends in the Participation in ECCE Programmes Although it has been suggested that ECCE programmes are expanding the world over, UNICEF (2002) observed that fewer than half of all children in the world participate in these intervention programmes. Indeed, while gains have been made from ECCE programmes in developed regions, the reverse is true for most developing regions. It is even more so in sub-Saharan Africa where it has been found that low enrolment rates combined with lack of progress influence the nature of ECCE programmes (UNESCO, 2002). For instance, as reported by UNESCO (2002), in 2000 it was observed that while Lebanon and Trinidad and Tobago had over 80 percent and 72 percent respectively of children aged 3-5years attending some form of organized early childhood education programmes, in Rwanda only 2.6 percent; Niger 2.5 percent; Somalia 1.9 percent; and Chad 0.8 percent children aged 3-5 years were enjoying some form of ECCE programmes. The Nature of Preschool Education in Ghana

Like most developing countries, early intervention programmes in Ghana is illustrative. The ECCE programmes in Ghana have mostly been provided through the informal approach that is the home-based method. Indeed, as observed by the President’s Committee on Review of Education Reforms in Ghana (2002), while nursery and kindergarten have been in existence for a long time, it was not until 2002 that the preschool system became an integral part of the regular education system. According to the UNICEF (2008), in 2006 there was a total of 1813 children of preschool aged 3-5 years out of which 927 were males and 886 females. Out of this figure, the total net enrolment ratio was 35.5 percent with 34.6 percent for males and 36.5 percent for females. Similarly, the gross enrolment ratio as observed by UNESCO (2008) was 55.0 percent with 53.7 percent for males and 56.4 percent for females.

While attendance/enrolment has not been encouraging, adequate teaching staff at the preschool level has presented its own set of challenges. Indeed, the number of teachers at the preschool level in 2005 stood at 29,014. Out of this figure, only 22.2 percent of the teachers were trained and over 90.8 percent of the preschool teachers were females.

6

The point deduced from these data is that while enrolment and low staffing persists, quality of personnel remains a serious obstacle in achieving the commitments set out in the Education for All goals. Preschool Education and Cognitive and Behavioural O utcomes

Heyman, Gee and Giles (2003) have observed a positive association between the cognitive abilities of preschool children in terms of their perception of exerting effort and experiencing academic success, plus being nice and having high academic ability. They, however, suggest that the perceived correlation between high effort and academic achievement and social and academic qualities diminish with age. In another study examining the long term benefits of good preschool programmes, Schweinhart (2000) found in the high/scope perry programme that the arrest rate for those with preschool experience was lower compared to those with no prior preschool education; and fewer than one-third of those with preschool experience arrested for drug dealing. Again, one-third of those with prior pre-school education graduated from high school or the equivalent compared to those with no previous preschool education. He thus concludes that cost-benefit analysis shows that preschool programme is an excellent investment for society with a sizeable positive net present value for either one or two years of preschool education.

On his part, Barnett (1992) has argued that although the long term effects of compensatory preschool education has been questioned, evidence points to the fact that compensatory preschool education can produce long term gains in school success through contributions to cognitive abilities not adequately measured by intelligence (IQ) tests. Again, he asserts that greater educational success is accompanied by substantial improvement in social and economic outcomes including employment, and reduced teen pregnancy, and reliance on welfare assistance. What we observe here is that while preschool education may work to a limited extent, it serves as a boost to the school readiness, academic achievements and social skills development of young people.

Similarly, Tashakkori, Haghighat, and Yousefi (1988) have found that preschool education positively affects children’s mental abilities and the effects were maintained for a relatively longer period during the primary school years. Preschool education, for them, thus becomes a means of enrichment and a suitable intervention programme for children brought up in relatively poor cultural environments. Furthermore, Umek, Kranjc, Fekonja, and Bajc (2008) in their study of the effectiveness of preschool education on children’s school readiness vis-à-vis their intellectual abilities, language competence and parents’ education found that preschool education has positive effect on school readiness for children whose parents have low level of education. Thus, preschool experience is able to compensate for deficiencies in the development of children from less affluent socio-economic backgrounds. In contrast, Umek et al. (2008) observed that preschool education has limited effect on children of highly educated parents who probably already offer their children quality simulation in the family environment that preschool activities do not surpass. Determinants of Quality Preschool Education

A number of antecedent factors have been identified as mediating the relationship between preschool education and children’s intellectual and social outcomes. Discussed here briefly are: socio-economic status and access; location; institutional challenge; and pedagogical issues. Socio-Economic Status and Access

Findings on the impact of socio-economic status on school and behavioural outcomes are mixed. While some authors argue that income levels are critical determinants of children’s intellectual outcomes, others suggest that family type and supportive behaviours hold the strongest effect in determining children’s intellectual and social outcomes. In the first instance, a number of studies report consistent findings on how socio-

7

economic status (SES) mediates the relationship between access to (quality) preschool and outcomes. In particular, lower SES levels keep many children away from school and also prevent a large number of children from accessing quality preschool facilities. Wein (1997) using the Bettye Cladwell School Test demonstrated that children from lower socio-economic homes entering basic schools at 4 years of age are seriously behind middle class children. Grantham-McGregor (1983) found that a large number of Jamaican children did not attend basic schools and these children probably represented the most deprived. For Grantham-McGregor, a 1971 study in Kingston, Jamaica found that children generally had few toys and books and their mothers had little idea of the importance of play. The mothers tended to be restrictive, and water and sand or dirty play was strongly discouraged; the commonest play activities being outdoor games and “rough-and-tumble” games. Subsequently, Grantham-McGregor (1983) concludes that while most mothers were very anxious for their children to do well, they had a rather poor understanding of child development. They thus spent time teaching their children school-related topics such as time-tables, which were usually inappropriate for their children’s level of development. This brings to the fore, the idea of parents’ SES, especially educational level, which influences family routines and child outcomes especially at the preschool level.

In examining the effects of preschool education on primary school entrance for urban and rural children in Argentina, Pozner (1983) observed that entrance age was related to socio-economic levels and that primary school entrance age of low-income children was later than the stipulated age. Again, entrance age at primary school was linked to preschool attendance. The average age of first grade children who had attended preschool was lower (6 years 5 months) than that of children who had not attended preschool (7 years).

In evaluating the level of preparation at first grade using the Bendner test, Pozner (1983) found that preschool education influences visuomotor ability and help raise low scores on the test and improves high ones. This is so partly because a large part of preschool activities stress motor and visual skills. Pozner (1983) again observed that in both urban and rural areas, the lower the socio-economic level, the lower the scores obtained. The difference, for Pozner, might be due to the different stimuli in each socio-economic level. Interestingly, however, preschool attendance improves test scores of children from lower-income levels especially for children in rural areas. This is because of all children who attended preschool, 35% of the rural children obtained the highest scores compared with only 11% of the urban children. The preschool education may thus provide visuomotor for children from lower socio-economic environments where objects such as pencils, scissors and books are not an integral part of daily routines (Pozner, 1983).

It is, however, worthy of note that while discussing the preschool achievements for preschoolers, the nature of the socio-economic level is clearly spelt out. Indeed, a study by Piggott and Israel (2005) using data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS) to examine the reading and maths assessment scores of Head Start children compared to their same-age peers at kindergarten entry found that while Head Start children score higher than their same-age peers when compared to non-Head Start children from the same socio-economic status, there is still a gap between Head Start children and their peers in schools with higher socio-economic standing. This situation points to the definition of ‘peer’ when it comes to discourses on socio-economic levels and the achievement of preschoolers.

On the other hand, some authors have found the impact of supportive families and family types on children’s social and intellectual outcomes. Weigel, Martin, and Bennett (2010) have observed supportive family behaviours as influential in improving and/or enhancing children’s literacy development. They found that the more regular the routines (e.g. bed time, meal time, scheduling of activities, communication, and personal time) in the household, the more likely parents were to engage their children in literacy enhancing

8

activities, and in turn, the higher the children’s print knowledge and reading interest. Weigel, Martin, and Bennett (2010) conclude that family resources and stress contribute to some aspects of literacy development, albeit not as strong as family routines. In a related study on socio-economic status and social development of children, Kerr and Beaujot (2002) hold the view that family type is more important than low income in predicting child outcomes such as hyperactivity, emotional disorder, indirect aggression, physical aggression and property offence. They make three observations as follows: that low income has a significant impact on childhood difficulties in lone-parent and stepfamilies but not in intact families. Second, family functioning has less impact on children’s outcomes in stepfamilies than in intact-or lone-parent families. Third, large family size predicts child outcomes only in non-intact families. Preschool Curriculum, Pedagogy and Staffing

Beyond SES and family routines, preschool outcomes, to a larger extent depend on the nature of instruction given and who delivers such instruction. There are several debates about the nature of pedagogy for preschoolers. These arguments on the pedagogy center on three areas namely social-emotional versus academic; child-initiated versus adult-directed; and play versus instruction orientations. There are, however, suggestion that the various arguments be brought under one rubric because they are quite compatible and most effective in combination (Bredakamp & Copple, 1997). In one study of preschool teachers’ views on appropriate pedagogy for 4-year olds, it was observed that these teachers think that preschool education should be fun and engaging, not stressful. They also believed that the curriculum should be based on children’s interest and everyday life. It should also allow them to direct their own play and exploration. Finally, they perceived preschool education as seeking to promote social, emotional and physical wellbeing and not so much of academic work (Lee, 2006). For King (1983), while there is much preference for preschool programmes to compensate for a hostile home environment and preparing for an equally hostile school environment through the learning of school-coping skills, there is the need to incorporate intellectual qualities through preschool activities. Specific preschool activities such as early reading first (ERF) have been found to be effective in addressing language and development related problems among children. Gonzalez et al. (2009) found that ERF-enriched instruction enhances the acquisition of alphabet knowledge and print concepts. ERF-enriched instruction was also found to promote vocabulary development.

The preschool curriculum for kindergarten education in Ghana, is child-centered which allows the child learn from the known to the unknown and prepares the child for a more routine and formal education (MoE, 2004). The curriculum identifies syllabuses in the following subject areas: language and literacy (pre-reading and pre-writing) pre-mathematics (e.g. writing of numerals), Creativity and critical thinking (memory drawing and painting of the human body parts), problem-solving, construction and assemblage, music (listening and singing for creativity), physical exercises (for gross motor activities), and psychosocial skills (self-confidence and assertiveness) for preschoolers. It has been suggested that while the curriculum promises positive outcomes for preschoolers, quality of personnel continues to impede the attainment of these outcomes.

Research evidence, again, suggests that teachers’ professional development also predicts the quality of preschool programme and children’s development outcomes. Saracho and Spodek (2007), in their study of preschool teachers’ preparation and the quality of programme outcomes, found that the quality of preschool programmes improved with better-educated teachers with bachelor’s degree and beyond. These teachers provided high or moderate quality instructions in their classrooms, more appropriate practices, better instructional activities and positive response to families. The educational level helped them in providing instructional activities that were developmentally appropriate for young children. Trained child care staff also tends to support the optimal early socio-

9

emotional development of children from varied socio-economic backgrounds. In evaluating the effectiveness of teacher-child interaction training (TCIT), Lyon et al. (2009) found that TCIT was positively associated with systematic increases in trained skills during the intervention programmes for meeting the early socio-emotional development needs of children from different socio-economic backgrounds.

King (1983) argues that in poor countries, it is necessary to predicate preschools on unqualified staff whose own education may be a little beyond primary school. This position seems to hold true for Ghana because, in 2005 only 22.2 percent of preschool caregivers were trained teachers (UNESCO, 2006). Again, Ofosu-Appiah (2008) observed that some preschools use inappropriate curricula difficult for preschoolers to comprehend. We therefore ask the question what do they teach and how do they teach what they teach? These drawbacks notwithstanding, Ghana is making efforts to address the shortfalls in staff capacity. There is a National Nursery Training Center that offers a 3-month training for nursery educators and attendants; a 3-year diploma in preschool education at the colleges of education; and a 4-year bachelor of education in ECCE at the University of Education, Winneba and the University of Cape Coast (UNICEF, 2006).

Another key feature in the preschool literature is the differences that exist in quality of programmes in urban and rural preschools. It has been observed that urban centers are abundant in quality preschool facilities and programmes compared to rural area. In their study of the preschool systems in Zimbabwe and India, Cleghorn and Prochner (2003) observed that differences in preschool education and outcomes exist because both settings are exposed to different stimulating environments. Yet while the rural preschoolers are exposed to inferior stimulating environments, it is they who experience the greatest effect of preschool education compared with urban children (see Grantham-McGregor, 1983; Pozner, 1983). The nagging question that comes up is what will happen if rural preschools see improvements in infrastructure and programmes? Conceptual Framework The foregoing review of literature has uncovered a number of issues regarding quality preschool education and outcomes. This has led to the development of a conceptual framework for this study. To achieve the tenets of quality preschool education with positive outcomes for pupils, there is the need for in-put factors that will shape the quality of the through-put (processes) so that given the appropriate teaching and learning environments, the output/outcome variables will be improved intellectual and academic performance of preschoolers at the basic school and higher educational levels. The in-put factors come under two headings namely logistic support in the form of teaching aids and physical infrastructure; and, personnel training and motivation factors. The in-put factors when properly integrated with the through-put factors such as appropriate pedagogy, family support factors (financial support and family routines on preschoolers’ training and development) will translate into equipping preschoolers with adequate and appropriate intellectual and learning outcomes. The output/outcome variables then become increased school-readiness of pupils, increased academic school performance (academic), and increased intellectual maturity of pupils. Figure 1 illustrates this interrelationship between the in-put and output factors.

10

Figure 1: Input-Output Model of Preschool Education in Ghana

Output Factors Input Factors Through-put

Logistic Support

Adequate Teaching Aids/ Learning Materials

Physical infrastructure

Preschool Processes

Appropriate pedagogy

Financial support/Socio-Economic Status

Family Routines

Quality Preschool Experience

Increased school readiness

Increased academic performance

Improved intellectual maturity

Personnel Factors

Personnel training

Personnel motivation

11

SECTION THREE METHODOLOGY

Introduction This section discusses the research procedures for collecting and analyzing data for

the study. It also throws light on the challenges encountered in the fieldwork and how they were confronted. Research Design

The study employed the ex post facto design which allows for a retroactive assessment of the effect of preschool experiences on the intellectual maturity of pupils in basic stages/grades 2, 3 and 4. Besides, a cross-sectional survey design was used to obtain information on the opinions of teachers and preschool caregivers in the selected schools. Choice of Study Areas

The study was undertaken in two regions of Ghana, namely Ashanti and Central Regions. The study was specifically conducted in Cape Coast, Jukwa, Kumasi and Boamang. The choice of the regions was informed by their superior educational infrastructure and also differences in socio-economic indicators. Whereas the Ashanti Region ranks among the top three regions with higher socio-economic well-being, the Central Region, in contrast, is ranked among the bottom three with low socio-economic status. Therefore the differences in socio-economic well-being enabled this study to compare differences in access to preschool, achievement scores, and intellectual maturity of pupils across the various socio-economic levels. Target Population

The study targeted pupils in Basic Grades 2, 3, and 4 in private and public primary schools in the two regions. This group was targeted because it constitutes a suitable age group for the drawing test that was used in the study. In addition to the pupils, the opinions of teachers in the selected classes and preschool caregivers in the selected schools were studied. Sample and Sampling Procedures

The study employed mixed-bag of purposive, stratified and simple random sampling techniques. First, primary schools in the two regions were stratified into public and private schools. Four schools (two public and two private schools with preschool facilities) were selected in each region for the study. Second, in each region the capital city (metropolis) was purposively selected. Next, one district in each region was randomly selected from the remaining districts. After that one educational circuit was randomly selected from the selected districts/metropolis. To obtain the rural-urban dichotomy, one non-urban community in the selected circuits from the districts with both private and public primary schools was randomly picked. The next step then was the random selection of one public and one private school in each of the circuits. The last stage was the selection of classes/grades. In schools with multiple streams, one class was randomly selected at each grade. In single stream schools, the three classes were automatically picked. In each of the selected classes, all the pupils present at the time of the study were used. The breakdown of the respondents is as follows: Central Region: Cape Coast Metropolis and Twifo-Hemang Lower Denkyira District were selected. St. Nicholas Anglican Primary (126) and University Primary Schools (113) in the OLA/Aboom circuit were selected from Cape Coast while Jukwa Methodist (126) and Jabez High Academy (86) in the Jukwa circuit were selected from Jukwa. This gives a sub-sample of 451 pupils. Ashanti Region: Kumasi Metropolis and Efigya-Kwabre District were selected. The primary schools used were Suame M/A Primary (155) and Holy Rosary Catholic Preparatory School (119) in the Suame circuit and Soko D/A Primary (94) and Holy City

12

International School (44) in the Boamang circuit. This gives a sub-sample of 412 pupils. Thus the sample for the pupils was 863.

In addition, 29 teachers/preschool caregivers comprising 11 from the Central Region and 18 from the Ashanti Region were studied. Information on socio-economic background of pupils was obtained from the head of household or guardian (in cases where the pupil was not staying with any parent). A total of 673 parents/guardians provided information about their socio-economic background. Table 1 Summary of Respondents for the Study

Region Category of Respondents Number of Respondents Central pupils 451 Teachers 8 Caregivers 3 Parents/Guardians 329 Sub-total 791 Ashanti Pupils 412 Teachers 11 Caregivers 7 Parents/Guardians 344 Sub-total 774 Total 1,565 Source: Field Data, September, 2010. Data Collection Instruments

The instrument for data collection was the questionnaire. Four sets of questionnaires were used. The one for teachers sought information on their socio-demographics, and their assessment of pupils’ achievement. The second questionnaire sought information on preschool caregivers’ assessment of the curriculum, instructional materials and other logistics for the provision of quality preschool education. The first two sets of questionnaires consisted of both structured choice items on a 5-point Likert-type scale and open-ended questions. The third instrument sought information on both the achievement and intellectual maturity of pupils in basic grades 2, 3 and 4. The researchers and the assistants completed the achievement portion using existing information on pupils’ end-of-term exams from school files. Pupils’ scores on the Draw-A-Man Test (DMT) (Harris, 1963) were used for intellectual maturity. The DMT has been found to be more appropriate for testing the intellectual maturity of young children especially 4 – 8 year olds. The test has also been reported to have high reliability scores (Harris, 1963). DMT is not culturally-biased and has been used in measuring intellectual maturity in different cultural settings. Again, it is not influenced by one’s previous knowledge of art or drawing. It measures the child’s conceptualization of the human figure. Fourth, a questionnaire seeking information on pupils’ socio-economic levels was given to the pupils for their parents through their class teachers who also assisted in the administration and retrieval of the questionnaires. The return rate of the SES questionnaire was 77.9% out of 863 pupils. Pilot Study

A pilot study was conducted at the Jacob-Wilson Sey School and Pammo International School which are public and private schools in Cape Coast and Jukwa respectively. Pupils in grades 2, 3 and 4, their class teachers and two preschool caregivers in each school were selected for the pilot study. The pilot study helped in assessing the feasibility as well as improving upon the instruments for the main study.

13

Data Collection Procedure Four assistants were trained to help in data collection from the eight (8) selected

schools. Permission was sought from heads of selected primary schools eight (8) weeks before the commencement of the study. The heads were briefed about the objectives of the study and strict compliance to research ethics. Data collection lasted for four weeks i.e. two week in each region for administering and retrieving instruments. Pupils were assigned unique ID numbers after which they were given mini-questionnaires to give to their parents to seek information about parents’ socio-economic status. This information from parents’ occupation and annual income was used to assess socio-economic status of pupils selected for the study. Variables and Measures

The achievement tests scores for the previous term available from the schools records were used to measure performance. Pupils’ scores in the English (language literacy) mathematics and natural science common to the three grades were used to assess their performance. This measure had a high reliability value of alpha co-efficient of .081. However, given the differences in performance tests by the schools, these scores were used with caution. The DMT standard test (Harris, 1963) as a measure of intelligence was used to gauge pupils’ intellectual maturity. Harris (1963) argues that the DMT is not culturally-biased and have been used in measuring intellectual maturity in different cultural settings. In the absence of localized instrument for measuring intellectual abilities and the timeline for the study, the DMT was utilized.

Pupils’ socio-economic background was measured by parental income, education, occupation, number of children in the family, number of school-aged children, and number of children in school. Income levels were measured using the income quintiles provided by the Ghana Statistical Services (GSS) (2008). The quintiles from the lowest to the highest are: GH¢ 1-999; GH¢ 1,000-1,097; GH¢ 1,098-1,262; GH¢ 1,263-1,543; and GH¢ 1,544+.

Rural-urban dichotomy was established using the GSS (2002) specification in the 2000 Population and Housing Census which defines a rural area as any place with a population of less than 5000 people while an urban area is any place with more than 5000 people. Therefore Kumasi (1,170,270) and Cape Coast (82,291) are urban while Boamang (2,436) and Jukwa (4,602) are rural.

Preschool experience was measured by asking the pupils whether they attended nursery/kindergarten and the names of these institutions. Parents/guardian feedbacks were used to validate what the pupils provided. Teachers assisted in classifying these kindergartens into public and private Data Processing and Analysis

Pupils’ drawings (DMT) were assessed by two researchers who had trained in evaluating the drawings using the test manual provided by Harris (1963). The raw scores were converted into standardized scores using the chronological age and raw score criterion. The manual provides different conversion tables for boys and girls. The SPSS version 16 was used to analyze data after careful coding and processing of scores. Descriptive statistics such as frequencies and means were used to describe the profile of the respondents. The following statistical techniques were used to analyze the data: t-test was used to explore differences in mean scores for children from very affluent and less affluent homes; two-way analysis of variance was used to explore differences in mean scores for children from the eight (8) schools; correlation analysis was used to explore the relationship between preschool experiences, performance and intellectual maturity of pupils; and Chi-square test was used to explore relationships between access and quality of preschool experiences of the pupils across the different socio-economic levels.

14

Challenges Faced In the course of this study, some difficulties were encountered. First, an

achievement test would have been appropriate for the selected schools but constraint of time and resources could not permit that. Nonetheless, since the West African Examination Council uses 40 percent of continuous assessment from school records, the use of school-based assessments as proxy for achievement test across the selected tools was justified.

Second, in order not to disrupt other classes in the study setting, the researchers could not sample but used all the pupils even in larger classes. In such classes especially in public schools, the researchers and assistants had to work tirelessly to study all the pupils.

Last but not least, there was difficulty in retrieving the socio-economic questionnaire from some parents. After a number of visits and with the support of teachers who assisted some parents to complete, an encouraging number was received. Concluding Remarks

This section has described the methodological procedure used for arriving at the sample for the study. It has also described the suitability of the various measures for exploring the relationship between the variables of interest to the study. Again, the chapter has described the challenges that emerged and how those challenges were addressed. The sections that follow make use of the information from the field to explore the relationship between socio-economic status, preschool experience and pupils’ intellectual maturity.

15

SECTION FOUR SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Introduction This section describes the background characteristics of the subjects of the study.

Variables discussed include pupils’ age, sex, preschool education, location, category of school and their parents’ socio-economic levels. The section, again, describes the age, sex, educational qualification, status, tenure and spatial locations of the teachers and caregivers. Sex and Age Distribution of Pupils

As noted earlier, 863 pupils were studied. Out of this number, 456 (52.8%) were boys while 407 (47.2%) were girls. Within the regions, 451 of the pupils were from the Central Region while 412 came from the Ashanti Region. Out of the 451 pupils from the Central Region, 247 (54.8%) were boys while 204 (45.2%) were girls. Similarly, out of the 412 pupils from the Ashanti Region, 209 (50.7%) were boys and 203 (49.3%) were girls. Comparing these figures to the primary enrolment rates for the regions, it is observed that the Central Region pupils were fairly represented (73.0% for males and 72.3% for females) compared with their counterparts from the Ashanti Region (78.9% for males and 79.0% for females) (GSS, 2003).

The ages of the pupils were distributed as follows: 327 (37.9%) were aged up to 8 years; 413 (47.9%) were aged between 9 and 10 years; and 123 (14.2%) were aged 11 years and above. The mean age of the pupils was 9.08 years (SD=1.52). Table 2 presents information on pupils’ sex and age. Within the regions, 176 (39.0%) out of the 451 pupils from the Central Region were aged up to 8 years; 219 (48.6%) were aged between 9 and 10 years; and 56 (12.4%) were aged 11 years and above. On the other hand, out of the 412 pupils from the Ashanti Region, 151 (36.7%) were aged up to 8 years; 194 (47.0%) were aged between 9 and 10 years; and 67 were aged 11 years and above. The mean age for the Central Region pupils was 9.01 years (SD=1.50) while that of the Ashanti Region pupils was 9.20 years (SD=1.60). The Ashanti Region pupils look relatively older than their Central Region counterparts. Comparing the mean ages of pupils by the nature of locality (rural or urban) revealed that the mean age for the urban pupils was 8.94 years (SD=1.38) while that of the rural pupils was 9.27 years (SD=1.67) suggesting that the rural pupils are relatively older than the urban pupils. Table 2 Age and Sex Distribution of Pupils by Region Region Sex Age Group Central (%) Ashanti (%) Total (%) Boy <8 93 (37.7) 80 (38.3) 173 (37.9) (n=456) 9-10 120 (48.6) 96 (45.9) 216 (47.4) 11+ 34 (13.8) 33 (15.8) 67 (14.7) Subtotal 247 (100) 209 (100) 456 (100) Girl <8 83 (40.7) 71 (35.0) 154 (37.8) (n=407) 9-10 99 (48.5) 98 (48.3) 197 (48.4) 11+ 22 (10.8) 34 (16.7) 56 (13.8) Subtotal 204 (100) 203 (100) 407 (100) Total 451 412 863 Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863 Pupils’ Spatial Location

The majority of the sample stay in urban environment. Out of the 863 pupils studied, 513 (59.4%) were from the urban centers compared with 350 (40.6%) from the rural communities. Across the regions, it was observed that 239 (53.0%) of the 451 pupils from the Central Region came from urban Cape Coast while 212 (47.0%) came from rural

16

Jukwa. In a similar vein, out of the 412 pupils from the Ashanti Region, 274 (66.5%) came from urban Kumasi while 138 (33.5%) came from rural Boamang. This reflects the larger sizes of classes in urban centres due to large populations in urban centres. Category of School attended by Pupils

Majority of the pupils attend public schools. Out of the 863 pupils studied, 501 (58.1%) attend public basic schools compared with 362 (41.9%) pupils attending private basic schools. Within regions, 252 (55.9%) of the 451 pupils from Central Region attend public basic schools while 199 (44.1%) attend private basic schools. Similarly, 249 (60.4%) out of the 412 pupils in the Ashanti Region attend public basic schools compared with 163 (39.6%) pupils who attend private basic schools.

Again, relating category of school to nature of locality (rural or urban), it was observed that 281 (54.8%) of the 531 urban pupils attend public schools while 232 (45.2%) attend private schools. Similarly, 220 (62.9%) out of the 350 pupils in the rural areas attend public schools compared with 130 (37.1%) who attend private schools. Thus while attendance at the public schools is generally high, rural pupils more than urban pupils attend public schools. Table 3 gives information on the nature of physical locality, category of school attended by pupils according to regions.

It is observed from the table that in the Central Region, the percentage of pupils attending public schools in the urban areas was lower (52.7%) than those in the rural school (59.4%). The case is different for the number of pupils attending private schools in the urban area which is higher (47.3%) than their rural colleagues (40.6%). Similarly, in the Ashanti Region, the percentage of pupils attending public school in the urban center was lower (56.6%) than those in the rural area (68.1) although those attending private school in the urban center was higher (43.40%) compared with their colleagues in the rural areas (31.9%). Between the two regions, relatively more pupils in the urban center in the Ashanti Region attend both public and private schools than their Central Region counterparts. In contrast, more pupils from the rural area in the Central Region attend both public and private schools than their Ashanti Region counterparts. Table 3 Category of School and Nature of Physical Location of Pupils by Region

Category of School Region Nature of Locality Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) Central Urban 126 (52.7) 113 (47.3) 239 (100) Rural 126 (59.4) 86 (40.6) 212 (100) Subtotal 252 (55.9) 199 (44.1) 451 (100) Ashanti Urban 155 (56.6) 119 (43.4) 274 (100) Rural 94 (68.1) 44 (31.9) 138 (100) Subtotal 249 (60.4) 163 (39.6) 412 (100) Total 501 362 863 Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863 Pupils’ Socio-Economic Status

Out of the 863 pupils studied, 673 (77.9%) had adequate information on their socio-economic background. Out of this 673, 385 (57.2%) came from male-headed households while 288 (42.8%) came from female-headed households.

On parent/guardian educational level, 305 (45.3%) had BECE or its equivalent; 118 (17.5%) had SSCE or its equivalent; 42 (6.2%) had Diploma in Education; 41 (6.1%) held Bachelor’s degree; 15 (2.2%) had Masters degree; 14 (2.1%) had professional qualification; 11 (1.6%) had Teachers Certificate ‘A’; and 1 (0.1%) had PhD. However, 126 (18.7%) said they have not had any formal education.

17

A diverse number of occupations were reported by parents/guardians. Out of the 673 parent/guardians, 297 (44.1%) were self-employed; 168 (25.0%) were farmers; 63 (9.4%) were teachers; 34 (5.1%) were civil servants; 35 (5.2%) were artisans; 31 (4.6%) were drivers; 29 (4.3%) were technicians; 8 (1.2%) were bankers; 5 (0.7%) were lecturers; and 3 (0.4%) were unemployed. Table 4 presents information on parent/guardian occupation and nature of physical locality. Table 4 Nature of physical Location and Parents/Guardians O ccupation

Nature of Locality Occupation Urban (%) Rural (%) Total (%) Self-employed 216 (55.8) 81 (28.3) 297 (44.1) Farming 12 (3.1) 156 (54.4) 168 (25.0) Teaching 44 (11.4) 19 (6.6) 63 (9.4) Artisan 31 (8.0) 4 (1.4) 35 (5.2) Civil Service 27 (7.0) 7 (2.4) 34 (5.1) Technician 23 (5.9) 6 (2.1) 29 (4.3) Driving 22 (5.7) 9 (3.1) 31 (4.6) Banking 7 (1.8) 1 (0.3) 8 (1.2) Lecturing 5 (1.3) - (-) 5 (0.7) Unemployed - (-) 3 (1.0) 3 (0.4) Total 387 (100) 286 (100) 673 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=673

As seen from Table 4, more than half (about 56%) of the urban parents is self-employed compared with their rural counterparts where a greater percentage (about 55.0%) engages in farming activities.

Regarding the number of children in the household and those in school, it was observed that the mean number of school-aged children in a household was 3.4 (SD=1.50). Comparing urban and rural households, the data revealed that whereas the mean number of school-aged children in the household of an urban pupil was 3.2 (SD=1.40), the mean number of school-aged children in the family of a rural pupil was 3.6 (SD=1.62). Regarding the number of children attending school, the mean for an urban pupil was 3.0 (SD=1.25) while the mean number of children attending school in a rural family was 3.1 (SD=1.40). Thus relatively more school-aged children in the families of the urban pupils attend school than their counterparts in the rural areas. Parents/Guardians Income Levels

As stated earlier parent/guardian mean annual income levels were measured using the quintiles provided in the Ghana Living Standard Survey (GLSS) (GSS, 2008). The quintiles from the lowest to the highest are: GH¢ 1-999; GH¢ 1,000-1,097; GH¢ 1,098-1,262; GH¢ 1,263-1,543; and GH¢ 1,544+. The majority of parents/guardians fall within the lowest income categories. Out of the 673 parents/guardians, 256 (38.0%) fall within the second quintile; 229 (34.0%) fall within the first quintile; 128 (19.0%) fall within the third quintile; 45 (6.7%) are within the fourth quintile; and 15 (2.2%) fall within the fifth quintile. Table 5 presents information on rural-urban differentials in parents/guardians income levels.

18

Table 5 Rural-Urban Differentials in Parents/Guardians Inco me Levels

Nature of Locality Income Levels Urban (%) Rural (%) Total (%) GH¢ 1-999 96 (49.4) 133 (46.6) 229 (34.0) GH¢ 1,000-1,097 139 (35.9) 117 (40.9) 256 (38.0) GH¢ 1,098-1,262 97 (25.1) 31 (10.8) 128 (19.0) GH¢ 1,263-1,543 40 (10.3) 5 (1.7) 45 (6.8) GH¢ 1,544+ 15 (3.9) - (-) 15 (2.2) Total 387 (100) 286 (100) 673 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=673 As seen from Table 5, whereas the majority of the rural parents/guardians (over 87%) fall within the two lowest income quintiles compared with the urban parents/guardians (about 85%), the converse is true for the urban parents/guardians where more of them (over 14%) fall within the two highest quintile compared with their rural counterparts (about 2%). Thus, while the parents/guardians generally fall within the lower income quintiles, the rural parents/guardians more than their urban counterparts receive the least annual income. Profile of Teachers/Caregivers Sex and Age of Teachers/Caregivers

As stated earlier, 29 teachers and caregivers were studied in addition to the pupils. Out of the 29 teachers/caregivers, 6 (20.7%) were males and 23 (79.3%) females. Whereas 5 (83.3%) of the males came from the rural schools, only 1 (16.7%) came from the urban schools. Similarly, 13 (56.5%) of the female teachers/caregivers came from the rural schools while 10 (43.5%) came from the urban schools. Thus there were more rural teachers/caregivers in the study than those from the urban centers.

The mean age of the teachers/caregivers was 36.5 years (SD=13.03) and the mean tenure in their occupation was 12.24 years (SD=12.42). This observation suggests an experienced number of teachers although the number of years worked varies accordingly. Educational Achievement

Out of the 29 teachers/caregivers, 10 (34.5%) had Diploma in Education, 8 (27.6%) had SSCE or its equivalent; 7 (24.1%) had Teachers’ Certificate ‘A’; 2 (6.9%) each had Bachelor’s and Professional qualification respectively. Table 6 presents information on sex and educational achievements of teachers/caregivers. Table 6 Sex and Educational Achievement of Teachers/Caregiv ers

Sex of Teacher/Caregiver Qualification Male (%) Female (%) Total (%) SSCE 2 (33.3) 6 (26.1) 8 (27.6) Cert ‘A’ 1 (16.7) 6 (26.1) 7 (24.1) Diploma 3 (50.0) 7 (30.4) 10 (34.5) Bachelor - (-) 2 (8.7) 2 (6.9) Professional - (-) 2 (8.7) 2 (6.9) Total 6 (100) 23 (100) 29 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=29

It is observed that whereas the male teachers/caregivers dominate in Diploma qualification and SSCE or its equivalent, the females in contrast, dominate in Bachelor’s degree and professional qualifications.

19

Status of the Teachers/Caregivers There were 19 teachers and 10 preschool caregivers. All of the 10 caregivers were

females. Out of this number, 5 (50.0%) were senior superintendant of education and 5 (50.0%) were preschool attendants. Similarly, out of the 13 female teachers, 3 (23.1%) were pupil teachers, 2 (15.4%) were assistant directors of education while 8 (61.5%) were senior superintendant of education. Table 7 gives details of the status (position) of teachers/caregivers and the category of school in which they teach. Table 7 Status of Teachers/Caregivers by School Category

School Category Status Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) Pupil Teacher - (-) 5 (41.7) 5 (17.2) Assistant Director 1 (5.9) 1 (8.3) 2 (6.9) Superintendant 14 (82.4) 3 (25.0) 17 (58.6) Preschool Attendant 2 (11.8) 3 (25.0) 5 (17.2) Total 17 (100) 12 (100) 29 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=29 It is observed from the Table that while trained teachers (i.e. senior superintendants) constitute the majority of the teachers in the selected public schools, untrained teachers (i.e. pupil teachers) were in the majority at the private schools. Concluding Remarks The foregoing description of the socio-demographics of pupils as well as the profile of the teachers and caregivers who participated in the study has revealed a number of issues. First, there was a fair representation of boys and girls in the selected schools and the pupils were generally young. Second, while both rural and urban pupils were fairly represented, the percentage of urban pupils in the sample was slightly higher than the rural pupils. This is probably due to the relative sizes of school-aged children’s population in the two contexts. Third, majority of the pupils attend public schools. There were more school-aged children in the families of the urban pupils who attend school than families of the pupils from the rural setting. Again, the annual income of families of urban pupils was higher than their rural counterparts. This is probably due to the economic activities in the two contexts; many urban families engage in commercial activities while the rural families largely undertake farming. On the part of the teachers/caregivers, it was observed that they are generally experienced and have worked for a considerable number of years (over 12 years). There were more females teachers than males as well as more trained teachers in the public schools than there were in the private schools selected for the study. The next section uses this socio-demographics information to assess pupils’ preschool experiences and outcomes.

20

SECTION FIVE PUPILS’ SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PRESCHOOL EXPERIENCE AND

PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES Introduction

In this section, the attempt is made to explore the effect of preschool experience on pupils’ academic achievement across socio-economic levels, physical location, and category of preschool they attended and the category of school they are attending. Preschool Experience

An overwhelming majority of the pupils have had preschool experience. Out of the 863 pupils, 819 (94.9%) have preschool experience. Only 44 (5.1%) have not had any preschool experience. Table 8 presents information on nature of physical location and category of preschool attended by the pupils. This is mainly due to Government policy which in 2002 made preschool programme an integral part of basic education with Government absorbing the cost of providing it. Table 8 Nature of Physical Location and Pupils’ Preschool E xperience

Preschool Experience Nature of Locality Yes (%) No (%) Total (%) Urban 499 (97.2) 14 (2.8) 513 (100) Rural 320 (91.4) 30 (8.6) 350 (100) Total 819 (94.9) 44 (5.1) 863 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863 Comparing rural-urban preschool experience, it was observed that 499 (97.2%) of the 513 urban pupils have had preschool experience while only 14 (2.8%) did not experience any preschool education. On the other hand, out of the 350 rural pupils, 320 (91.4%) have had preschool experience while 30 (8.6%) said they have not had preschool experience. It is thus observed that whereas preschool experience is high for all the pupils, it is higher for the urban pupils compared with the rural pupils.

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance was conducted to explore the relationship between the nature of physical location and preschool experience of pupils. There was a significant difference at the 0.05 level ( 2=13.494, df=1 n=863, p<.001). This implies that pupils from urban environments tend to have higher preschool experience (i.e. attendance) than those from rural settings. The strength of the relationship was though small (13%) (Phi=.130, p<.001). Across the regions, it was found that in the Central Region, out of the 451 pupils, 432 (95.8%) have had preschool experience while 19 (4.2%) have not had any preschool experience. In a similar vein, out of the 412 pupils from the Ashanti Region, 387 (93.9%) have had preschool experience compared with 25 (6.1%) who have not had preschool experience. It was thus observed that slightly more pupils from the Central Region than Ashanti Region have had preschool experience. Category of Preschool attended by Pupils

It was found that majority (55.2%) of the 819 pupils with preschool experience attended private preschool facilities compared with those who attended public preschools (44.8%). Table 9 presents information on the category of preschool attended by pupils and the nature of physical location (urban or rural). In both regions, it was observed that the urban pupils attended private preschools (i.e. over 73% for Central Region and nearly 60% for Ashanti Region) than public preschools. In the rural areas, however, most of the pupils attended public preschools (about 53% for the Central Region and nearly 76% for the Ashanti Region) than private preschools.

21

Table 9 Nature of Physical Location and Category of Prescho ol Attended by Region

Category of Preschool Region Nature of Locality Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) Central Urban 64 (26.9) 174 (73.1) 238 (100) Rural 102 (52.6) 92 (47.4) 194 (100) Subtotal 166 (38.4) 266 (61.6) 432 (100) Ashanti Urban 106 (40.6) 155 (59.4) 261 (100) Rural 95 (75.4) 31 (24.6) 126 (100) Subtotal 201 (51.9) 186 (48.1) 387 (100) Total 367 (44.8) 452 (55.2) 819 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=819 Socio-Economic Status and Preschool Experience

As pointed out in the literature, a number of findings suggest that socio-economic status of children severally affect their access to and the quality of preschool experience. In this study, this relationship was explored. As mentioned earlier, 673 pupils had information on their parents/guardians. Table 10 presents information on parent/guardian’s mean annual income and pupils’ preschool experience. As seen in Table 10, a higher percentage of the pupils with preschool experience fall within the 2nd lowest (38.4%) and the lowest (33.0%) income quintiles. Only a few (6.8%) fall within the higher income quintile and just a handful (2.2%) fall within the highest income quintile. In contrast, majority of the pupils without preschool experience fall within the lowest (over 56%) and the 2nd lowest (30.0%) income quintiles. There was none of the pupils in the highest income quintile. This observation suggests that whereas majority of the pupils generally fall within the lower income levels, those with preschool experience tend to come from homes with higher income status compared with their counterparts with no preschool education. Table 10 Parents/Guardians Mean Annual Income and Pupils’ Pr eschool Experience

Preschool Experience Income Levels Yes (%) No (%) Total (%) GH¢ 1-999 212 (33.0) 17 (56.7) 229 (34.0) GH¢ 1,000-1,097 247 (38.4) 9 (30.0) 256 (38.0) GH¢ 1,098-1,262 126 (19.6) 2 (6.7) 128 (19.0) GH¢ 1,263-1,543 43 (10.3) 2 (6.7) 45 (6.8) GH¢ 1,544+ 15 (3.9) - (-) 15 (2.2) Total 643 (100) 30 (100) 673 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=673

However, the chi-square ( 2) test of significance found no statistically significant difference between income level of parents/guardians and pupils preschool experience. ( 2=8.482, df=4 n=673, p=.075). The strength of the relationship was very small (11%) (Cramer’s V=.112, p=.075). This implies that preschool experience may not depend solely on income level per se but a number of factors may account for the attendance or otherwise of preschool. This observation is contrary to previous findings (e.g.Grantham-McGregor, 1983; Pozner, 1983) suggesting that pupils from lower socio-economic status are deprived of access to such programmes. Socio-Economic Status and Category of Preschool

There is a higher tendency for parents from higher income groups to send their wards to private educational institutions based on perceived quality and adequacy of

22

instructional materials and facilities. Against this backdrop, this study used private preschools as an index of high quality preschool and public to represent ordinary preschool facilities in order to access the category of preschool that pupils from the various income levels attended. Out of the 673 pupils with preschool experience, 643 had information on parent/guardian income levels. Of this number, 288 attended public preschool while 355 attended private preschool. This information is provided in Table 11. Table 11 Parents/Guardians Mean Annual Income and Category o f Preschool Pupils Attended

Category of Preschool Attended Income Levels Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) GH¢ 1-999 123 (42.7) 89 (25.1) 212 (33.0) GH¢ 1,000-1,097 114 (39.6) 133 (37.5) 247 (38.4) GH¢ 1,098-1,262 36 (12.5) 90 (25.4) 126 (19.6) GH¢ 1,263-1,543 12 (4.2) 31 (8.7) 43 (6.7) GH¢ 1,544+ 3 (1.0) 12 (3.4) 15 (2.3) Total 288 (100) 355 (100) 643 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=643

It is observed from Table 11 that over a third (37.5%) of the 355 pupils with private preschool experience fall within the 2nd lowest income quintile; over a quarter (25.4%) fall within the middle income quintile. Again, over 10% of them fall within the high income quintiles. On their part, more than four-fifth of the pupils with public preschool experience (288) fall within the lowest (42.7%) and the 2nd lowest (39.6%) income quintiles. A little over 5% fall within the higher income quintiles. Thus pupils who attended private preschools tend to have higher income status than those who attended public preschools.

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance conducted to explore the relationship between parent/guardian income level and the category of preschool pupils attended found a statistically significant difference ( 2=37.276, df=4 n=643, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was small (24%) (Cramer’s V=.241, p<.001). The impression made from the observations so far is that while access to preschool may not necessarily depend on income status of a child’s family, the type of preschool attended (private or public) may to a large extent depend on income levels of parent/guardian. Parents/Guardians Educational Level and Preschool E xperience of Pupils Parents/guardians educational level has been identified as a more accurate index of socio-economic status (see e.g. Tashakkori, et al., 1988). This study explored the relationship between parent/guardian educational level and pupils’ academic performance. Table 12 illustrates this information. There were 673 pupils who had adequate information on parent/guardian educational level. As seen from Table 12, out of the 643 pupils with preschool experience, 45 percent have parent/guardians with basic education qualification. In addition, about 18 percent of these pupils have parents/guardians with SSCE qualification or equivalent and over 15 percent of them belong to parent/sguardians with tertiary qualification. On their part, majority (60%) of the 30 pupils without preschool experience belong to parent/guardians with BECE qualification and about 17 percent each for parents/guardians with no formal education and SSCE or equivalent qualification.

It is interesting to note that two of the pupils with no preschool education belong to parent/guardian with tertiary qualification. Again, about a fifth (18.8%) of those with preschool experience belong parents/guardians with no formal education. This observation suggests that parent/guardian educational level may not predict preschool attendance.

23

Table 12 Parents/Guardians Educational Level and Pupils’ Pre school Experience

Preschool Experience Parent Educational level Yes (%) No (%) Total (%) No Formal education 121 (18.8) 5 (16.7) 126 (18.7) BECE 287 (44.6) 18 (60.0) 305 (45.3) SSCE 113 (17.6) 5 (16.7) 118 (17.5) Certificate ‘A’ 11 (1.7) - (-) 11 (1.6) Diploma 42 (6.5) - (-) 42 (6.2) Bachelor 40 (6.2) 1 (3.3) 41 (6.1) Masters 15 (2.3) - (-) 15 (2.2) Professional 13 (2.0) 1 (3.3) 14 (2.1) PhD 1 (0.2) - (-) 1 (0.1) Total 643 (100) 30 (100) 673 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=673 Pupils’ Performance Variables

Pupils’ performance was assessed using achievement scores for their previous grade in three subjects common to all the grades studied. The subjects were English language (language literacy) mathematics, and natural science. The scores are in the 100 percentage points. Due to missing scores for pupils in some of the subjects, the total scores are different and the cut-off points for statistical reasons are not exactly the same. For English language, there were a total of 696 pupils with achievement scores. Out of this number, 141 (20.5%) scored between 44 and 55 points; 142 (20.4%) scored between 56 and 70 points; 141 (20.3%) scored between 71 and 84 points; and 129 (18.5%) scored 85 points and above. The mean score for English language was 62.25 (SD=20.96).

For mathematics, there were 691 pupils with appropriate achievement scores. Out of this number, 147 (21.3%) scored below 50 points; 137 (19.8%) scored between 51 and 61 points; 133 (19.2%) scored between 62 and 71; 150 (21.7%) scored between 72 and 81 points; and 124 (17.9%) scored 81 and beyond. The mean score for mathematics was 64.7 (SD=16.98).

For natural science, a total of 696 pupils had achievement scores. Out of this number, 154 (22.1%) scored 50 points or below; 126 (18.1%) scored between 51 and 60 points; 138 (19.8%) scored between 61 and 71 points; 146 (21.0%) scored between 72 and 83 points; and 132 (19.0%) scored 84 points and beyond. The mean score for natural science was 65.3 (SD=18.8).

Comparing the mean scores across the grades/classes the following was observed. The mean achievement scores for Grade 2 were: English language (M=62.8, SD=18.7); mathematics (M=63.1, SD=17.60); natural science (M=62.7, SD=18.20). The mean achievement scores for Grade 3 were: English language (M=67.7, SD=20.50); mathematics (M=67.9, SD=15.10); natural science (M=68.8, SD=19.60). The mean achievement scores for Grade 4 were: English language (M=55.8, SD=22.20); mathematics (M=62.8, SD=17.8) and natural science (M=64.4, SD=18.20). It is observed that while pupils’ performance across the 3 subject areas is generally beyond average, there were differences in performance across grades with Grade 3 pupils showing superior performance in all three subjects than Grade 2 and Grade 4 pupils. Pupils’ Performance across Schools

Against the backdrop of the general level of performance of pupils, observations were matched across the category of schools (private versus public). The category of school was entered as an index of socio-economic status and achievement scores for pupils in the three (3) subject areas were combined to constitute an index of overall

24

performance for pupils. Thus the maximum points a pupil could score was 300 percentage points. Table 13 presents information on this relationship. Table 13 Pupils’ Performance by Category of School

Category of School Total Achievement Score (%) Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) <149 107 (28.0) 33 (10.7) 140 (20.3) 150-180 88 (23.0) 48 (15.6) 136 (19.7) 181-209 95 (24.9) 48 (15.6) 143 (20.7) 210 -239 62 (16.2) 73 (23.7) 135 (19.6) 240+ 30 (7.9) 106 (34.4) 136 (19.7) Total 382 (100) 308 (100) 690 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=690

As seen from Table 13, there were 690 pupils with adequate information for the analysis (the remaining 6 pupils had missing scores for some of the subjects and are statistically removed). It is observed that whereas over a quarter (28.0%) of pupils in public basic schools scored a total of 149 points or lower out of a maximum of 300 points, only a handful (7.9%) scored 240 points and beyond. In contrast, more than a third of the pupils in the private schools (34.4%) scored a total of 240 points or higher compared with a few (10.7%) who scored 149 points or lower. Thus the performance of the private school pupils as measured by their achievement in English language, mathematics and science far outweighs the performance of public school pupils.

The Chi-square ( 2) test of significance was computed to explore the relationship between the category of school and pupils academic performance. There was a significant relationship at the 0.05 level ( 2=1029, df=4 n=690, p<.001). The strength of the association was strong (about 40%) (Cramer’s V=.386, p<.001). Thus, private school pupils perform better than their public school counterparts Pupils’ Performance across Localities

The study again assessed the performance of pupils across the two contexts (urban or rural). It was observed that performance in the urban centers was much higher than in the rural areas. Table 14 gives information on pupils’ performance by the nature of locality. Table 14 Pupils’ Academic Performance by Nature of Physical Location

Nature of Physical Locality Total Achievement Score (%) Urban (%) Rural (%) Total (%) <149 68 (16.0) 72 (27.2) 140 (20.3) 150-180 71 (16.7) 65 (24.5) 136 (19.7) 181-209 96 (24.9) 47 (15.6) 143 (20.7) 210 -239 80 (18.8) 55 (20.8) 135 (19.6) 240+ 110 (25.9) 26 (9.8) 136 (19.7) Total 425 (100) 265 (100) 690 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=690 From Table 14, it is observed that the number of urban pupils’ with superior performance (i.e. 240 and beyond) is higher (about 26%) compared to pupils with the lowest scores (i.e. 149 and below) which stands at 16%. In contrast, close to a third of the pupils in the rural areas (over 27%) scored a total of 149 or below compared with pupils who scored 240 points and beyond (about 10%). This implies that for the two settings, the urban pupils tend to perform better than the rural pupils.

25

The Chi-square ( 2) test found a significant relationship between nature of physical location and pupils’ performance at the 0.05 level ( 2=38.65, df=4 n=690, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was though small (23%) (Cramer’s V=.237, p<.001). Differences in Performance between Pupils with- and without Preschool Experience The study explored the performance difference between pupils with- and without preschool experience. It was observed that a slight difference exists in the academic performance of pupils with- and without preschool experience. Table 15 illustrates the relationship between preschool experience and performance. Table 15 Preschool Experience and Pupils’ Academic Performan ce

Preschool Experience Total Achievement Score (%) Yes (%) No (%) Total (%) <149 131 (20.0) 9 (25.7) 140 (20.3) 150-180 127 (19.4) 9 (25.7) 136 (19.7) 181-209 135 (20.6) 8 (22.9) 143 (20.7) 210 -239 131 (20.0) 4 (11.4) 135 (19.6) 240+ 131 (20.0) 5 (14.3) 136 (19.7) Total 655 (100) 35 (100) 690 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=690

As seen from Table 15, for pupils with preschool experience, the same percentage (20.0%) had the least and highest scores respectively. In contrast, whereas over a quarter (over 26%) of the pupils with no preschool experience scored 149 points or below, only about 14% scored 240 points and beyond.

However, an independent-samples t-test conducted to compare the performance of pupils with- and without preschool experience found no statistically significant difference in scores for pupils with preschool experience (M=193.1, SD=48.44) and pupils without preschool experience [M=179.4, SD=46.80; t(688)=1.627, p=.104]: The magnitude of the difference was very small (eta squared=.004). This observation implies that preschool experience may not necessarily translate into performance outcomes at the basic school levels. This is contrary to findings (e.g. Barnett, 1992) which suggest that preschool education is associated with long-term cognitive effects on achievement and school performance. Category of Preschool attended and Pupils’ Performa nce

To find out whether differences exist in the performance of pupils with preschool experience, their achievement scores were matched with the category of preschool attended. This information is presented in Table 16. As seen from the table, 655 pupils with preschool experience had adequate achievement scores. Over a quarter (28.4%) of the pupils with public preschool experience scored 149 points or below and only a handful (8.4%) scored 240 points and above. In contrast, more than a quarter (29%) of the pupils with private preschool experience scored 240 points and beyond compared with the few (about 14%) who scored 149 points or below. Thus pupils with private preschool experience show higher academic performance than those with public preschool experience.

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance found a statistically significant relationship between the category of preschool pupils attended and their academic performance at the 0.05 level ( 2=57.762, df=4 n=655, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was moderate (30%) (Cramer’s V=.297, p<.001). This implies that pupils with private preschool experience perform better than those with public preschool experience.

26

Table 16 Category of Preschool attended and Pupils’ Academic Performance

Category of Preschool Attended Total Achievement Score (%) Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) <149 81 (28.4) 50 (13.5) 131 (20.0) 150-180 66 (23.2) 61 (16.5) 127 (19.4) 181-209 64 (22.5) 71 (19.2) 135 (20.6) 210 -239 50 (17.5) 81 (21.9) 131 (20.0) 240+ 24 (8.4) 107 (28.9) 131 (20.0) Total 285 (100) 370 (100) 655 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=655 The impression once again made from the observation so far is that urban pupils more than rural pupils perform better in achievement tests. However, since the difficulty level of the tests across schools differ depending on the special needs of the pupils in particular school settings, this information needs to be treated with utmost caution. Nonetheless, the information provided gives the indication of performance differentials between public and private schools and also between rural and urban schools. This information is interesting given that pupils with preschool education were introduced to these subjects. Socio-Economic Levels and Pupil’s Performance

Given that no significant difference was found between preschool experience and pupils’ academic performance, the study probed further to explore the relationship between parent/guardian income level and performance of pupils. Income levels were re-coded into three categories for statistical reasons. The categories were low, middle, and high income levels. This information is presented in Table 17. Table 17 Parents/Guardians Income Level and Pupils’ Academic Performance

Mean Annual Income (GH¢) Achievement Score 1-1,097 1,098-1,262 1,263-1,544 Total (%) (%) (%) (%) <149 89 (25.2) 13 (12.1) 1 (2.3) 103 (20.4) 150-180 76 (21.5) 18 (16.8) 5 (11.4) 99 (19.6) 181-209 75 (21.2) 20 (18.7) 7 (15.9) 102 (20.2) 210 -239 72 (20.4) 23 (21.5) 10 (22.7) 105 (20.8) 240+ 41 (11.6) 33 (30.8) 21 (47.7) 95 (18.5) Total 353 (100) 107 (100) 44 (100) 504 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=504 Out of the 696 pupils with information on achievement scores, only 504 had information on parent/guardian income level. As seen from Table 17, over a quarter (25.2%) of the 353 pupils in the low income category scored 149 points or below out of the possible 300 percentage points compared with the few (11.6%) who scored 240 points and

27

above. In the middle income category, in contrast, about a third of the pupils (about 31%) and slightly more than one-fifth (about 22%) scored between 210 and 239 points compared with only about 12.1 percent who scored 149 points or below. In the high income category, nearly half (about 48%) out of the 44 pupils scored 240 points or beyond and more than a fifth (23%) scored between 210 and 239 points. Only a handful (2.3%) scored 149 points or below.

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance conducted to explore the relationship between income level of parent/guardian and pupils’ performance found statistically significant difference at the 0.05 level ( 2=55.52, df=8 n=509, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was moderate (33%) (Cramer’s V=.332, p<.001). It is therefore observed that majority of the pupils from the low income status families tend to perform below average compared with their counterparts from the middle income and high income status families who display superior performance. Concluding Remarks

This section has examined a number of issues. First it has been observed that whereas preschool experience is high and that no significant difference in performance exists between preschool experienced children and no preschool experience children, performance is related to the category of preschool attended and also the socio-economic status of parent/guardian. Again, the type of preschool (i.e. public or private) pupils attended, and their performance at the basic grades, to a large extent, is influenced by their parent’s income level. Parent/guardian educational level does not influence access to preschool. Furthermore, while the physical location of pupils (i.e. urban or rural) does not influence their access to preschool education, it was observed that majority of the pupils with preschool experience rather come from urban centers and that the majority of these pupils attended private preschools rather than public ones. Since urban households tend to have higher annual incomes than rural households, it can be inferred that more urban pupils attend private preschool because they can afford the high cost of private school education compared with their rural counterparts who are less likely to do so and thus largely depend on public preschool education which is mainly funded by government and international development aid agencies.

28

SECTION SIX PRESCHOOL EXPERIENCE AND INTELLECTUAL MATURITY

Introduction In the previous section, the relationship between pupils’ preschool education and academic performance was examined. Our concern in this section was to find out how pupils’ preschool experiences have influenced their intellectual abilities at the basic school level. The relationship between intellectual maturity and each of the following: school category, nature of locality and socio-economic status are explored. Pupils’ Level of Intellectual Maturity

As stated earlier, pupils’ intellectual maturity was measured using the Draw-a-Man Test (DMT) (Harris, 1963). The DMT uses a mean standard measure of 100 with a standard size for the standard deviation of fifteen points. In terms of the theoretical distribution of the values, Harris (1963 p.89) argues that roughly 68 percent of children at each age should score between the values of 85 and 115, and 99.8% should score between the values of 55 and 145. In this study, while all pupils had scores between the 55 and 145 marks predicted by Harris (1963), only a little over 58 pupils scored between 82 and 115 (which is quite below the theoretical expectation). Indeed, 180 pupils scored 73 points or lower, 183 pupils scored between 74 and 81 points, 187 scored between 82 and 90 points, 146 pupils scored between 91 and 100 points and 167 pupils scored 101 points and beyond. The mean score on the DMT was 87.4 (SD=17.03) which is below the theoretical average. The mean scores for some socio-demographic variables were as follows:

Regarding sex of pupils, the mean score for boys was 89.60 (SD=16.6) while that of girls was 84.9 (SD=17.15). Regarding grade of pupils, the mean score for Grade 2 was 87.30 (SD=17.30); the mean score for Grade 3 was 89.50 (SD=17.20); and that of Grade 4 was 85.3 (SD=16.30). The mean scores for category of school were 83.12 (SD=15.04) for public schools and 93.3 (SD=17.9) for private schools. On the nature of locality, the mean scores were 94.30 (SD=16.80) for urban pupils and 77.30 (SD=11.43) for the rural pupils. For the regions, the mean scores were 82.90 (SD=14.20) for the Central Region and 92.32 (SD=18.50) for the Ashanti Region, and for the preschool experience the mean scores were 87.71 (SD=16.93) for pupils with preschool experience and 81.20 (SD=17.82) for pupils without preschool experience. Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity across School Categor ies

Given that the mean score of (M=87.4, SD=17.03) for the pupils in the DMT was below the theoretical average of (M=100, SD=.15), their intellectual maturity across schools (public or private) was examined. Table 18 provides information on pupils’ scores in the DMT by category of school. Table 18 Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity by Category of School

Category of School DMT Score Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) <73 137 (27.3) 43 (11.9) 180 (20.9) 74-81 122 (24.4) 61 (16.9) 183 (21.2) 82-90 116 (23.2) 71 (19.6) 187 (21.7) 91-100 66 (13.2) 80 (22.1) 146 (16.9) 101+ 60 (12.0) 107 (29.6) 167 (19.4) Total 501 (100) 362 (100) 863 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863

As seen from Table 18, in the public schools, only 12% of the pupils scored beyond the theoretical average. Over half (50%) of the pupils in the public schools had scores

29

below 82 points compared with about a quarter (25.2%) who scored beyond 90 points. In contrast, while just about 30 percent of the pupils in the private schools scored 82 points and below, more than quarter (about 30%) scored beyond the theoretical mean (M=100, SD=.15) and the bulk of them (over 36%) scored beyond 90 points. Thus, although majority of the pupils scored below the theoretical average, the pupils from the private schools showed higher intellectual maturity compared with their counterparts from the public schools.

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance conducted to explore the relationship between category of school and intellectual maturity found statistically significant difference in intellectual maturity scores between pupils from the public and private schools ( 2=74.362, df=4 n=863, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was moderate (30%) (Cramer’s V=.294, p<.001). This implies that the private school pupils have higher intellectual abilities than their public school counterparts. Intellectual Maturity across Localities

Again, given differences in intellectual abilities across the different schools, the relationship between nature of locality and intellectual maturity was also explored. Table 19 presents information on the nature of physical locality and pupils’ scores in the DMT. As depicted in Table 19, over 30% of the urban pupils scored beyond the theoretical average. Over half (52.6%) of the pupils in urban schools scored 90 points and beyond compared with those who scored 82 points and below (about 23%). In contrast, the majority of the pupils in the rural areas (over 70%) scored below 82 points compared with just a handful (about 13%) that scored 90 points and beyond. Thus, it is observed that the urban pupils on average have higher intellectual maturity than rural pupils. Table 19 Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity by Nature of Physical Locality

Nature of Physical Locality DMT Score (%) Urban (%) Rural (%) Total (%) <73 40 (7.8) 140 (40.0) 180 (20.9) 74-81 77 (15.0) 106 (30.3) 183 (21.2) 82-90 126 (24.6) 61 (17.4) 187 (21.7) 91-100 109 (21.2) 37 (10.6) 146 (16.9) 101+ 161 (31.4) 6 (1.6) 167 (19.4) Total 513 (100) 350 (100) 863 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863

The chi-square ( 2)test of significance conducted to explore the relationship between the nature of physical location and pupils intellectual maturity found a statistically significant relationship between the intellectual maturity of urban and rural pupils ( 2=239.885, df=4 n=863, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was strong (53%) (Cramer’s V=.527, p<.001). This implies that the urban pupils possess higher intellectual maturity than the rural pupils. Intellectual maturity across Regions

Pupils’ intellectual maturity was further assessed by their region of residence. Table 20 illustrates the intellectual maturity of pupils according to regions. As Table 20 depicts, only a handful of the pupils in the Central Region scored beyond the theoretical average. Again, whereas over half (about 52%) of the pupils scored below 82 points, only about a quarter (25%) scored 90 points and beyond. Conversely, more than a quarter (30.3%) of the pupils in the Ashanti Region scored beyond the theoretical mean. Furthermore, although a little over a quarter (about 32%) of the pupils scored below 82 points, almost half (about 49%) scored 91 points and beyond. The impression one gets from this

30

observation is that the pupils from the Ashanti Region possess higher intellectual abilities than their colleagues from the Central Region. Table 20 Pupils’ Intellectual Maturity according to Region o f Residence

Region of Residence DMT Score (%) Central (%) Ashanti (%) Total (%) <73 117 (25.9) 63 (15.3) 180 (20.9) 74-81 115 (25.5) 68 (16.3) 183 (21.2) 82-90 107 (23.7) 80 (19.4) 187 (21.7) 91-100 70 (15.5) 76 (18.4) 146 (16.9) 101+ 42 (9.3) 125 (30.3) 167 (19.4) Total 451 (100) 412 (100) 863 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance found statistically significant difference between the intellectual maturity of pupils from the Central Region and Ashanti Regions ( 2=72.052, df=4 n=863, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was moderate (30%) (Cramer’s V=.289, p<.001). Thus, the Ashanti Region pupils show higher intellectual maturity than their Central Region counterparts. Preschool Experience and Pupils’ Intellectual Matur ity

As the core of this study, the relationship between preschool experience and intellectual maturity of pupils was explored. Given the high level of preschool experience by the pupils, it was expected that their intellectual abilities (as measured by the figure drawing test) would be high. Table 21 presents information on pupils’ preschool experience and their level of intellectual maturity. Table 21 Pupils’ Preschool Experience and their Intellectual Maturity

Preschool Experience DMT Score (%) Yes (%) No (%) Total (%) <73 116 (20.3) 14 (31.8) 180 (20.9) 74-81 167 (20.4) 16 (36.4) 183 (21.2) 82-90 182 (22.2) 5 (11.4) 187 (21.7) 91-100 143 (17.5) 3 (6.8) 146 (16.9) 101+ 161 (19.7) 6 (13.6) 167 (19.4) Total 819 (100) 44 (100) 863 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=863

Table 21 shows that for pupils with preschool experience, about a fifth of them (19.7%) scored beyond the theoretical average of (M=100, SD=.15). Two-fifth (41%) scored below 82 points while over a quarter (about 38%) scored beyond 91 points. In contrast, only a handful (about 14%) of the pupils with no preschool experience scored beyond the theoretical average. Majority of them (over 68%) scored below 82 points while a fifth of them (20.4%) scored 91 points and beyond.

The chi-square ( 2) test found statistically a significant relationship between the intellectual ability of pupils with- and without preschool experience ( 2=13.545, df=4 n=863, p<.01). The strength of the relationship was though small (13%) (Cramer’s V=.125, p<.01). Thus pupils with preschool experience show higher intellectual maturity compared with those without preschool experience.

31

Category of Preschool attended and Intellectual Mat urity of Pupils Against the backdrop of differences in intellectual maturity between pupils with- and

without preschool experience, the study further examined whether differences exist in scores for pupils who experienced public preschool and those with private preschool experience. This information is provided in Table 22. Table 22 Category of Preschool Experience of Pupils’ and the ir Intellectual Maturity

Category of Preschool Attended DMT Score (%) Private (%) Public (%) Total (%) <73 110 (30.0) 56 (12.4) 166 (20.3) 74-81 93 (25.3) 74 (16.4) 167 (20.4) 82-90 72 (19.6) 110 (24.3) 182 (22.1) 91-100 50 (13.6) 93 (20.6) 143 (17.5) 101+ 42 (11.4) 119 (26.3) 161 (19.7) Total 367 (100) 452 (100) 819 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=819

As observed from Table 22, out of the 367 pupils who attended private preschool, just a handful (11%) scored beyond the theoretical mean of 100 (SD=.15). The majority (over 55%) scored 82 points and below, while a little over a quarter (25.4%) scored 91 points and beyond. In contrast, out of the 452 pupils who attended public preschools, over a quarter (26.3%) scored beyond the theoretical average. Again, about half (47%) of the pupils scored 91 points and beyond although over a quarter (about 29%) scored below 81 points. It is thus observed that pupils who experienced private preschool education possess higher intellectual abilities (as measured by the DMT) compared with their counterparts who had their preschool experience in public schools.

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance found a statistically significant difference between the category of preschool pupils attended and their intellectual ability ( 2=69.34, df=4 n=819, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was moderate (30%) (Cramer’s V=.291, p<.001). This implies that pupils with private preschool experience have higher intellectual abilities than pupils with public preschool experience. Socio-Economic Status and Intellectual Maturity of Pupils

It was observed earlier that pupils from high income home tend to attend private preschools compared with those from low income homes. Given the difference in intellectual maturity between pupils with public and private preschool experiences, the relationship between socio-economic status (using parent/guardian income levels) and intellectual maturity was explored. Table 23 presents information on annual income of parent/guardian and their pupil’s intellectual maturity. As seen from the table, out of the 485 pupils in the low income category, less than one-fifth (about 16%) scored beyond the theoretical expectation (M=100, SD=.15). Almost half (about 47%) of the pupils scored below 82 points while a third (about 33%) of them scored 91 points and beyond. In contrast, out of the 128 in the middle income category, more than a third (35%) scored beyond the theoretical average. Again, while half (50%) scored 91 points and beyond, over a quarter of these pupils (about 30%) scored below 82 points.

Regarding the 60 pupils in the high income category, over a quarter (about 28%) scored beyond the theoretical mean. Again, while a third (about 33%) scored 82 points and below, almost half (about 47%) scored 91 points and beyond. It is observed that while generally about one-fifth (about 21%) scored beyond the theoretical average in the DMT, there were more pupils in the middle and high income categories with higher scores than those from the low income categories.

32

Table 23 Parents/Guardians Income Level and Pupils’ Intellec tual Maturity

Mean Annual Income (GH¢) Achievement Score (%) 1-1,097 (%) 1,098-1,262 (%) 1,263-1,544 (%) Total (%) <73 124 (25.6) 22 (17.2) 3 (5.0) 149 (22.1) 74-81 105 (21.6) 15 (11.7) 17 (28.3) 137 (20.4) 82-90 99 (20.4) 27 (21.1) 12 (20.0) 138 (20.5) 91 -100 81 (16.7) 19 (14.8) 11 (18.4) 111 (16.5) 101+ 76 (15.7) 45 (35.2) 17 (28.3) 138 (20.5) Total 485 (100) 128 (100) 60 (100) 673 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=673

The chi-square ( 2) test of significance found a statistically significant relationship between annual income of parent/guardian and pupils’ intellectual maturity ( 2=40.018, df=8 n=673, p<.001). The strength of the relationship was though small (24%) (Cramer’s V=.244, p<.001). This observation suggests that pupils from affluent backgrounds have higher intellectual maturity compared with their colleagues from less affluent backgrounds.

A two-way between-groups analysis of variance was conducted to explore the impact of pupil’s preschool experience and grade on their intellectual maturity (as measured by DMT standard scores). Subjects (pupils) were divided into three groups according to their grades (Group1: Grade 2; Group 2: Grade 3; and Group 3: Grade 4). There was a statistically significant main effect for preschool experience (M=87.71, SD=16.92) and no preschool experience [(M=81.20, SD=17.82) f(1, 857)=4.23, p<.05]: However, the effect size was small (partial eta squared=.005). The main effect for Grade of pupil (f (2, 857) =1.99, p=.137) and interaction effect (2, 857) =.899, p=.407) did not reach any statistical significance.

Again, partial correlation was used to explore the relationship between pupils’ academic performance (as measured by their achievement scores) and their intellectual maturity (as measured by the DMT standard score), while controlling for the effect of age. There was a small/weak positive correlation between academic performance and intellectual maturity [r=.274, n=687, p<.001], with some levels of academic performance associated with some levels of intellectual maturity. An inspection of the zero-order correlation (r=.315) suggested that controlling for the effect of age had very little effect on the strength of the relationship between the two variables. Thus, the observed relationship between academic performance and intellectual maturity is not due merely to the influence of age. Again, higher levels of academic performance may not translate into higher intellectual maturity. Teachers’ Opinions on Pupils Preschool Experiences and Outcomes

We now examine the opinions of teachers and preschool caregivers on preschool education and outcomes for pupils. First, teachers’ evaluation of their pupils’ socio-economic status, preschool experiences, and performance and intellectual abilities are explored. Teachers generally held the belief that preschool experience has a greater impact on pupils’ achievement (performance) and intelligence. First, the majority of them (over 63%) said differences exist in the performance of their pupils, although a over a quarter (32%) thought that their pupils did not differ in performance while a handful (5.3%) remained indifferent. About two-thirds (63.1%) of the teachers thought that there were more

33

high achievers in their classes than low achievers. In contrast, about a third disagreed with that view. A disaggregation of the teachers’ views by category of school is presented in Table 24. Table 24 Teachers’ Opinion on Pupils’ Performance by Categor y of School

Class dominated by Category of School High Achievers Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) Agree 5 (45.5) 7 (87.5) 12 (63.2) Disagree 6 (55.5) 1 (12.5) 7 (36.8) Total 11 (100) 8 (100) 19 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=19

As seen from Table 24, majority of the teachers in the public schools did not think that their classes are dominated by high achievers compared with the private school teachers where an overwhelming majority (about 88%) thought that their classes have more high achievers.

Regarding the socio-economic status of pupils and their performance, many of the teachers thought that the low achievers in their classes come from less affluent homes. Subsequently, the majority (73.7%) said that high achievers in their class come from less affluent homes. It is therefore observed that the teachers generally believe that people who perform poorly tend to be those from less affluent backgrounds. This supports the finding on performance where the poor performing ones seem to be those from the low income levels. The teachers were, however, emphatic that high achievers are able to meet their entire school requirements compared with their low achieving counterparts. The majority (about 58%) of the teachers said high achievers are able to meet their school requirement although a little over a quarter (over 26%) disagreed. In a similar vein, the majority (about 53%) of the teachers said low achievers find it difficult to meet their entire school requirements although a little over a quarter (about 32%) disagreed.

Regarding evidence of preschool experiences of their pupils, the teachers thought that low achievers just like high achievers have generally had preschool experience. Only a handful (about 11%) thought that low achievers show no evidence of preschool experience while about 16% were undecided. Again, the majority (79%) of the teachers said high achievers show evidence of preschool. Only a handful (5.3%) said high achievers in their classes do not show evidence of preschool and about 16% were undecided. Thus the teachers generally believe that preschool experience is high irrespective of performance at the basic level. This is consistent with the earlier observation that preschool attendance is on the increase.

In comparing the performance of pupils, majority of the teachers (84.3%) thought that high achievers are able to meet set standards/targets. In contrast, about half (over 47%) said that low achievers do not meet set standards/targets although a little over a quarter (about 26%) disagreed with this position. Yet the majority of the teachers (about 58%) said low achievers have adequate social and creative skills just like their high achieving counterparts who majority of the teachers (over 63%) said exhibit a strong sense of social and creative skills.

Regarding the type of preschool that provides adequate intellectual and performance outcomes, the teachers generally thought that the preschool facilities in their schools were the best and prepare pupils adequately to perform at the basic grades compared to other preschool facilities. Indeed, over half of the teachers (about 58%) said their preschool was the best although a handful (about 16%) disagreed. Subsequently, the majority (63.1%) thought that pupils from their preschool perform better than children who

34

enroll from different preschools. Table 25 illustrates teachers’ opinion on the best preschool for pupils by their category of school. Table 25 Teachers’ Opinion on the Best Preschool for Pupils’ by Category of School

Own Preschool Category of School is the Best Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) Agree 5 (45.5) 6 (75.0) 11 (57.9) Indifferent 4 (36.4) 1 (12.5) 5 (26.3) Disagree 2 (18.2) 1 (12.5) 3 (15.8) Total 11 (100) 8 (100) 19 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=19

As seen from Table 25, although teachers from both categories think that the best care is given in their preschool facilities compared to other preschools, those from the private schools have the highest agreement (75%) compared with their public school colleagues. Caregivers’ Opinions on Curriculum and Teaching Aid s in their Facilities

On their part, the 10 preschool caregivers generally held the view that they engage preschoolers in mentally stimulating activities such as storytelling, imaginative play, music, etc. Indeed, eight out of ten caregivers said they engage preschoolers in imaginative play; all of them said they engage preschoolers in storytelling; pre-reading activities; prewriting; and nine of them said they engage preschoolers in pre-mathematics activities. It is thus observed that the preschools are closely following the specifications provided by the curriculum on preschool (kindergarten) education in Ghana.

Play constitutes an important part of children’s mental growth and development. When preschoolers play with materials such as sand, water and other objects, they critically improve upon their intellectual abilities (MoE, 2004). However, the preschool caregivers thought that they were unable to engage preschoolers in most of these activities because the facilities are generally non-existent. Indeed, nine of the caregivers said they do not engage preschoolers in sand play; half of them said they do not engage preschoolers in water play although four said they do; and all of them said they do not engage the preschoolers in construction activities. Again, all of them said they do not have science materials and computers for preschoolers to explore. However, all of the caregivers said that they engage the preschoolers in music and games with rules as substitutes for mentally stimulating activities and nine out of the ten agreed that they encourage creative play of preschoolers. It is thus observed that in the absence of materials for stimulating the minds of preschoolers, caregivers resort to other strategies to compensate for the lack/inadequacy of the teaching and learning materials. Quality of Care provided in Preschools and Pupils’ Performance

Regarding the quality of care provided at their current preschool facilities, the caregivers generally thought that they provide average care. Indeed, half of them disagreed that their preschool provides the best of care, three of them were undecided and two disagreed. Yet the caregivers still believed that the care provided in their facilities is good for academic, reasoning and social skills development of pupils. Indeed, eight of them said the activities prepare preschoolers for higher academic work; nine of them said the activities help improve their social skills; and all of them said the activities prepare them for reasoning. In line with these views, the preschool caregivers were emphatic that preschool education improves the academic performance of the preschoolers. They all agreed that differences exist between the performance of pupils with- and without preschool experience and all of them again said that children with preschool experience perform better at the basic school than those without preschool experience. This opinion, however, differs from

35

the actual results of the performance test which suggest that there is no significant difference in performance between pupils with and those without preschool experience. Caregivers’ Opinions on Socio-Economic Status and P reschool Education

The caregivers did not think that both affluent and less affluent children enroll in their preschools. The majority of them (7 out of 10) said often, preschoolers in their facilities belong to the low socio-economic level. Table 26 illustrates information on the opinion of caregivers on the socio-economic status of preschoolers of their current preschool by category of preschool. Table 26 Perceived Socio-Economic Status of Preschoolers by Category of Preschool

Preschoolers come Category of Preschool from low SES Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) Agree 5 (83.3) 2 (50.0) 7 (70.0) Disagree 1 (16.7) 2 (50.0) 3 (30.0) Total 6 (100) 4 (100) 10 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=10

As seen from Table 26 the majority of the caregivers in the public schools believe that their preschoolers come from low socio-economic background, compared with their counterparts from the private school where opinions were divided. This gives some support to the finding made earlier that most pupils who attend public preschool generally come from low income levels.

Given the general opinion on socio-economic background of their preschoolers, the caregivers said that parents often have difficulties in providing the preschool needs of their wards. Eight out of the ten said parents find it difficult to provide for the preschool needs of their wards. Six of the ten caregivers said the mean annual income of their preschoolers parents fall within the lowest income category (GH¢ 1-999) while two each gave the low (GH¢ 1,000-1,097) and the middle (GH¢ 1,098-1,262) categories. Table 27 presents information on caregivers’ estimation of the mean annual income of their preschoolers’ parents according to category of preschool. Table 27 Perceived Annual Income of Preschoolers’ Parents by Category of Preschool

Category of Preschool Attended Income Levels Public (%) Private (%) Total (%) GH¢ 1-999 4 (66.7) 2 (50.0) 6 (60.0) GH¢ 1,000-1,097 2 (33.3) - (-) 2 (20.0) GH¢ 1,098-1,262 - (-) 2 (50.0) 2 (20.0) Total 6 (100) 4 (100) 10 (100) Source: Field Data, September, 2010 N=10

As depicted in Table 27, while the caregivers in the private schools think that their pupils fall within both the low and upper income categories, four out of the six caregivers in the public schools said that the parents fall within the lowest income category. This observation suggests that the majority of the pupils in the public preschools tend to come from less affluent homes compared with those in the private preschools which divided equally between low and upper income groups. Improving Preschool Activities and Outcomes

The teachers and the caregivers were of the opinion that preschool education faces a number of challenges which need to be addressed for improved outcomes. Majority (57.9%) of the 19 teachers mentioned inadequate teaching and learning materials, over a quarter (26.3%) mentioned inadequate trained personnel while less than a fifth (16%)

36

mentioned inadequate parental support as the core problems that face the preschool education and thus constrain positive outcomes.

On their part, the majority (70%) of the preschool caregivers mentioned inadequate teaching and learning materials, while the remaining (30%) hinted that poor family routines and support were the key problems that confront teaching and learning at the preschool facilities. It is interesting to note that it is particularly the lack of teaching and learning aids that constrain caregivers in providing mentally challenging activities such as construction, sand-play and computers for exploration. In this regard, both teachers and caregivers suggested the provision of teaching and learning materials, play equipment, the training of more personnel to teach at the preschool and increased family involvement in the preschool education of their wards as means or requirements for improving the quality of care provided at the preschool. Concluding Remarks

In the foregoing section, a number of key observations were made. It was observed that the intellectual maturity of pupils was generally below the theoretical expectation. However, that of pupils in private basic schools was higher than those in public ones and that the intellectual maturity of urban pupils was higher than that of rural pupils. Again, it was observed that pupils with preschool experience show higher intellectual abilities than those without preschool experience. Furthermore, it was found that pupils with private preschool experience show higher intellectual maturity than those with public preschool experience and pupils from affluent homes had superior intellectual maturity than those from less affluent homes. The connection between these observations is that it is probably because more pupils in the urban centers have higher socio-economic status, attend private preschool facilities than their rural counterparts that they acquire higher intellectual abilities than their rural counterparts. However, it was observed that academic performance does not necessarily reflect intellectual maturity.

From the point of view of teachers, it was observed that preschool experience of their pupils is generally high. Again, the teachers believed that preschool education prepares pupils for higher academic performance at the basic levels and some of them, especially the public school teachers, thought that low achievers in their classes generally come from less affluent backgrounds which make it difficult for the pupils to meet several school needs.

On the part of the preschool caregivers, much as they strive to engage preschoolers in mentally stimulating activities to prepare and improve upon the intellectual abilities of preschoolers, their efforts are often constrained by the lack of and inadequacy of teaching aids and materials for accomplishing these tasks.

37

SECTION SEVEN SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction This section provides a summary of the major findings from the study. Based on

the findings, conclusions are drawn and recommendations to guide policy on preschool programmes and also for future research are made. Summary of Main Findings

This study has explored the factors which influence access to preschool education and has attempted to explain the factors accounting for the difference between intellectual outcomes of pupils with- and without preschool experience. It was observed that access to preschool education is generally high and that an overwhelming majority of the pupils in basic schools have had preschool experience. Again, it was observed that attendance at preschool does not necessarily depend on parent/guardian income level nor their level of education. Furthermore, it was found that while pupils generally did not meet the theoretical expectation on the intellectual maturity test, pupils with preschool experience show higher intellectual maturity than pupils without preschool experience. However, for pupils with preschool experience, those who attended private preschools showed higher intellectual maturity than those who attended public preschools.

The specific objectives of the study were achieved. The first specific objective sought to examine the extent to which a child’s physical location affects their access to preschool education. It was found that the nature of physical location of a child (whether urban or rural) does not affect their access to preschool. An overwhelming majority of the pupils in both rural areas and urban centers had experienced preschool education. This is mainly due to Government policy. The second specific objective was to find out whether a child’s socio-economic background affects their access to preschool education. It was observed that children of all socio-economic levels attend preschool irrespective of parent/guardian income and educational levels. The third specific objective sought to find out whether socio-economic status of a child affects the category of preschool education the child receives. It was observed that children of affluent socio-economic backgrounds mostly attend private preschools compared with those from less affluent socio-economic backgrounds who mostly attend public preschools.

The fourth specific objective sought to examine whether children with private preschool education perform better academically and intellectually than those with public preschool experience. It was found that pupils who attend private preschools perform better than those who attend public preschools. Again, pupils who attend private preschools show higher intellectual maturity than those who attend public preschools. The fifth specific objective sought to find out whether there are differences in academic performance and intellectual maturity between children with- and without preschool experience. It was found that no significant difference exists in academic performance between pupils with- and without preschool experience. However, pupils with preschool experience show superior intellectual maturity than those without preschool experience. Conclusions

The findings in this study generally support the arguments in the multiple intelligence position (Sternberg, 1999) which says that children have multiple intelligence and that early care programmes can unearth these talents. Indeed, the study has shown that children who experienced preschool education have greatly improved upon their intellectual abilities at the basic school level. Based these findings, the study draws the following conclusions:

• There is no relationship between physical location and access to preschool. Children of all physical locations (urban or rural) have equal access to preschool education in the study areas.

38

• There is no relationship between socio-economic status and access to preschool education. Children of all socio-economic levels have equal access to preschool education in the study areas.

• There is a positive relationship between socio-economic status and the category of preschool experience children receive. The category of preschool education (private or public) is contingent on a child’s socio-economic background.

• There is no relationship between preschool experience and academic performance. Preschool experience does not predict academic performance.

• There is a positive relationship between preschool experience and intellectual maturity. Children with preschool experience show superior intellectual maturity than those without preschool experience.

Recommendations Based on the findings, the following recommendations are made

• First, since pupils from urban centers tend to have higher rates of preschool experience than those in the rural areas, the Ministry of Education (MoE) in Ghana needs to commit more efforts and resources towards educating parents/guardians to send their wards to preschools. This will help improve enrolment in the rural settings where preschool programmes are known to have the greatest outcomes.

• Second, this study found that pupils with private preschool experience show higher intellectual abilities than their public preschool counterparts. Therefore, the MoE and the preschool caregivers should work hand-in-hand to provide refresher courses and in-service training for public preschool teachers and also embark on routine checks to ensure that preschoolers are engaged in appropriate activities in order to bridge the gap between the intellectual outcomes of public and private preschool pupils.

• Third, the MoE should partner with other stakeholders to improve upon preschool facilities where they are in decrepit conditions and to provide adequate teaching and learning materials in preschools where they are lacking. This is especially the case in public preschools which are the responsibilities of the MoE.

• Fourth, preschool intervention programmes from the MoE and the Department of Social Welfare should target pupils from less affluent socio-economic backgrounds and rural preschoolers who lag behind their more affluent urban counterparts in intellectual achievement.

• Fifth, since findings from this study show that pupils from more affluent backgrounds have higher intellectual abilities than their less affluent counterparts, it is suggested that preschool intervention programmes should consider supportive family context, especially for the less affluent ones, in terms of family routines and financial support throughout the preschool period and beyond.

Further Research In future, a more extensive study that examines the preschool situation in other regions looks promising to allow for empirical generalizations. Such a study should find out the reasons why some less affluent parents send their wards to private preschools where financial demands are rather high. Again, such a study should delve more into the relationship between preschool education and academic performance. The DMT measured only the intellectual maturity of children i.e. their development of conceptual abilities to engage in abstract thinking. In future, other measures of intelligence should be incorporated to check for outcomes from children’s preschool experiences. Again, the use of school-based achievement test makes it difficult for drawing generalizations although the Ghana Education Service uses school-based assessment to evaluate performance. In future, researchers should attempt to administer a general achievement test for all pupils included in a study of this nature.

39

REFERENCES Addae-Mensah, I. (2000). Education in Ghana: A tool for social mobility or social stratification? The J. B. Danquah Memorial Lectures. Accra: Academy of Arts and Sciences. Agyeman, D.K. (1993). Sociology of education for African students. Accra: Blackmask Press. Barnett, W. S. (1992). Benefits of compensatory preschool education. Journal of Human Resource, 27 (2), 279-312. Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.) (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programmes (Revised ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Ceci, S. J. & Williams, W.M. (1997). Schooling, intelligence and income. American Psychologist, 52, 1051-1058. Cleghorn, A., & Prochner, L. (2003). Contrasting views of early childhood education: Examples from rural and urban settings in Zimbabwe and India. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 1 (2), 131-153 Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (1998). Ethnicity and race: Making Identities in a changing world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Forojalla, S. B. (1993). Educational planning for development. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. Gardner, H. (1999). Who owns intelligence? Atlantic Monthly, pp. 67-76. Ghana Statistical Service (2002). 2000 Population and housing census: Summary reports. Accra: Ghana Statistical Services. Ghana Statistical Service (2003). 2003 Core welfare indicators questionnaire survey, Ghana. Accra: Ghana Statistical Services. Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) (2008). Ghana living standards survey: Report of the fifth round (GLSS 5). Accra: Ghana Statistical Services. Gonzalez, J. E., Goetz, E. T., Hall, R. J., Payne, T., Taylor, A. B., Kim, M., & McCormick, A. S. (2009). An evaluation of early reading first (ERF) preschool enrichment on language and literacy skills. Springer science+Business Media B.V. DOI 10.1007/s11145-009 -9212-8. Government of Ghana (GoG). (2002). Meeting the challenges of education in the 21st

Century. Review Report. Accra: GoG Grantham-McGregor, S. (1983). Development of intervention strategies for young children in Jamaica. In IDRC Report 172-e. Ottawa: International Development Research Center, pp. 13-207. Greenberg, P. (2004). Three core concepts of the war on poverty: Their origins and significance in Head Start In E. Zigler and S. J. Styfco (Eds.). The Head Start Debates, pp. 61-83 Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Books. Harris, D. (1963). Children’s Drawings as a measure of intellectual maturity. New York: Harcourt Brace. Heyman, G. D., Gee, C. L., & Giles, J. W. (2003). Preschool children’s reasoning about ability. Child Development, 74 (2), 516-534. Hunt, M. (1982). The universe. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kerr, D., & Beaujot, R. (2002). Family relations, low income, and child outcomes: A comparison of Canadian children in intact-, step-, and lone-parent families. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 43 (2), 134-173. King, K. (1983). Conceptual issues and early primary education. In IDRC Report 172-e. Ottawa: International Development Research Center, pp. 136-140. Known, Y. I. (2003). A comparative analysis of preschool education in Korea and England. Comparative Education, 39 (4), 479-491.

40

Lee, J. S. (2006). Preschool teachers’ shared beliefs about appropriate pedagogy for 4 -year olds. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33 (6), 434-441. Lyon, A. R., Gershenson, R. A., Farahmand, F. K., Thaxter, P. J., Behling, S., & Budd, K. S. (2009). Effectiveness of teacher-child interaction training (TCIT) in a preschool setting. Behaviour Modification, 33 (6), 855-884. Myers, R. (1992). The twelve who survive: strengthening programmes of early childhood development in the third world. London: Routledge. Ofosu-Appiah, B. (2008). Refocusing the aims and objectives of preschool (nursery and kindergarten education in Ghana. Retrieved 02/15/10 from http://africanews.com Piggott, T. D. & Israel, M. S. (2005). Head start children’s transition to kindergarten: evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 3 (1), 77-104. Pozner, P. (1983). Relationship between preschool education and first grade in Argentina. In IDRC Report 172-e. Ottawa: International Development Research Center, pp.7485. Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Robertson, D. L., & Manri, E. A. (2001). Long term effects of an early childhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2339-2345. Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (2007). Early childhood teachers’ preparation and quality of program outcomes. Early Child Development and Care, 177 (1), 71-91. Scar, S. (1984). What’s a parent to do? A conversation with E. Hall. Psychology Today, 58-63. Schweinhart, L. J. (2000). The high/scope perry preschool study: A case study in random assignment. Evaluation and Research in Education, 14 (3 & 4), 136-147. Sternberg, R. (1999). The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 3, 292-316. Tashkkori, A., Haghighat, S., & Yousefi, F. (1988). Effects of preschool education on intelligence and achievement of a group of Iranian elementary school children. International Review of Education, 34 (4), 499-508. Umek, L. M., Kranjc, S., Fekonja, U., & Bajc, K. (2008). The effects of preschool on children’s school readiness. Early Child Development and Care, 178 (6), 569-588. UNESCO (2000). Education for all: Year 2000 Assessment. Paris: UNESCO UNESCO (2002). Education for all: Is the world on track? (EFA Global Monitoring Report 2002). Paris: UNESCO UNESCO (2006). Country profile commissioned for EFA global monitoring report 2007, strong foundations: Early childhood care and education (ECCE) programmes. Geneva: UNESCO International Bureau of Education (IBE). UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2008). Data Center, http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/ReportFolders/ReportFolders.aspx,January2008 UNICEF (2008). Education statistics: Ghana. UNICEF: Division of Policy and Practice, Statistics and Monitoring Section Vane, J., & Kessler, R. (1964). The Goodenough draw-a-man test: long term reliability and validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 487-488. Weigel, D. J., Martin, S. S., & Bennett, K. K. (2010). Pathways to literacy: connections between family assets and preschool children’s emergent literacy skills. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 8 (1), 5-22. Wein, N. (1971). Analysis of four subsets of the Caldwell preschool inventory revised for Jamaican children. Report from Bernard Van Leer Foundation of Jamaica Ltd. Project for Early Childhhod Education. Zigler, E. & Styfco, S. J. (2001). Extended childhood intervention prepared for schools and beyond. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2378-2380.

APPENDIX I

GOODENOUGH-HARRIS DRAWING TEST

Name________________________________________Boy___________Girl____________

School______________________________________Date of Drawing__________________

Class_______________________________________Age____________________________

Draw a MAN in the box below 1. _____ 41. _____

2. _____ 42. _____ 3. _____ 43. _____

4. _____ 44. _____

5. _____ 45. _____

6. _____ 46._____

7._____ _ 47._____

8.______ 48._____

9.______ 49._____

10.______ 50._____

11. _____ 51._____

12. _____ 52._____

13. _____ 53._____

14. _____ 54._____

15. _____ 55._____

16. _____ 56._____

17. _____ 57._____

18. _____ 58._____

19. _____ 59._____

20. _____ 60._____

21. _____ 61._____

22. _____ 62._____

23. _____ 63._____

24. _____ 64._____

25. _____ 65._____

26. _____ 66._____

27. _____ 67._____

28. _____ 68._____

29. _____ 69._____

30. _____ 70._____

31. _____ 71._____

32. _____ 72._____

33. _____ 73._____

34. _____

35. _____

36. _____

37. _____

38. _____

39. _____

40. _____

Raw Score ______

APPENDIX II PUPILS ACHIEVEMENT SCORE SHEET

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH NETWORK FOR WEST AND CENTRAL A FRICA (ERNWACA) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PRESCHO OL EDUCATION AND

PUPILS’ INTELLECTUAL MATURITY This instrument seeks information on the performance/achievements and intelligence scores of pupils in basic grades 1-3. It is to be completed by researchers/assistants with the help of teachers using achievements scores for previous terms/grades. The study is purely an academic exercise and may be used to guide policy to improve preschool outcomes. You are assured of complete anonymity. Any information you give will be kept confidential and used only for the intended purpose. Direction : Please tick or write where appropriate. A. General Information 1. Serial Number …………………………………………………………………………………. 2. Name of City/Town/Community ……………………………………………………………… 3. Nature of Locality (Urban/Peri-Urban/Rural) …………………………………………………. 4. District …………………………………………………………………………………………. 5. Region ………………………………………………………………………………………….. B. Socio-Demographic Information 1. Name of Pupil ………………………………………………………………………………….. 2. Age of pupil …………………………………………………………………………………….. 3. Sex of pupil: Boy [ ] Girl [ ] 4. Class …………………………….…………………………………………….………. 5. Preschool Experience: Yes [ ] No [ ] 6. Category of Preschool: Public [ ] Private [ ] C. Pupils’ Achievement/Performance and Interest 1. GPA scores earned in the previous term/class in three subjects common to basic grade 1-3

� Reading …………………………………………………………………………………... � Arithmetic ………………………………………………………………………………... � Science …………………………………………………………………………………….

2. Pupil’s score on standard DMT test ……………………………………………………………

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH NETWORK FOR WEST AND CENTRAL A FRICA (ERNWACA) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PRESCHO OL EDUCATION AND

PUPILS’ INTELLECTUAL MATURITY QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PRESCHOOL CAREGIVERS

The study is being conducted for academic purpose and may be used to guide policy to improve preschool outcomes. You are assured of complete anonymity and any information received from your outfit shall be handled with the strictest confidentiality. Thank you in advance for your time and support. Direction : Please tick or write where appropriate. A. General Information 1. Serial Number …………………………………………………………………………………. 2. Name of City/Town/Community ……………………………………………………………… 3. Nature of Locality (Urban/Peri-Urban/Rural) …………………………………………………. 4. District …………………………………………………………………………………………. 5. Region ………………………………………………………………………………………….. B. Socio-Demographic Information 1. What is your age at your last birthday? ……………………………………………………….. 2. What is your sex? Male [ ] Female [ ]

3. What is your highest level of Education? BECE [ ] SSCE [ ] Teachers’ Cert ‘A’ [ ] Diploma [ ] Bachelor’s degree [ ] Master's degree [ ] Professional degree [ ] other (please specify)………………………….………..

4. Number of years in this occupation …………………………………………………………… 5. Status in this occupation ……………………………………………………………………… C. Preschool Curriculum, Teaching-Learning Material s & Activities Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement by circling one of the sets of options for each question (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=indifferent; 4=agree; and 5=strongly agree) 1. This center has home-corner facilities for preschoolers ...…....……...……………….. 1 2 3 4 5 2. This center engages children in imaginative play ...….……………..…….....………... 1 2 3 4 5 3. The preschoolers here engage in story telling ……………………….....….……...….... 1 2 3 4 5 4. The preschoolers engage in pre-reading ………….……..…………...……….………....1 2 3 4 5 5. The preschoolers engage in pre-math activities ………….…………...…………….…..1 2 3 4 5 6. The preschoolers engage in pre-writing skills ……………………………...……………1 2 3 4 5 7. This preschool engages children in water play .…………….…….……………….….....1 2 3 4 5 8. This preschool engages children in sand play ….…..………………...………….....….. 1 2 3 4 5 9. This preschool has facilities for physical and construction activities …...…………….. 1 2 3 4 5 10. This preschool engages preschoolers in music and games with rules ….….………. 1 2 3 4 5 11. This preschool has science materials for preschoolers to explore …..........………… 1 2 3 4 5 12. This preschool encourages creative play of children ….…..……….……..……….... 1 2 3 4 5 13. This preschool has computers for preschoolers to explore…..……….………...…..... 1 2 3 4 5 D. Quality of Preschool Experiences and Performance Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement by circling one of the sets of options for each question (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=indifferent; 4=agree; and 5=strongly agree) 1. This preschool provides the best of all possible preschool education for preschoolers ………………………………………………..….…...............1 2 3 4 5 2. Compared to other preschool facilities, this preschool provides average care ……………………………………………………………….……………....1 2 3 4 5 3. The activities performed here prepare children to be ready for higher academic work …………………………………………….……..………….....1 2 3 4 5 4. The activities performed in this preschool facility adequately improve children’s social skills ………………………………………….………..….....…1 2 3 4 5 5. The care given to preschoolers here prepares them for reasoning …………...…...……1 2 3 4 5 6. Compared to other preschool systems, the kids trained here do not adequately perform at the basic grades/classes……………………….………....….1 2 3 4 5 7. Children with preschool experience perform better at the basic grades than those without preschool experience …………………………………....…..1 2 3 4 5 8. Children without preschool experience perform better than those with preschool experience ………………………………………….…………….….1 2 3 4 5 9. There is no difference in performance for those with preschool experience and those without preschool experience ………………………..…….....…..1 2 3 4 5 E. Socio-Economic Status of Preschoolers 1. Children of all socio-economic backgrounds enroll in this preschool …………....………1 2 3 4 5 2. Often, children from less affluent homes enroll in this preschool ………………......……1 2 3 4 5 3. Often, children from more affluent homes enroll in this preschool ………………....……1 2 3 4 5 4. Parents often have difficulties providing for the preschool needs of their wards …………...………………………….……………………………….1 2 3 4 5 5. Parents often have little or no difficulty in providing for the preschool needs of their wards …………...…………...……………………….……..1 2 3 4 5

6. Please specify roughly the percentage of children in this preschool that falls into each of the following income categories: Income Category Percentage (%) of Children in Income Category GH¢ 1-999 [ ] GH¢ 1,000-1,097 [ ] GH¢ 1,098-1,262 [ ] GH¢ 1,263-1,543 [ ] GH¢ 1,544+ [ ] F. Suggestions for Improving the Quality of Prescho ol Programmes 1. What are some of the problems/challenges faced by your preschool facility? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2. Please suggest ways by which some of these problems/challenges could be confronted ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

APPENDIX III QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH NETWORK FOR WEST AND CENTRAL A FRICA (ERNWACA) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PRESCHO OL EDUCATION AND

PUPILS’ INTELLECTUAL MATURITY The study is being conducted for academic purpose and may be used to guide policy to improve preschool outcomes. You are assured of complete anonymity and any information received from your outfit shall be handled with the strictest confidentiality. Thank you for your time and support. Direction : Please tick or write where appropriate. A. General Information 1. Serial Number …………………………………………………………………………………..……………. 2. Name of City/Town/Community …………………………………………………………………………… 3. Nature of Locality (Urban/Peri-Urban/Rural) ……………………………….……………………………. 4. District …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5. Region ……………………………………………………………………………..………………………….. B. Socio-Demographic Information 1. What is your age at your last birthday? .………………………………….…………………………….. 2. What is your sex? Male [ ] Female [ ] 3. What is your highest level of Education?

BECE [ ] SSCE [ ] Teachers’ Cert ‘A’ [ ] Diploma [ ] Bachelor’s degree [ ] Master's degree [ ] Professional degree [ ] other (please specify)……………..…………………….………..

4. Number of years in this occupation …..…………………………………..…………………………….… 5. Status in this occupation …………………………………………………………..……………………….. C. Socio-Economic Status and Performance of Pupils Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement by circling one of the sets of options for each question (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=indifferent; 4=agree; and 5=strongly agree) 1. This class/grade has high achievers more than low achievers………...…………...…….1 2 3 4 5 2. This class has low achievers more than high achievers …....….……...…………….……1 2 3 4 5 3. There is no difference in performance for the pupils in this class ….....……...…....…….1 2 3 4 5 4. The low achievers come from less affluent homes.……..…..………...………….............1 2 3 4 5 5. The high achievers come from less affluent homes…….……….…...……………….......1 2 3 4 5 6. The low achievers show no evidence of preschool experiences…………...……….…..1 2 3 4 5 7. The high achievers show evidence of preschool experiences.……….…...………....... 1 2 3 4 5 8. High achievers meet set targets/standards ….…..…………………...…………...……...1 2 3 4 5 9. Low achievers do not meet set targets/standards …………………...……………….… 1 2 3 4 5 10. Low achievers have adequate social and creative skills …………...………….…...….1 2 3 4 5 11. Low achievers do worse on social and creative skills ……...……...………….…...…..1 2 3 4 5 12. High achievers have adequate social and creative skills ...…...……….…...……….....1 2 3 4 5 13. High achievers do worse on social and creative skills ….………..……………....….....1 2 3 4 5 14. High achievers have their entire school requirement met by their parents .……...…...1 2 3 4 5 15. Low achievers have difficulties in meeting their school requirement ……………...…..1 2 3 4 5 16. Pupils who come from the preschool in this school perform better than those who enroll here from other preschool facilities …………………….…...…..1 2 3 4 5 17. Pupils who enroll from other preschools perform better than those who had their preschool education here …………...………………………………...….1 2 3 4 5 D. Suggestions for Improving Intellectual Needs of Pupils 1. What are some of the challenges faced by preschool education? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2. Please suggest ways by which some of these problems/challenges could be solved. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

APPENDIX IV QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PARENTS/GUARDIANS

EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH NETWORK FOR WEST AND CENTRAL A FRICA (ERNWACA) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PRESCHO OL EDUCATION AND

PUPILS’ INTELLECTUAL MATURITY The study is being conducted for academic purpose and may be used to guide policy to improve preschool outcomes. You are assured of complete anonymity and any information received from your outfit shall be handled with the strictest confidentiality. Thank you for your time and support. Name of Pupil …………………………………………………………………………………………………... Name of School ………………………………………………………………………………………………… Class ……………..…………………………………………………………………………….………………… E. Socio-Economic Background of Pupil’s Parent/Guar dian 1. Where do you stay (town/community)? ……………………………………..…………………………… 2. Sex: Male [ ] Female [ ] 3. What is your occupation? ………………………………………………………………………………….. 4. What is your highest level of Education?

No Formal Education [ ] BECE [ ] SSCE [ ] Teachers’ Cert ‘A’ [ ] Diploma [ ] Bachelor’s degree [ ] Master's degree [ ] Professional degree [ ] other (please specify)………………………….……………………………………………………………..

5. How many children of school-going age do you have? ……………………….….……………………… 6. How many of them are in school? ……………………………………………………………………….... 7. In which of the following categories does your annual income fall? GH¢ 1-999 [ ] GH¢ 1,000-1,097 [ ] GH¢ 1,098-1,262 [ ] GH¢ 1,263-1,543 [ ] GH¢ 1,544+ [ ] 8. Did your child attend nursery/kindergarten? Yes [ ] No [ ] 9. What is the name of the nursery school/kindergarten? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..