i.

GENDER OF TEACHERSAND

TEACHING PRACTICES IN PAKISTANI SCHOOLS

BY

HAROONA JATOI

ACADEMY OF EDUCATIONAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENTISLAMABAD

... I

2

INTRODUCTIONEducation for all is the aim of almost all countries of the

world, but a number of countries cannot yet provide educationpartly because they do not have enough educated persons eligible tobecome teachers. At the same time many of these countries havepreferred to recruit men as primary school teachers. Thispreference does not seem justifiable from the point of view ofeducational efJEiciency. The positive impact of the employment ofwomen as teachers on the social status of women, and on theeducational aspirations of girls, is taken as demonstrated. Butare female teacmers as good as or better than male teachers? Thereis little or no research on this question from developingcountries.BACKGROUND

The impor1:ance of education for women is accepted world widebecause it improves their earning ability (Psacharopoulos, 1985);influences the number of children they have (Cochrane; 1979); andcontributes to their better health and well-being (UNICEF, 1980).In 1984 the United Nations proclaimed the right of "everyone" toeducation.

But in reality the provision of equal rights for women hasremained an unfulfilled promise (UNESCO, 1987). Almost everywherewomen have a hi.gher illiteracy rate than men (UNESCO, 1987; WorldBank, 1987). \iforld-wide data reveal that in 1980, 33.9 percent ofwomen were illiterate, as compared to 23.3 percent of men. Thisgap is even wider in the developing countries, where 48.5 percentof the women are illiterate as compared to 32.3 percent of the men(UNESCO, 1987). If one considers primary school age to be from 6 to11 years, UNESCO gives participation rates as 69 percent for malesand 56.5 percent for females in Africa; 77.4 percent for males and59.3 percent felr females in Asia; and about the same for males asfor females in Latin America. The percentage of girls admittedinto school ccmtinues to be lower than that of boys in manydeveloping countries, and the "higher the grade the lower theenrollment of ~Jirls" (Anderson, 1988).

Several factors explain why girls are less likely to beeducated than boys. Girls are less likely to attend school if theschool building is remote from their home. Poor families are lesslikely to educate girls than boys. Both of these factors havemore impact in .=ountries with cultural or religious traditions thatdiscourage the education of girls. Education of boys is preferredin many cases because the structure of the economy providesemployment for educated men but not for educated women (Anderson,1988; Hasan, 1980; Shah, 1986).

Bellew pre:sents findings of her study in developing countriesto show that "traditional, parental and social patterns anddiscrimination against females, as the most important reasons fordisparity." She explains:

There were, however differences across the regions. Forexample, religious traditions were noted as quite important inAfrica and Asia and family factors predominated in LatinAmerica. School-related factors emerged as important in all

._-------,--

3

regions (Bellew, 1989, p.5).

Girls tend to receive less schooling than boys. The schoolinggap tends to be greater in rural areas and in countries in whichIslam is predominant (Alderman, 1991, p.2).

Girls are less likely to enroll in school and in manycountries may drop out sooner. Women are often trained in differentinstitutions than men and may have a different curriculum. Theconsequence is that the average level of education among women isless than that of men, and therefore, there are fewer women whomeet the educational qualifications to become teachers. As aresult, there are fewer women teachers to teach the girls whoultimately want to enroll in schools (UNESCO, 1987). The viciouscircle continues.PAKISTAN AND WOMEN'S EDUCATION

The World Bank sums up education in Pakistan as:Literacy rates one of the lowest in the world, decliningparticipation rates, very low system efficiency and a lack ofeducational opportunities for many, particularly for girls inthe rural areas •••• perhaps the most critical problem impedingexpansion of education is the unavailability of femaleteachers (The World Bank, 1988, p.6).As in many other developing countries, the quality of primary

education in Pakistan is not high. In addition, there is ashortage of opportunities for schooling, particularly for girls.The supply of teachers is constrained in part by the shortage ofwomen candidates, and in part by the practice of preferring menteachers for male students and women teachers for females. Inaddition to this there are more "male" then "female" primaryschools to hire teachers in Pakistan. There is, however, no firmevidence that the gender of men teachers makes them moreeffective than women teachers, with either boy or girl students.

In Pakistan, according to the latest estimates, the population'is about 113 million. Women make up almost half the population(there are 1000 women per 1100 men, according to Government ofPakistan, 1980). The country has about 70 percent of the totalpopulation of age group 10 years and above categorized asilliterates and the gross participation rate at the primary levelis about 60 percent, 65 percent for males and 55 percent forfemales (Government of Pakistan, 1984). Half of the femalepopulation is of school-going age (Government of Pakistan, 1979).Yet only 55 percent of those girls are actually enrolled inschools. Within the male population, 65 percent of all school ageboys are enrolled (Government of Pakistan, 1984).In addition to this, dropout rates remain persistently high,especially for rural children and females. I The literacy rate inPakistan is 30 percent (men 35% and women 16%), and there is widedisparity between the urban and rural pOpulations. To be morespecific, the literacy rate for both sexes in urban areas is 47percent as compared to 17 percent in rural areas. 2 Even withineach setting, the male/female disparities are pronounced. For

...•

4

example, 55 percent of urban males as compared to 36 percent offemales are li1:erate. In rural areas, where the overall literacyrate is 17 pel~cent, only 7 percent of females are literate incomparison with 26 percent of males. There are fewer schools forfemales in pakistan, both in rural and urban areas. There are alsofewer teacher-training institutions available for women (Governmentof Pakistan, 1984),3 leading to fewer trained teachers. And, thereare very few cipportunities available for in-service training inteaching (Bhat1:i, 1986).4

. In Pakistan education is usually segregated at all levels,except at universities. Most girls and boys attend separateschools and colleges. Even the teacher training institutions areseparate for male and female participants. They generally teach inseparate schools.CONCEPTUAL FRPJoIEWORK

DifferenCElS in educational opportunities are the result ofcultural, reli.gious and social circumstances. Differences inopportunities for education and the content of schooling andtraining are likely to result in marked differences in theattitudes and abilities of women as compared to men teachers. Thispaper investiga.tes the differences between the classroom practicesof men and women teachers in primary schools in Pakistan. Theresearch was designed to identify variables that predict thosedifferences, in order to formulate recommendations for policiesdesigned to improve teaching and learning practices.

It is likely that men and women teachers in Pakistan differ interms of academic qualification, professional training and in­service training. All of these may playa role in the quality ofteaching they can provide. The different backgrounds and differentlife experienc1es of men and women are likely to affect theirperformance as teachers in the classroom.RESEARCH ON TE1\,CHERS AND TEACHING PRACTICES

In this se<ction I will first review research studies about thefactors related to the background of the teachers: academicqualifications, pre-service training and in-service training. Iwill then discuss research on classroom practices. I will presentexamples from research in developed countries, less developedcountries and related research studies in Pakistan.RESEARCH ON TEA.CHER BACKGROUNDS

It usually has been assumed that the academic qualificationsand professiona.l training of teachers have a direct and positivebearing on the quality of teaching performance. Effective teachingis determined by both sUbject-matter knowledge and pedagogicalskills (Husen, 1978; Avalos & Haddad 1981). Doyle (1990) arguesthat "conception of teaching as a curriculum process is offered asa framework for inquiry into the experienced curriculum inclassrooms" and, thus, "as an approach to understanding the natureand acquisition of teachers' curriculum knowledge". He calls for:

•••• study of teaching content as distipline to curriculum asclassroom event, because herein lies the knowledge teachersmust have of the content if it is to become pedagogicalsubstance in the lives of students

5

(Doyle, 1990, p.28).Evidence from developed countries shows a strong positive

effect of teacher sUbject matter knowledge on student achievement.But only a few studies from developing countries have studied thisquestion (Fuller, 1987).

Although it is believed that the ability of teachers improvesin a linear fashion with their level of general education, incountries with high rates of population growth the rapid expansionof the primary education system has necessitated reducing thelength of general education attained prior to entry into teachertraining (UNESCO, 1988 quoted in Lockheed and verspoor, 1989,p. 74) • In Nigeria only five years of primary education wererequired for entry to teacher education in 1981; this was thelowest minimum teacher's education requirement for all the Africancountries at the time (Zymelman & Destefano 1989 quoted in Lockheedand Verspoor, 1989, p.74). In Pakistan, even in 1990 there areteachers with less than 8 years of schooling; in some of the lessdeveloped areas teachers' schooling is five years only.

But the basic assumption still remains that the more teachersare academically as well as professionally prepared the morelikely they are to do a better job. The evidence to support thisnotion comes from developed countries (Saha, 1983) as well as fromdeveloping countries (Lockheed, 1989). Research on theimportance of teacher training provides mixed results. Husen,saha, & Noonan (1978) have reviewed major research findingspertaining to the relationship of teacher characteristics,including the level of educational attainment and pedagogicaltraining as it relates to student performance, in developingcountries. The authors reported that they found this relationshipto be complex and mixed. Some of the variables showed positiverelationships, while others showed negative or no association tostudent learning. They concluded that the more carefully designedand executed studies revealed a positive relationship betweenteacher training and student achievement. They did not considerthe impact of training separately for female and male teachers.

In the same study, Husen et al. conclude about the generalassessment of the 32 studies within the context of 16 teachervariables:

Trained teachers do make a difference in student achievementin LDCs. In particular it seems clear that teacherqualifications, experience, amount of education, and knowledgeare positively related to student achievement •..• Finally,demographic and social variables such as sex, age, andsocioeconomic.status, appear to have mixed effects ..•• Thereis only slight support for the notion that teachers fromhigher status backgrounds are more successful than those fromlower status origins (Husen et al., 1978, p.37).

But there are differences of opinion about teacher training, as insome countries the training received is mediated by other factorsand does not contribute to teaching effectiveness. There is someevidence of the limited effectiveness of pre-service teachertraining (Avalos and Beatrice, 1985).

6

Warwick, Nauman., and Reimers, in the study of teacher training inPakistan presen.t a similar finding:

The present system of training primary schools teachers inPakistan makes a small difference for how teachers teach andhow their students learn (Warwick et al., 1991, p.2).

Research on Teaching PracticesResearch in the United states and developing countries

over the last two decades has shown the importance of specificteaching practi.ces for student learning. Fuller (1985) analyzesschool factors which boost achievement, comparing the results of 72empirical studies done in developing countries. He concludes thatoverall expendi.ture, material inputs, teacher quality, teachingpractices, classroom organization, school management and structureare deciding factors contributing to students' achievement. Heconsiders teach,ars' contribution towards the students' learning butdoes not document different teaching styles by men and womenteachers. He concludes that:

Most importantly, we are largely ignorant of how teachersmanage mat:erial inputs. Differing forms of management andvariation in classroom organization are apparent to mostobservers of Third World schools. But little empiricalresearch has tried to relate these differing ways oforganizing material inputs with levels of student achievement(Fuller, 1985, p.32).Lockheed and Verspoor (1989) took into account the

effectiveness o:f schools, improvement of the curriculum, provisionof learning materials, time for learning, effective teaching, andteachability. About classroom teaching practices in developingcountries they say:

Little research on classroom teaching practices has beenconducted cross-nationally, but the results are consistentwith thOSE! from developed countries. In general, teachingpractices found to enhance student learning are those that (a)offer instruction that requires active student participation,(b) provide student opportunities to practice what is beingtaught, (e) evaluate student performance, and (d) accordappropriately paced feedback on student performance (Lockheed& Verspoor, 1989, p.70).

Montero-sieburth (1989) reviews the relevance ofclassroom management to developing countries by emphasizingteaching in relation to management, and the use of instructionalmaterials and time. Her review highlights the importance forlearning outcomes of: teacher and student attendance; incentivesfor the teachers; efficient use of existing resources (which sheidentifies as t:ime spent on academic tasks leading to learningoutcomes) and instructional materials. Montero-Sieburth also dealswith the conceptions of classroom management, factors that limitthe amount of time available, and most importantly how the time inthe classroom ill utilized by the teacher. Her review does not dealwith the gender of the teacher and its impact on classroompractices.

7

Schiefelbein and Simmons (1981) reviewed results oftwenty-six studies on the determinants of student cognitiveachievement in developing countries. They reviewed the results foreach of the major determinants of cognitive student achievement,schooling characteristics, teachers' attributes, and studenttraits. One of their findings about the student's characteristicswas:

Students who have schoolwork to be done outside the school,i.e. 'homework' tend to do better on achievement. None of theother school determinants of achievement have as high aproportion of significant findings (Schiefelbein and Simmons,1981, p.10).

Davis and Thomas (1989) reviewed the research on effectiveschools and effective teachers in developed countries. Theyconcluded:

Academic engagement is the most important factor contributingto student achievement. Academic learning time is timeengaged in activities related to the outcomemeasure •••Allocated time, opportunity to learn, and amount ofcontent covered are related to each other, to academicengagement, and to higher achievement ••• The amount of contentcovered was the strongest correlate of achievement (Davis andThomas, 1989, p.149).

Gender of the teachers has not been studied much relating toschool effectiveness. Kelly points this out as following:

Women's education as a research concern is relatively new tothe academic scholarship as well as to policy makers andplanners. Before the rebirth of the women's movement in thelate 1960s, academic research and policy studies focusing onwomen were virtually non-existent ••• Studies on education andits outcomes were, when all said and done, studies of males.Gender was rarely acknowledged, even as a background variable(Kelly, 1989, p.15).

There are several studies in the united States and otherdeveloped countries which have observed the impact of backgroundcharacteristics on classroom practices linking those to theachievement of students, but most of those studies do not take thegender of the teacher into account. For example:

Rosenshine examined 51 studies from united states, Britain,and Australia in 1971 and concluded that some teachervariables, particularly relating to classroom interaction,were directly related to student performance (Cited in FUller,1987, p.37).

There are, however, some studies both in developed and lessdeveloped countries which deal with the gender of the teachers:

As pointed out by Getzel and Jackson (1963), some personal­social characteristics were different for men and womenteachers, with men generally being more business-like, less

8

friendly and responsible (Cited in Husen, Saha, &Noonan 1978,p.22).

Mwamwenda et al. (1989) studied Teachers' Characteristics andPupils's AchiE!vement in Botswana Primary schools. 5 They showeda relationship lbetween teacher characteristics and pupils' academicachievement. The study concluded that pupils taught by female andlong experienced teachers performed significantly better thanpupils taught k~ males and those with short teaching experiences.

Avalos and Haddad (1985) reviewed studies on teachereffectiveness in Africa, India, Latin America, Middle East,Philippines and Thailand. They summarized the results aboutdifferences in women and men teachers as follows:

A number elf studies comparing male and female teachers foundthat female teachers were more satisfied with their careers,possessed a better attitude towards their prOfession,students, and school work, exhibited better mental health andsuffered less from problems related to their teachingactivities: •••• there was some indication that female teachersuse more "modern" teaching approaches such as participationand problem solving methods (Avalos and Haddad, 1985, pp.14­15) •Hussain examined the difference between the academic

achievement of students taught by the female and male teachers inPrimary schools of Pakistan. 6 One of the findings is that"students of male teachers achieve better results in mathematics ingrade 4 and 5 1:han students taught by female teachers" (Hussain,1990, p.20).Summary

To summarize, there is a vast quantity of research onclassroom practices related to student achievement. But verylittle,· however, has examined the impact of gender of the teachersmediated by ot.her factors, relating to classroom practices asoutcome.

"Most of the studies agree that the effectiveness ofpedagogical style varies widely from place to place and no singlepedagogy can b,a taken as a definitive model for policy" (Rugh,1989). Brophy (1982) concluded his work on "classroomorganization" as following:

No single approach is SUfficient, but a comprehensive andincreasingly empirically supported eclectic approach toclassroom management can be developed by combining differentbut compat:ible elements into an integrated system (Brophy,1982, p.51).As there is no single pedagogy available, I offer the

following list 'Jf teaching practices as part of a longer list whichhave been identified by other researchers, especially by Lockheedand Verspoor (1989). I group these irlto two categories: a)background characteristics of teachers; b) classroom practices.The following list of assumptions about teaChing practices andbackground characteristics related to them is presented as part of

--- ~-~----

9

a longer list which have been identified by other researchers as"effective teaching".

ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT EFFECTIVE TEACHING PRACTICESBackground Characteristics.

1) Teachers with a higher level of schooling are betterequipped to teach.2) Teachers who have professional training in teaching (bothpre-service and in-service) are more likely to useinstructional material, and make more use of instructionalmaterial. This is because during the training they are taughtto use the instructional material like teaching kits, modelsand charts.3) Teachers who come from higher social class are betterteachers than those who come from comparatively lower socialclass.

Classroom Practices.1) Teachers who assign fewer tasks to the students in theclassroom and spend more time teaching provide a betterlearning environment for the students.2) Teachers who use instructional material (teaching kit,blackboards) more often contribute more to the students'knowledge.3) Teachers who assign homework on a regular basis, check itthemselves, give feedback to the students help the students tolearn more.4) Teachers who use less physical punishment are betterteachers than those who use physical punishment, more oftenand more severely.5) Teachers who systematically cover the textbooks and covermore chapters are better than teachers who don't teach thebooks in sequence and cover fewer of chapters.6) Teachers who give regular tests and discuss these with thestudents, are better teachers than those ones who give fewertests.7) Teachers who use monitors l less often, spend more timewith their students. This applies to mUlti-grade teaching,which is common in Pakistan.8) Teachers who use translators teach their subject matter ina better way. Students in Pakistan come from different ethnicbackgrounds and speak different languages. So it is importantthat teachers explain the sUbject matter in more than onelanguage. They can do this with the help of studenttranslators.9) Teachers who plan their lessons teach in more effective

1 It is common in Pakistani classrooms that teachers have toteach more than on class at the same time. If this is the case,teachers take help from student monitors to review the .lesson ormaintain discipline within the group not being taught by theteacher at that time.

10

way than teachers who don't plan the lessons.

HYPOTHESESI expect that women teachers in Pakistan will more frequently

than men teachers engage in the positive teaching practices listedabove. These hypotheses are based on the following assumptions:

a. women teachers come from better educated families than menteachers, and <Ire therefore more likely to possess the "culturalcapital" required by the school. This hypothesis is tested in thestudy.

b. the subordination of women in Pakistani society increasesfor them the ilnportance of positive interpersonal relationships.This translates into greater understanding of young children. Thishypothesis is not tested in the study.

c. the subordination of women requires them to strive harderthan men to achieve the same social status. That is, womenteachers are more oriented toward a high level of performance thanare men teachers. This hypothesis is also not tested in the study.

Background Characteristics and Teaching PracticesConsidering the related research and my hypotheses, I expected

that teachers from high social class, with more education, moretraining are more likely to use more effective teaching practices.

Gender and Teaching PracticesI expected that the research would show differences between

male and femall!! teachers. My expectation also was that femaleteachers will more often carry out effective teaching practices.

Research Ouestions2

This paper asks: Do these differences in background (familybackground, academic education, training) of men and women inPakistan lead to different behavior among male and female teachersin the classrooms? This can be translated into the followingquestions:

1. Do men and women teachers in primary schools of Pakistancome from different backgrounds, in terms of socio-economicstatus, fClrmal education, pre-service training, in-servicetraining and living conditions?

2 The data for this study come from research carried in anational sample survey of government primary schools in Pakistan.Data collection was a joint project of Project BRIDGES and theAcademy of Educ<ltional Planning and Management (AEPAM), Ministry ofEducation, Pakistan. The purpose of the survey was to identifyfactors that c:ontribute to the achievement and promotion ofstudents in primary schools. 'The survey was carried out inDecember 1988 and January 1989 in Pakistan's four provinces and thefederal district.

..._ .._------------_.

11

2. How are women teachers different from men teachersregarding classroom practices that other researchers havefound to be associated with good teaching?3. Are differences in classroom practices between men andwomen related to differences in their backgrounds?3

ANALYSISFor the purposes of the analysis, I treated gender of the

teachers as an independent (influencing) factor. Control variableswere factors that differentiate women and men teachers, such asacademic level, professional training and socio-economic status.Rural/urban location of the school was used as a control variablemediating the relationship.

The purpose of controlling for rural/urban was to see whetherthe different conditions in the rural/urban schools arecontributing to the differences in teaching practices or if theseare attributable to other factors such as gender. Experience inteaching and mUltigrade teaching was also used as controls. Theteaching practices were the outcome variables. 4

3 SPECIFIC OUESTIONS to be answered with the data included:1. How do teachers assign tasks to the different groups if theyhave to teach more than one class at the same time?2. Do they use student monitors while teaching more than one classand more than one sUbject? If they do, how often?3. How do they use instructional material provided by theGovernment (including the teaching kit, modules and blackboards)?4. What is their policy regarding home work? If they assign it,do they check it themselves, give feedback, discuss it withstudents and how long do the discussions last?5. How do they handle problems related to students? Do they usephysical punishment?6. How many lessons had they taught in Mathematics and Science atthe time of the survey? Do they teach the books in sequence?7. How often do they use student translators in the classrooms?8. How many tests do they assign to their stUdents? Do they gradethe tests, return these to the students and discuss the tests?9. How much time do they spend for instruction of math and sciencein an average week?

4 STRATEGY FOR ANALYSIS

1. Question 1. Do men and women teachers come from differentbackgrounds, in terms of socio-economic status, formal education,pre-service training, in-service training and living conditions?

Analysis: To analyze the differences in ~eachers' backgrounds, Iused t-test statistics and chi-square statistics for continuous andcategorical variables respectively.

12

RESULTSsummary of Background Characteristics

Female tE!achers had less academic qualification, lessprofessional training and fewer in-service teacher's trainingcourses. The female teachers are comparatively younger than maleteachers and slightly less experienced as teachers. The proportionof female teachers in urban schools is higher than the proportionof male teachers in urban schools. More male teachers than femaleteach more than one class. Female teachers' parents werecomparatively lDore educated than the parents of male teachers.Female teachers; had more possessions at home than male teachers.Female teachers belonged to a comparatively higher SES levelcompared to th.eir male colleagues. There were no significantdifferences between male and female teachers by years of experienceor whether the~... teach in a single or mUltigrade situation.

SUMMARY OF CIJ\,SSROOM PRACTICES BY GENDER OF THE TEACHERSThe resu!t:s are summarized in annex 1, Male teachers give

more homework to their students in math and science. Femaleteachers give ~lore tests in math and science. More male teachersuse the teaching kit if available. Male teachers had covered moreof curriculum in math and science than female teachers. Maleteachers spend more time on instruction on math and science.Female teachers use less physical punishment. More female teachersuse the blackboards. More male teachers use the students help fortranslations from one language to another. More male teachers thanfemale plan the lesson before they teach. There are no differencesin the followin.g teaching practices for the two groups: follow upof the homework; frequency of the kit use; number of hours studentmonitors used for; tough physical punishment; and assigning thetasks.

In summary, it can be said that men and women teachers dodiffer in their teaching practices. There are significant

2. Ouestion 2. How are women teachers different from men teachersregarding classroom practices that other researchers have found tobe associated with good teaching?

Analysis: Information on classroom practices contains bothcategorical and continuous dependent variables. T-test statisticsand chi-square statistics were used for analysis.3. Ouestion 3. Are different classroom practices related to thedifferent backgrounds of teachers?

Analysis: ThE~ specific analyses was: The individual teachingpractices will be seen controlling for background characteristics;for gender of the teacher; for background practices and gender ofthe teachers. Anova and Chi-Square anctlysis will be used forcontinuous and categorical dependent variables.

13

diffeences between the two groups for 9 out of 15 teachingpractices. Of these 9 significant differences, male teachers morefrequently than females report using the effective practices in 6comparisons.As seen in annex 2, out of 9 statistically significant practices,female teachers used 6 teaching practices which were contrary to myinitial expectation.

SUMMARy OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY ACADEMIC OUALIFICATIONS AND GENDEROF THE TEACHERS (see annex 3)

Both male and female teachers, with matric level of educationgive more homework compared with teachers with any other level ofeducation. Male and female teachers who have matric level ofeducation alos use the teaching kit more than teachers with otherqualifications. Within this group more male than female teachersuse the kit. Highly qualified teachers use the student monitors'help for the maximum number of hours. Teachers with matric andFA/FSc qualification use translators more than others. In eachgroup more male than female teachers use translators. Furhter,more male teachers than females who have matric level of educationplan lessons.

SUMMARY OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY PROFESSIONAL TRAINING AND GENDEROF THE TEACHERS (see annex 4)

Male and female teachers with JV level of training give themost homework compared to those with other levels of training. Maleteachers in this category give more homework than female teachers.In the category of teachers who have SV-PTC as professionaltraining more male than female teachers use the teaching kit.Teachers with JV level of training use the teaching kit for morelessons than teachers with any other level of training. Femaleteachers use the kit for many more lessons than male teachers do.Teachers with CT and higher levels of qualifications use thestudent monitors for the maximum number of hours. Male teachers· inthis group use the monitors' help more than female teachers do.More male than female teachers with JV and SV-PTC training usephysical punishment. More female teachers than male teachers withSV-PTC level of training use the blackboard for teaching. The useof translators by JV and SV-PTC teachers is significant. In thesegroups male teachers use more translators than female teachers.There are two levels of professional training where thedistribution of lesson plans is significant, i.e., No- training andSV-PTC. In both of these categories more males than females planlessons.

There were no significant differences with controls by genderand professional training for the following teaching practices:follow up of the homework, tests in math and science, curriculumcoverage, instructional time for teaching math and science, use oftough physical punishment, teaching of integrated curriculum, andassigning the tasks to the students.

As shown in the above discussion, professional training of theteachers does not contribute towards positive practices. It was

14

assumed that p:r:ofessionally trained teachers are more likely toengage in teaching practices which are identified as positivelyrealted to student achievement. This is not true in this research.professional training of the teachers is not realted to goodpractices irrespective of the gender of the teachers. The contentof the professional training in Pakistan needs change to make itmore effective.

summary of Teaching Practices ~y In Service Training and Gender ofthe Teachers (see annex S)

Teachers who had in-service training give more homework thanteachers who d.id not have the training, irrespective of gender.The differences: for the use of the teaching kit were significantfor the teachel~s who did not have in-service training, in whichcase more male teachers used the teaching kit. More teachers whohad training ha:d used the kit for more lessons than the teacherswho did not have training. Within the trained teachers' categorymale teachers had used the kit for slightly more lessons thanfemale teachers;. More teachers who are not trained use physicalpunishment and within this group more males than females usepunishment in each category. For the use of blackboards, the onlysignificant difference was for trained, in which case more femalesthan males used the blackboard. More male teachers, both trainedand not trained, used the student translators. More untrained maleteachers plan their lessons than female untrained teachers.

As stated earlier, the expectation from the teachers who hadprofessional tri!ining in teaching (both pre-service and in-service)were more likely to engage in effective teaching practices. Butthis analysis s,hows not much difference between the teachers whohad training or those who did not have training. This might bebecause of the content and quality of in-service teacher trainingthey receive. The teacher training contributes a little towardsthe effective teaching practices. This can be a substantive areaof improvement where government can introduce changes.

SUMMARY OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY URBAN RURAL LOCATION OF THESCHOOLS AND GENDER OF THE TEACHERS (see abnnex 6)

Teachers i.n rural schools give more homework in math andscience. Within rural schools more male than female teachers givehomework to thl~ir students. Female teachers in urban schoolsfollow up on the homework more than males in urban schools. Morefemale teachers in urban schools use the teaching kit than femaleteachers in rurcll schools. More male teachers in urban schools usethe kit than males in rural schools. More male teachers both inurban and rura, I schools use physical punishment than femaleteachers in the, same areas. More male than female teachers inrural and urban areas also are more likely to use help from studentmonitors. "

The significant difference for lesson planning was for ruralschools in which more female teachers than male teachers plan theirlessons for teaching.

15

SUMMARY OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY TEACHERS' PARENTS EDUCATION ANDGENDER OF THE TEACHERS (see annex 7)

Teachers whose parents were less educated followed up onhomework more than teachers whose parents were more educated. Moreteachers with less educated parents also used the teaching kit andalso used it more frequently or for more lessons. Teachers whocame comparatively more educated families used less physicalpunishment. More female teachers from educated families usedblackboards than male teachers from more educated families. Bothmale and female teachers from less educated families used helpfrom students for translations. Comparatively more female teachersthan males from more educated families assigned tasks to thestudents. More teachers from comparatively more educated familiesplanned their lessons than the teachers from less educatedfamilies.

SUMMARY OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY TEACHERS' POSSESSIONS AND GENDEROF THE TEACHERS (see annex 8)

Teachers both male and female with more possessions usemonitors' help more, than do teachers with fewer possessions. Moremale teachers than female with less possessions, use translators'help. Both male and female teachers with fewer possessions assignmore tasks.

SUMMARY OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY TEACHING EXPERIENCE AND GENDER OFTHE TEACHERS (see annex 9)

Within the group of less experienced teachers moremale teachers than females used the teaching kit. Teachers bothmale and female with more experience used the kit for more numberof lessons compared to the teachers with less experience. Moreexperienced male teachers used more help from monitors than moreexperienced female teachers. More male teachers both with more andless experience used physical punishment than female teachers ineach category. More experienced female teachers used blackboardsthan males in this group. Male teachers used more studenttranslators irrespective of their experience. More male teachersthan females planned the lessons, whether more or less experienced.

SUMMARY OF TEACHING PRACTICES BY SINGLEt MULTIGRADETEACHING AND GENDER OF THE TEACHERS See annex 10)

Teachers both male and female, who have to teach mUltigradegive more homework than the teachers who teach single grade. Moremale teachers than females use the teaching kit in single gradeteaching. More male teachers in both single and multigrade teachinguse physical punishment. More female teachers use blackboards inboth single and mUltigrade teaching. More male teachers both insingle and mUltigrade teaching use student translators and plantheir lessons. '

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSThis stUdy was designed to compare and contrast the teaching

16

practices of m,!le and female teachers in the primary schools ofPakistan. The expectation was that the data from the study wouldshow sharp differences between the practices of male and femaleteachers. MalEl and female teachers were compared on their self­reports on 15 practices. There were significant differencesbetween the twe. groups for 9 out of 15 comparisons.

The expect:ation further was that female teachers would moreoften carry out those practices that in previous studies have beenassociated with higher levels of student learning. For convenience,these were referred to as effective practices. Of the 9statistically significant differences, male teachers morefrequently than females 1:"eported using the effective practices in6 comparisons (.'ee /tr..,. "-e.,<: I). Hence the general hypothesis thatfemale teachers. would more frequently report using more effectiveteaching practices is disconfirmed.

Female teachers were expected, more frequently than males, toengage in effective teaching practices because of the ways men andwomen are treated in Pakistani society. Even when female teachersreceive the SClme amount of training as male teachers, theirbehavior could be different, because women bring to the teachingprofession a conception of themselves and their role that differsfrom that of ml~n. This conception is developed in a society inwhich women arl~ accorded an inferior position, denied access tocertain kinds of experiences and positions, and nurtured, educatedand trained to be subordinate to men.

It was ar~led that this set of experiences would dispose womento be much more highly committed than men to the task of educationof young children. Female teachers would be more concerned withpreparing lessons, getting children to do their work, andsupervising their homework. Female teachers would be less likelythan men to use harsh punishment, or to use student monitors as away to escape responsibility.

The specific hypotheses are re-stated in summary form in Table1.Interpretation of Findings

An attempt: was made to determine whether the differencesbetween male a,nd female teachers could be attributed to theircharacteristics. I examined the relationships between, parents'education and teachers' possessions (social class), teachers'formal education, level of training, experience in teaching, urbanrural location, single or mUltigrade teaching with each of theteaching practice variables, holding gender of the teachersconstant. The results are as follows.

, "

Table 1CLASSROOM PRACTICES BY GENDER OF THE TEACHERS

(As Expected)

Homework in mathand science

Follow up of theHomework

Tests in math andscience

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes)

# of lessons kitused for

Curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science)

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours)

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes)

Tough PhysicalPunishment

Integrated Curriculum

Use of Blackboards(% Yes)

Use of StudentTranslators

Assigning Tasks

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

High

High

High

Low

Low

Low

Low

Female

High

High

High

High

High

High

High

Low

Low

Low

High

High

High

High

Lesson Plans(% Yes) Low High

18

1. Instructional TimeInstructicmal time is a good predictor of student

achievement, clccording to the research literature and otheranalyses of a random sample survey of primary schools in Pakistan.In this study, male teachers spent more time on instruction of mathand science theln did female teachers.

None of t;he control variables account for the differencesbetween male ,and female teachers. That is, the differencesassociated wit:h gender cannot be explained by reference ~o

education of the parents of the teacher (social class, see )Inn"'''7 ), the teacher's own level of academic education (see ~ 1'l1\'~:<

~ '), the te;!cher's own professional training or teachingexperience (seEI A7\'I\e." It ), whether the teachers face a single ormultigrade cla.ss (see A'1"'4X 1'0 ;), or whether the school isdesignated as urban or rural. (see PrI'\Vl~ '" )

What other factors could account for the differences betweenmale and femalE! teachers, in terms of time on math and science?In the Pakistani school system female teachers spend as much timein school during the week as the male teachers. Specifically, theyreported essentially the same length of school day during thesurvey. This llleans that if male teachers spend more time on mathand science theln females, then females must spend more time thanmales on other SUbjects. The study focused only on math andscience becausEI of the existence of an achievement test only forthose SUbjects. The other official subjects in Pakistani schoolsare urdu, Social Studies and Islamic Studies. If we know which ofthese SUbjects was favored by female teachers, we might have abetter understanding of the math-science difference.2. curriculum Coverage

Given that, male teachers spend more time on math and sciencethan do female teachers, it is not surprising that male teachersalso cover mOrE! of the curriculum for these two subjects. Onceagain the con't:rol variables were introduced to see if theyaccounted for the gender differences. only the level of teachers'academic educat:ion had a significant relationship to curriculumcoverage. Male teachers covered more of the curriculum thanfemales, except for those teachers with 8 years or less ofschooling. Here female teachers covered more of the curriculum.

There is a general conviction that better educated teachers dobetter in teaching than do those with less education. If coverageof the curriculum is a measure of doing well in teaching (and otherresearch shows that it is related to student achievement scores)then we should laxpect a steady increase in coverage with increasesin levels of academic education. 7 But this is not the case. Thoseteachers with the highest levels of academic education are notthose who most I::::over the curriculum. We saw in chapter 3 that thegreatest coverclge by male teachers was for the matric diplomaholders, whereas for female teachers it was the FA/FSc holders.

This diff,arence in the impact of I academic education oncoverage of math and science might be a reflection of the differentquality of educ=ation male and female teachers have received, aquestion we cannot answer with this data. Reimers and Warwick in

---------- --------

19

their report "Influences on Academic Achievement in Pakistan:students, Teachers, and Classrooms" comment on the quality ofeducation teachers have received when they were students. Theyconclude:

Variables, such as rural and urban location, formal education,multigrade teaching, those conditions are not plausibleexplanations for the lower achievement performance inmathematics. The most likely reason is that in their ownschooling female teachers received less or lower-qualityinstruction in mathematics than their male counterparts. Asa result, when the time came to transmit their knowledge ofthe field to their students, they were ill-prepared to do so(Reimers and Warwick, 1991, p.3).

But it is also possible that the impact of formal education onteaching practices, independent of its quality, differs for men andwomen.

Earlier we noted that female teachers on average come frombetter educated families than do male teachers. (see table ***) Amatric education for a female teacher could be said to be less ofan advancement over that of her family, than a matric education fora male teacher. Or in other words, in general male teachers haveshown more social mobility in comparison with their parents thanhave female teachers in comparison with their parents. For manymen, teaching is a way YR from the low status of their parents.For many women in this study, however, teaching may be the only joba women from an educated family can get. If social mobility is areflection of personal motivation, then it is possible that womenfrom highly educated families who become teachers are lessmotivated to do well than are men who come from less well educatedfamilies.

To check this we can compare coverage of the curriculum bymale and female teachers, controlling on both the education oftheir parents, and on their own education.' First I divided bothparents' education and teacher education at the median, into Lowand High. When parent education is low and teacher education ishigh, the teacher is classified as Upwardly mobile. The hypothesisis that Downward Mobility teachers are less motivated than UpwardMobility teachers, and therefore less likely to engage in correctpractices. This hypothesis was true in this case. Downwardmobility teachers covered less of the curriculum than did upwardmobility teachers.3 Homework

Homework is considered a way of increasing the time studentsspend working on the lessons, and therefore is positively relatedto students' aChievement. In this study, male teachers give morehomework than female teachers. How can this be explained?

Both male and female teachers with a matric level of educationgive the most homework; teachers with the most education give theleast homework. This is contrary to the argument that formalschooling has a linear relationship with the good teachingpractices. As with respect to coverage of the curriculum, maleteachers with a matric level of education give the most homework,

20

and female teachers with FA/Fsc level give the most for theirgender.

The same pattern holds for the relationship between level ofprofessional training and the amount of homework assigned. Bothfor male and female teachers the highest level of training isassociated with the lowest amount of homework assigned.

The finding that teachers, both male and female, in ruralschools give me.re homework than do teachers in urban schools, wascontrary to e)(:pectations. One assumption was that in generalquality of education is higher in urban schools than in ruralschools: urban :schools are better equipped, have better facilities,and have teachers and administrators with higher levels oftraining. This assumption is correct--urban schools are better offthan rural schools on these dimensions. Warwick and Reimers (1991)applied the term "good schools" to schools that scored in the topthird of a pooled index of student achievement in mathematics andscience and "pc)or schools" to those in the bottom third. Theirfindings include:

Good schools were more likely to be in cities or towns than inrural arei!S and to be male or coeducational rather thanfemale. ~~he urban rural difference arises in part from thestrong pre'ference of teachers to settle in urban locations.Given tha1: preference and government allowances that makeurban residence financially more attractive, urban schoolshave a larger pool of candidates for teaching positions. outof this pool district officials can choose those with betterlevels of qeneral education, a condition positively related toachievement (Warwick and Reimers, 1991,p.4).

Reimers and Warwick in their report "Influences on AcademicAchievement in Pakistan: Students, teachers, and Classrooms" showthe positive impact of urban schools on student achievement:

The result.s showed that the best predictors on all the fourpredictors on all four tests are, in order, whether the schoolis urban or rural •••• Achievement was higher when: the schoolis located in urban area (Reimers and Warwick, 1991, p.2).

A second assumption was that better schools give more homework.This may not be correct. It may be that in Pakistani schoolshomework is considered a substitute for work in the class. When theteacher is able to complete planned work during the class hours,then homework is not as necessary. perhaps teachers give morehomework in rural schools because they cannot complete lessonsduring the regular class period. To test this, I looked at therelationship between time spent on math and science, and amount ofhomework assigned, and found that there is a significant negativerelationship. This suggests that teachers do use homework as asUbstitute for not covering the lessons in class.

4. Regular Use of Tests I

I assumed that teachers can increase the time students spendon learning the curriculum by assigning tests which focus students'attention. I expected that female teachers would give more tests

_._._--_._-----------_.

21

than do male teachers. This expectation was upheld: at each levelof education female teachers give more tests than male teachers.Once again, the difference associated with the gender cannot beexplained by reference to any of the controls.5. Use of the Teaching Kit

There clearly are differences between male and female teachersin the access to and training in the use of teaching kits. Femaleteachers less frequently were in schools with kits, and had lessopportunities for training. The relationship of gender to the useof the kit is therefore conditioned by other variables not takeninto account in the study.

Once again, there is not a linear relationship between levelof education and professional training and use of the kit. Kitsare used more frequently by male teachers with matric diplomas,least by those with BAs. Female teachers with no professionaltraining are those who most use the kit. Kits are more likely tobe used by male and female teachers whose parents had little or noeducation.5. Use of physical punishment

Female teachers, by virtue of their own experience ofsubordination in society, are expected to be more kind to studentsand more understanding, and therefore less inclined to use physicalpunishment when exerting discipline in the class.

As expected, a higher proportion of male teachers compared tofemale teachers use physical punishment. This difference is notrelated to the levels of academic education or professionaltraining. Use of physical punishment is more common in ruralschools than in urban schools. Teachers whose parents are lesseducated, and teachers with fewer years of teaching also usepunishment more frequently. On this variable, at least, theoriginal hypothesis is confirmed.

I had originally assumed that the various types of practicesare all a reflection of a single dimension---teacher commitment,which is higher for females. But it is possible that practicesmight reflect several dimensions, e.g., one reflecting kindness(women higher), another reflecting subject knowledge and interest(men higher on math and science). I thought good teaching is allone thing, but it might be made up of several dimensions. On somewomen may excel, on others men.6. Use of Student Monitors

The assumption made was that teachers use monitors to reducethe time they themselves have to spend teaching, and therefore thatuse of monitors is a negative teaching practice. I reasoned thatfemale teachers would be more committed to teaching, and would makeless use of monitors. This expectation was also upheld, and it alsoconfirms the notion that teaching practices are multi-dimensional.

Male teachers were shown to use monitors more than femaleteachers. This is true for each level of academic education andprofessional training. It is important to" notice that highest useof monitors was made by the teachers with highest levels ofacademic educational and professional training. It will berecalled that these teachers were often on the low side of

22

completion of curriculum, amount of instruction time, assignment ofhomework , and other practices considered positive.8. Lesson Plans

To avoid asking a question that might put teachers on thespot, they we,re asked "Do you have time for lesson plans?"Proportionally more male teachers than female teachers say theyhave time to plan their lessons. Female teachers in rural schoolsmore frequentllr say they plan their lessons than do female teachersin urban schools. The reverse is true of male teachers. Othercontrols do no,t explain the differences between male and femaleteachers about the available time to prepare lessons. Anotherexplanation might be that the question itself was taken in itsliteral sense. It might be true that more time is available to maleteachers to pre,pare the lesson plans as against female teachers whohave total responsibility of child rearing and household affairs.Conclusions

Male and :Eemale teachers differ in their teaching practices.Male teachers spend more time than females teaching math andscience and cover more of the curriculum in these subjects. Maleteachers give more homework, use the teaching kit more, morefrequently use students as translators and more often say they plantheir lessons. Female teachers less frequently use physicalpunishment and students as monitors, give more tests, and morefrequently use blackboards.

The findings do not support my hypothesis that female teachersare more likely than male teachers to use what I defined as goodteaching practices. To support my hypothesis with these data, itwould be neces,;;ary to state that in Pakistani schools the betterteaching practice is to:

a. spend less time on instruction in math and scienceb. cover less of the curriculum in math and sciencec. give little or no homeworkd. not use the teaching kit when availablee. not use students as translatorsf. not say that there is time to plan lessons.

But there is no argument to support these statements. In fact,most are contrcldicted by other findings that show these practicesto be positively correlated with student aChievement. WltwiIXand Reimers report on teaching practices in good and poor schoolsin Pakistan.

Several teaching practices distinguish good from poor schools.Above all, good schools have less multigrade teaching. And,when their teachers are responsible for several grades, theyare less likely than those in poor schools to use studentmonitors t:o lead recitation or supervise the class they arenot teaching at that time. These findings support the viewthat studEmt achievement will rise when teachers spend moretime in class with their students. In addition, teachers ingood schoo,ls more often use student t!ranslators to make theirpresentations understood by pupils speaking otherlanguages. 8•••••

Compared t:o teachers in poor schools, those in good schools

23

show better coverage of the curriculum, more homework, assignmore exercises in math and science, ••• give more tests (Warwickand Reimers, 1991, p.14).

Warwick, Reimers and McGinn in their report on "TeacherCharacteristics and Student Achievement in Math and Science inprimary Schools of Pakistan" used the following predictors: sex ofthe teacher; the teacher's formal education; whether the teacherstaught more than one class; the number of the exercises assigned inMathematics; whether the teachers used translators in the class;and whether the teacher had the teaching kit. They concluded:

Results also show that three characteristics of teachers aresignificant predictors of achievement on all 4 tests. Theseare the teacher's formal education, whether the teacherteaches more than one class, and the number of exercisesassigned in mathematics. The sex of the teacher is arelatively strong predictor of student achievement in math butnot in science. Students of female teachers have lower scoresthan those of male teachers ••• Asking students to translatefor others is significantly related to achievement just inmath 59 (Warwick, Reimers and McGinn, 1989, p.23).

It appears that, by my definitions, female teachers currentlyin service are less likely than male teachers to engage in goodteaching practices. Why should this be so? It is worth remindingour selves that women teachers are product of an inferior system.Women teachers were for the most part educated in girls' schools byfemale teachers. Warwick and Reimers comment:

Of the total sample of female teachers, 42 percent are in goodschools and 58 percent in poor schools. These figures areconsistent with other findings showing a major gender gap inachievement, particularly in rural schools ••• classroompractices of teachers, including mUltigrade teaching carrymuch more weight for achievement than the quality andequipment in school buildings (Warwick and Reimers, 1991,p.14).

I argued earlier that females are treated assubordinates in Pakistani society, and therefore that they enterteaching with a stronger commitment than men to carrying out theresponsibilities of teaching. If they were less familiar than menwith those responsibilities, then the negative findings I haveshown would make sense. But the evidence is that even with thesame training, female teachers less frequently used effectivepractices.

In several cases, as I have shown above, it was teachers withhigher levels of academic education or training who were lesslikely to use the effective practices. Access to schooling is tosome degree a reflection of the social class of the teacher. Theresults suggest that persons from the higher social class do lesswell as teachers. This might occur if teaching was seen as aninferior occupation, something that persons had to do when nothing

24

else was available. Persons with this perspective would be lessmotivated to carry out the responsibilities of their positions.

We can als,o estimate the social class of teachers by referenceto the education level of their parents. Earlier I showed thatteachers with d.ownward mobility, that is, who had parents with higheducation but themselves had low education, were less likely tocarry out effective teaching practices: assigning the homework andits follow up; use of teaching kits; coverage of curriculum in mathand Science; instructional time for Math and Science; and lessonplans. Downward mobility, it was suggested, would lead to lowerlevels of motivation and therefore less use of effective practices.

Female te.achers are more likely than male teachers to comefrom higher soc:ial class backgrounds, and therefore more often areclassified as Downwardly mobile. If the argument is correct thatdownward mobility leads to low motivation and not carrying outeffective pract;ices, then we should expect that female teachers, asa group, would use those practices less than male teachers.

It bears repeating, of course, that all this is conjecture atthis point.POLICY IMPLICM~IONS

Traditioncll governments like Pakistan realize that womenteachers are ne!eded if female children are to be educated. Womenteachers are a necessity even if there is no evidence that they areeffective teachers. The awareness is sharply rising that in somecountries unive:rsalization of primary education cannot be achievedif women teachelrs are not available.

As pointed out earlier evidence is needed on the effectivenessof teachers ill relation to their gender and other mediatingfactors. Thi.s paper was designed to answer some of thequestions.

Why were the results of this research not as expected? Theremight be several reasons. There is a genuine possibility thatother variables~ interact in real life situations not included inthis study. For example, certain social aspects like women's rolein child rearing and the responsibilities in the joint familysystem could a:Efect teacher performance. Women's absences fromschool during the academic year might have been a good indicator toexplain some of this and might have provided some explanation.

It may also be possible that women teachers are notparticularly good at teaching math and science. They might performdifferently when it comes to teaching other sUbjects, like socialstudies, languages, home economics, and arts. This issue wasbeyond the scope of this paper and might be a good question forfurther researc:h. If evidence to this account does show thatwomen's performance is better for other sUbjects, then changes incurriculum development particularly for girls' schools and alsoteacher training institutions with reference to teaching math andscience may be a practical option.

There is a,Iso the possibility that ~he quality of educationwhich women te,achers had received when they were students inprimary schools, particularly at rural schools, was not good. Sowhen they became teachers they were not ready to do a good job.

25

(As noted earlier, a similar conclusion has been presented by otherresearchers from project BRIDGES based on the same data set whichhas been used for this study). Poor quality of instruction yieldsineffective teachers and the process continues.

The Government of Pakistan has to break this circle at somepoint, for otherwise girls' education will continue to suffer. Aneffective way of teaching mathematics particularly for femalechildren, has to be a priority. This could be done through changesin the curriculum at the primary level, and through changes in theteacher training courses. Both of these would need furtherresearch to determine exactly what factors lead to the lowperformance of girl students in mathematics. A part of it has beenexplained by this dissertation and other research by ProjectBRIDGES that female teachers contribute to this low achievement butthe differences of quality of instruction received by females havenot been researched and seem a promising area.

Women teachers are less likely to use physical punishment.Even if physical punishment is not related to student achievementit might have a big negative relationship with the retention of thestudents in the schools. In countries like Pakistan, wheredropouts are a major problem, the impact of physical punishmentmight be an important factor.This question has been not studied in relation of the studentdropout from the elementary levels and might be a good question forfurther research.

Teacher training is another area which may need muchimprovement. Teacher training can be improved both at the pre­service and in-service level. The present system of trainingparticularly, in-service training does not contribute much to thepresent system of primary education. A significant contributionhas been made by Project BRIDGES to study this particular issue.Training of the teachers can be organized keeping in view therecommendation of the research by BRIDGES. If reorganized, teachertraining can be a substitute for a high level of education for theteachers, particularly women teachers who did not have as good aneducation as men when they themselves were students.

The recruitment policies of the government of Pakistan are anarea which can be modified. Teachers can be hired withmatric andFA/Fsc level and through teacher training their expertise can bedeveloped. This would be a practical solution for the recruitmentof women teachers particularly in rural areas where they are neededthe most. Women teachers who are not very highly educated to startwith, are not very willing or cannot move away from the familiesand are not expensive to be hired.

change of the social status of teachers is another area whichmight need long term planning. This might be the most complicated,difficult, and hard to implement. The low performance in theclassrooms by highly qualified teachers (irrespective of theirgender) is a strong argument for the" fact that teaching isconsidered a not very prestigious profession. This perception hasto be changed. This could be done through several changes in thesystem. Teachers have to be better paid, and they have to be

26

treated better, to recruit them into the service and to retainthem. The low status of teachers is a very common argument for whyteachers have negative attitudes towards their profession. Thepakistani educiation system is still based on the traditions ofBritish colonic:l rule, where social status was attached to being acivil servant cmd not to being a teacher. U r ban / r u r a Idisparities have to be eliminated and this can go with therecruitment policies. The government has to pay equal allowances,so that being posted in the rural area does not mean getting paidless. Rural female schools need women teachers the most. On thebasis of the findings of this research, as argued earlier,effective teaching does not need highly qualified teachers atprimary level. This could lead to a pOlicy option which can beless expensive deal for developing countries like Pakistan. Morequalified teachers are harder to find, have to be paid more. Theyare also reluc:tant to join teaching which is not one of theprestigious professions. Hiring comparatively less qualifiedteachers may solve a practical problem especially in case of womenteachers. WheTI women teachers are more qualified, they representa higher social class and probably comparatively more educatedfamilies and usually have an urban base. In that case they like tobe posted in urban areas only. This poses a problem forrecruitment for rural schools which are in desperate need of womenteachers. As mentioned earlier, there are monetary incentiveswhich make urbcm posting more attractive. This is a financiallydifficult decis:ion for the government to implement, but still isthe most desired and consistently recommended by researchers fromwithin the country and in countries with similar circumstances.

Research c,n the education system in Pakistan is a relativelynew phenomenon. The country has so many other pressing needs thatthis particular aspect gets neglected. It is the last priority evenwithin the education system. The BRIDGES project has filled a gapin this particular field but the need is so elaborate, that itneeds extension for a reasonable amount of time. The BRIDGESproject has not only conducted the research on important aspects ofprimary educati,on but has also trained the educational planners andadministrators 'to do research on problems of concern. Those mastertrainers are not yet enough to take the responsibility. Researchin education has to be a priority within the education system.Research institutes can be established at the national andprovincial level.

,.

_.__ .._----------------

27

REFERENCES

1. In 1983-84, dropout rates for primary school children rangedfrom a low of 18% in Punjab for males in urban area, to a highof 93% for females in Baluchistan. In 1985 only a third offive year old girls (940,000) were in school, and only half ofthose who entered school were expected to finish the fifthgrade. By the age 12, only about 4% of the rural girls arestill in schools. (p.4)

The World Bank figures are quoted from "Effective ClassroomPractices in Primary schools of Pakistan" by Andrea B. Rugh,Harvard University, project BRIDGES (1989)

2. We mark the borders of the bottom category of countries likeBhutan, Nepal, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Sudan, Chad, Mali andZaire.

In 1951 the literacy rate was estimated at 16.4% of the totalpopulation (all age groups) in spite of a liberal definitionof literacy 'ability to read any printed language'Comprehension was not a condition. In 1961, this parameter wasadded, and the ratio came down to 13.6% (of the totalpopulation). The definition was 'ability to read withunderstanding in any language'-writing ability was notincluded. In 1972 the definition was 'the ability to read andwrite with understanding in any language'. The literacy ratewas estimated at 21. 7%. In 1981 the criterion became moreprecise 'the ability to read a newspaper and write a simpleletter in any language'. The changing criteria detract fromthe comparability of the time series. At any rate, literacywas estimated at 26.2% in 1981. Behind this unflatteringfigure, there are large disparities- in terms of rural/urban,(17.3% against 47.1%) and male/female (35.1% against 16.0%)Rural female literacy is only 7.3%, the worst case beingliteracy in Baluchistan, only 1.8%"

Quoted from Action Plan for Educational Development (1983-'88),Ministry of Education; Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, 1984.(p.ll)

3. There are 56394 female teachers versus 176721 total.Differences in proportions of male ~nd female teachers areeven more marked when further break-down of provinces andurban/rural areas is considered.

28

Source: Central Bureau of Education, Islamabad (June 1983 cited inAction Plan of Educational Development: 1983-88).

4. In-service! facilities are not enough as according to the needsof the tea.chers. So the teachers end up staying with the samequalificat:ions with which they entered the system. It isparticularly hard for the women who work in the rural schoolsand training courses are usually held in the urban areas,making it harder for the women to attend.

Quoted from "Primary Education Improvements: Desired Measures"National Educat:ion council, (1986) Islamabad, Pakistan.

5. The researchers randomly selected 51 primary schools inBotswana and from those schools 2,559 students selected (basis-final exam) sample was 1517 girls and 1042 boys). Furthermore52 women teachers and 35 men teachers were selected for thestudy (thedr teaching experience ranged from 2 to 34 yearswith a m,aan of 11 years) Teachers were administered aquestionna.ire stating their sexes and years of experience. Onthe basis of grand mean pupils were divided into two groupsbased on less or more teaching experience. The performance ofthe teache'rs were evaluated on the basis of the group theybelonged.

6. He used the same data set as of this study, but he dealt witha number of 500 teachers because he linked it to the achievement ofthe students, a.nd information was available for 500 teachers whotaught math and science to grade 4 and 5. I dealt with 1000teachers and not linking it to the achievement of the students. Istudied' the different practices by the male and female teachers asmediated by the different background factors.

7. In Pakistan, "students of teachers with secondary educationoutperformed students of teachers with only primary education ontests of mathematics and science" (Warwick et al. 1989).

8. Pakistan and schools are faced with a considerable problem inthat the pe,ople speak many languages ....The problem of perhaps90% of the students beginning school with a different languagegreatly complicates the instruction. (p.37)

Quoted from Primary Education in Pakistan: Part III Case Studies ofSchools in Pakistan (1986) by Development Associates, INC.

9. The writers of this report used the same data set as I did withthe only diffet'ence that they linked to the achievement of thestudents of claslses 4 & 5. The data was available where they couldlink the performance of the teachers to the students achievement

29

only consisted of about 500 teachers, while the data, I used forthe study consisted on a sample of 1000 teachers from which 60%were male.

•

Annex 1

summary of Teaching PracticesBy Gender of the Teachers

Male Female Total N. p <Homework :in mathand scienc~e 8.39 7.51 8.04 825 .002

Follow up of theHomework 4.11 4.04 4.08 775 N.S.

Tests in lnath andscience 3.35 4.24 3.79 853 .048

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes) 30.9 22.0 27.4 936 .011# of lesscms kitused for 3.10 2.38 2.84 746 N.S.

Curriculum Coverage(math and science) 80.44 64.87 72.65 789 .000

Instructional Timein Minuteel(math & sc:ience) 533'.64 456.57 495.10 765 .000

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) 10.28 9.17 9.72 934 N.S.

Use of Physicalpunishment: (% Yes) 59.5 40.7 52.0 876 .000

Tough Phys:icalPunishment: 1.96 1.92 1.92 358 N.S.

Integrated Curriculum 3.5 3.0 3.3 877 N.S.

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) 90.9 96.1 93.5 879 .003

Use of studentTranslators 66.2 46.5 56.3 853 .000Assigning Tasks 44.1 44.7 44.4 815 N.S.

Lesson Plans(% Yes) 90.3 82.3 86.3 911 .000

~

Annex 2

summary of Teaching Practices (expected versus actual)By Gender of the Teachers

Expected ActualFemale Female ~

Homework in mathand science Hi Lo .002

Follow up of theHomework Hi Lo N.S.

Tests in math andscience Hi Hi .048

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes) Hi Lo .011

# of lessons kitused for Hi Lo N.S.

curriculum coverage(math and science) Hi Lo .000

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science) Hi Lo .000

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Lo Lo N.S.

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes) Lo Lo .000

Tough PhysicalPunishment Lo Lo N.S.

Integrated Curriculum Hi Lo N.S.

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) Hi Hi .003

Use of StudentTranslators Hi Lo .000

Assigning Tasks Lo Hi N.S •

Lesson Plans .'(% Yes), Hi Lo .000

3(

ActualLessEducated(Female)

Annex 3

summary of Teaching PracticesBy Academic Qualifications

ExpectedLess MoreEducated Educated(Female) (Female)

MoreEducated(Female)

Homework in mathand science Lo Hi Lo Hi

Follow up of theHomework Lo Hi Not Significant

Tests in math andscience

Use of Tea.ching Kit(% Yes)

# of lesse,ns kitused for

Curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Lo

Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Hi

Hi

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Instructie,nal Timein Minutes(math & science) Lo Hi Not significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Hi Lo Lo Hi

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes) Hi

Tough physicalPunishment Hi

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Not Significant

Not significant

Not significant

Not significant

Use of Blackboards(% Yes)

Use of StudentTranslators

Assigning Tasks

Lesson Plans (% Yes)

Lo

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo .'

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

_...._-----------------.".--

Annex 4

summary of Teaching PracticesBy Professional Training

Curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes)

Lo Hi Hi Lo

Lo Hi Not Significant

Lo Hi Not Significant

Lo Hi Hi Lo

Lo Hi Hi Lo

Lo Hi Not Significant

MoreQualified

(Female)

MoreQualified

(Female)

ActualLess

Qualified(Female)

ExpectedLess

QualifIed(Female)

Homework in mathand science

Follow up of theHomework

Tests in math andscience

# of lessons kitused for

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science) Lo

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Hi

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes) Hi

Tough PhysicalPunishment Hi

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) Lo

Use of StudentTranslators Lo

Assigning Tasks Hi

Lesson Plans (% Yes) Lo

Hi Not Significant

Lo Lo Hi

Lo Lo Hi

Lo Not Significant

Hi Not Significant

Hi Mixed

Hi Mixed

Lo Not Significant,.

Hi Hi Lo

Annex 5

Summary of Teaching PracticesBy In-Service Training

ExpectedNot Trained Trained

(Female) (Female)Trained

(Female)Homework in mathand science Lo Hi

ActualNot Trained

(Female)

Not Significant

Follow up of theHomework Lo Hi Lo Hi

Tests in math andscience Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes)

# of lesso:ns kitused for

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Instructio:nal Timein Minutes(math & science)

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of hour:::) Hi Lo Lo Hi

Use of PhYI::icalpunishment (% Yes) Hi

Tough physicalPunishment Hi

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Blackboards(% Yes)

Use of StudentTranslatorl;

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo

Assigning ~rasks Hi Lo,"

Not Significant

Lesson Plal1s (% Yes) Lo Hi La Hi

----------------

Annex 6

summary of Teaching PracticesBy Urban Rural Location of the Schools

Urban(Female)

ExpectedRural Urban

(Female) (Female)

ActualRural

(Female)

Homework in mathand science Lo Hi Hi Lo

Follow up of theHomework

Tests in math andscience

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes) Lo Hi Lo Hi

# of lessons kitused for

curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science)

Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Hi Lo Not Significant

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes)

Tough PhysicalPunishment

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) Lo

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of StudentTranslators

Assigning Tasks

Lesson Plans (% Yes)

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

,.Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Annex 7

summary of Teaching PracticesBy Teachers' Parents Education

Expected ActualLess More LessEducated Educated EducatedParents Parents Parents(Female) (Female) (Female)

MoreEducated

Parents(Female)

Homework in mathand science Lo Hi Not Significant

Follow up of theHomework Lo Hi Hi Lo

Tests in Illath andscience Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of Tea,ching Kit(% Yes)

# of lessclns kitused for

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science)

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Hi Lo Not Significant

Use of physicalpunishment (% Yes) Hi Lo Hi Lo

Tough PhysicalPunishment Hi Lo Not Significant

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) Lo

Use of StudentTranslators Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Assigning Tasks

Lesson Plans (% Yes)

Hi

Lo

Lo

Hi

I Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

ActualMore

Possessions(Female)

Not Significant

LessPossessions

(Female)

HiLo

Annex 8summary of Teaching Practices

By Teachers' PossessionsExpected

Less MorePossessions Possessions

(Female) (Female)mathHomework in

and science

Follow up of theHomework Lo Hi Not Significant

Tests in math andscience Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes) Lo Hi Not Significant

# of lessons kitused for Lo Hi Not Significant

Curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science)

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Hi Lo Lo Hi

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes) .Hi Lo Not Significant

Tough PhysicalPunishment Hi

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Lo

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of StudentTranslators Lo Hi Hi La

Not significant

Assigning Tasks

Lesson Plans (% Yes)

Hi

Lo

Lo

Hi ..Hi Lo

ActualLess Exp. More Exp.

(Female) (Female)

Annex 9Summary of Teaching Practices

By Teaching ExperienceExpected

Less Exp. 4 More Exp.(Female) (Female)

Homework in mathand science

Follow up of theHomework

Tests in math andscience

Lo

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes)

# of lessons kitused for

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

curriculum Coverage(math and science)

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science)

Lo

Lo

Hi

Hi

Not Significant

Not significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of hours) Hi Lo Lo Hi

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes) Hi Lo Hi Lo

Tough PhysicalPunishment Hi

Integrated Curriculum Lo

Lo

Hi

Not Significant

Not Significant

Not Significant

Use of Blackboards(% Yes)

Use of StudentTranslators

Assigning 'rasks

Lesson Plans (% Yes)

Lo

Lo

Hi

Lo

Hi

Hi

Lo

Hi"

Lo

Hi

Hi

Hi

Lo

Lo

4 Experienced

----- - --- ------

Annex 10Summary of Teaching Practices

By Single/Multigrade Teaching

Expected Actual

Multigrade Singlegrade MUltigrade Singlegrade(Female) (Female) (Female) (Female)

Homework in mathand science Lo Hi Hi Lo

Follow up of theHomework Lo Hi Hi Lo

Tests in math andscience Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of Teaching Kit(% Yes) Lo Hi Hi Lo

# of lessons kitused for Lo Hi Not Significant

curriculum Coverage(math and science) Lo Hi Not Significant

Instructional Timein Minutes(math & science) Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of Student Monitors(# of-hours) Hi Lo Not Significant

Use of Physicalpunishment (% Yes) Hi Lo Hi Lo

Tough PhysicalPunishment Hi Lo Not Significant

Integrated Curriculum Lo Hi Not Significant

Use of Blackboards(% Yes) Lo Hi Lo Hi

Use of StudentTranslators Lo Hi Hi Lo

Assigning Tasks Hi La ." Not Significant

Lesson Plans (% Yes) La Hi Hi Lo

Bibliography

Alderman, Harold et al. (1991) "The Gender Gap in Humancapi1:al Accumulation in Poor Rural Economy". A paperprepared for the Human Capital Accumulation in Post GreenRevolution Pakistan Project, International Food PolicyResearch Institute. Washington, D.C.

Anderson, Mary B. (1988) Improving Access to Schooling inthe Third World: An Overview" Cambridge: HarvardInstitute of International Development, BRIDGES Project.Research Report Series No. 1.

Anderson, Mary B. and N. Chaudhry {1989} "The impact of thescho()ls in mosques on girl's access to education inPaki!ltan," BRIDGES project.

Anderson, S.L. and Lorin, W. (1987) "The ClassroomEnvironmental Study: Teaching for Learning" ComparativeEduccltion Review. 31 {1}, 1987.

Ankhra-Dove, L. (1986) Teachers and Teacher Education InDeveloping Countries: Issues in Planning. Management andTraining. London, England.

Ankhra-Dove, L. {1982} "The Deployment and Training ofTeachers for Remote Rural Schools in Less DevelopedCount:ries" International Review of Education. No, 27.

Associaticm of Working Women in Pakistan (1988) "TheEducation and Retention of Rural Primary school womenTeachers, " Lahore.

Avalos, Beatrice (1990) "Teacher Effectiveness:Quest:ions about an Old Theme" Published in Rust,(199(1) Teachers and Teaching in the DevelopingGarland PUblishing Inc., New York.

MoreVal D.World.

Avalos, BE!atrice (1985) "Training for BetterThird World: Lessons from Research."Teacher Education. 1(4).

Teaching in theTeaching and

Avalos, BE!atrice and Wadi Haddad (1981) A Review of TeacherEffec:tiveness Research in Africa. India. Latin America.Middle East. Philippines and Thailand: synthesis ofResults, International Development Research Center,Ottawa Canada.

Baloch, Islamuddin S. (1990) "The Impact of Multi Grade andSingle Grade Teaching on Students Achievement inPakbtan. " An unpUblished papel" produced in the BRIDGESWorks:hop on Analysis of Survey Data held at the Academyof E:ducational Planning and Management, Islamabad,Pakis.tan.

2

Belenky, Mary Field; clinchy~ Blythe Mcvicker; Goldberger,Nancy Rule; and Tarule, J~ll Mattuck. (1986) Women's Waysof Knowing: The Development of Self. Voice and Mind.Basic Books PUblishers, New York.

Bellew, Rosemary. (1989) "The Status of Girls' and Women'sEducation in Developing Countries I What World Bank StaffThink", Education and Employment Division, PopUlation andHuman Resouroes Department, The world Bank, Washington,D.C.

Bhatti, Mukhthar Ahmad; Afzal, Mian M.; Nadeem, Mahmood-ul­Hafiz, Hassan; Khalid, Humala; Hashmi, Belal M. andShireen, Shahnaz. (1986) Primary Education Improvements:Desired Measures. National Education Council, Islamabad,Pakistan.

Bhatti, Mukhthar Ahmad; Khalid, Humala; Shireen, Shahnaz andSaeed, Faisel (1988) Female Teachers in Rural Areas ofPakistan. National Education Council, Islamabad,Pakistan.

Brophy, J. (1979) "Advances inResearch" Institute for ResearchPaper No. 18.

Teacher Effectivenesson Teaching. Occasional

Brophy, J. (1982) "Classroom Organization and Management"East Lansing: The Institute for Research on Teaching,Michigan State University, Occasional Paper No. 54.

Brophy, J. & Rohrkemper, M.; Rashid, It.; & Goldberger, M.(1982) "Relationship Between Teachers' Presentations onClassroom Tasks and Students' Engagement in those Tasks."Michigan State University: Institute for Research onTeaching.

Chapman, David W. (1983) "A Model of the Influences onTeacher Retention." Journal of Teacher Education. Vol.XXXIV Number 5. September, 1983.

Chapman, David W. and Sydney, Conrad W. (1989) "Is TeacherTraining Associated with Teachers' Classroom Behavior inthe Third World?" Paper prepared for the United StatesAgency for International Development.

Cochrane, S. (1979) The Effects of Education on Fertilityand Mortality, The> World Bank Education and TrainingDepartment Discussion paper EDT No. 26, Washington, D.C •..

Cooley, W.W. and Mao, B.J. (1981) "The Sample of ClassroomTime Observed." Journal of Classroom Interaction, 1

William K. (1988) "Who Teaches? An International Anal,

ysis." ,A paper presented at IMTEC Conference at Bali ..

3

Curle, Adam. (1966) Planning fo-r' Education in Pakistan.Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Davis, Gclry A. and Thomas, Margaret A. (1989) EffectiveSchools and Effective Teachers, Allyn and Bacon, USA.

Development Associates, Inc. (1986) Primary Education InPakistan Part 1: "summary Conclusions andRecommendations, An Analysis and Assessment of Pakistan'sPres,ent Education System with Recommendations for itsFurther Development."

Development Associates, Inc. (1986) ~mary Education inPakii'ltan Part: II "The Analysis."

Development Associates, Inc. (1986) primary Education inPakii'ltan Part: III "Case Studies of Schools in Pakistan."

Doyle, Walter. (1990) "Teachers Curriculum Knowledge" Paperprepared for the Division K Symposium, "Teachers'Knowledge and Learning to Teach, at the annual Meeting ofthe .American Educational Research Association, Boston,April 19, 1990.

Economist.. (1987) A Survey of Pakistan: Living on the Edge.

Friedman, Lynn (1989) " Mathematics and the Gender Gap: AMetao-Analysis of Recent Studies on Sex Differences inMathE~matical Tasks" Review of Educational Research,Vol.S9, No.2 pp 185-213.

Fazal Qadi.r, Syed. (1990) "The Impact of the Primary EducationProjE,ct in students' Achievement, Supervision andTeaching Practices in the North West Frontier Province,Pakistan; An unpublished paper produced in the BRIDGESWorkflhop on Analysis of survey Data held at the Academyof Educational Planning and Management, Islamabad,Pakistan.

Fuller, Bruce (1985) Raising School Quality in DevelopingCount:ries: What Investment Boost Learning? World BankDiscussion paper; Education and Training Series.

Fuller, Bruce. (1987) "What school factors raiseachie,vement in the Third World?" Review of EducationalResecLrch 57: 3 .. ,

Fuller, Bruce and Sydney, Conrad W. (1990) "Vocal Teachers,Siler:lt Pupils?: Life in Botswana Classrooms" World BankDiscussion Paper, Education and Training series.

Gillis, Malcom et al. (1987)Second Edition, New York,

4

Economics of Development,W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Government of Pakistan, (1980) Bureau of Statistics, Womenin Pakistan. Karachi, Pakistan.

Government of Pakistan, Islamabad,Formal Education Wing; Ministryfor Girls' Education at Primary

(1987) Primary & Non­of Education; "Teacherslevel."

Government of pakistan, (1979) Ministry of Education,Islamabad, "Educational Policy."

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (1984) "ActionPlan for Educational Development: 1983-88." Islamabad.

Harvard Educational Review (1985) Reprint Series No. 17,Women's Experience and Education. Editors: Sharon LeeRich and Ariel Phillips.

Hasan, Iftikhar. (1980) "Attitude of Rural Populationtowards Women's Education" National Institute ofPsychology, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Husen, Torsten; Saha, Lawrence J. and Richard Noonan. (1978)Teacher Training and Student Achievement in LessDeyeloped countries World Bank, Staff Working Paper No.310.

Hussain, M. Anwar. (1990) "Explaining the Differences inAcademic Achievement of Students of Female and MaleTeachers in Primary Schools of Pakistan." An unpublishedpaper produced in the BRIDGES Workshop on Analysis ofSurvey Data held at the Academy of Educational Planningand Management, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Jatoi, Haroona and McGinn"

Noel (1991). Are Women Good Teachers? Data from Pakistan"Paper presented at theconference of the Comparativeand International EducationSociety at Pittsburgh.

Jayaweera, Swarna. (1987) "Gender and Access to Educationin Asia" International Reyiew of Education, Vol. 33 No.4.

Kelly, David H. and Kelly, Gail P. (1989) Women's Educationin the Third World: An Annotated Bibliography GarlandPublishing, Inc., New York

Keddie, Nikki and Beck, Lois (Editors) Women in the Muslim

5

Wor1g (1978) Harvard University Press: Cambridge,Massachusetts and London, England.

King, Elizabeth M. (1990) "Educating Girls and Women:Investing in Development" World Bank.

Krupnick, Catherine G. (1985) "Women llnd Men in Classrooms:Inequalities and Remedies". on Teaching and Learning, Thejournal of the Harvard-Danforth Center.

Kruppenba1oh, Susan E. and Adams, Milton M. (1987) "Genderand Access in the African Schools" (1987) InternationalRevi'Bw of Education, Vol. 33, No.4.

Lampert, l~agda1ene. (1987) "How Do Teachers Manage to Teach?Perspectives on Problems in Practice. " Teachers.Teaching. & Teachers Education. Harvard EducationalRevi'ew, Reprint Series no. 19.

Leiufsrud, Hakon and Lindblad (1991) "Teachers andSocileties: A Comparative Study of Teachers' Positions andOrientations in the Social Structure. The cases ofCanada, Norway, Sweden, the US, and West Germany. Paperpreslmted at the conference of the Comparative andInternational Education Society, at Pittsburgh.

Ligons, Merrell Claudette. (1989) "In-service Education InThailand: Key Innovations Since 1980." Paper prepared forHarvllrd university, Project BRIDGES.

Lockheed, Marlaine E. and I<omenan, Andre. (1989) "TeachingQuali.ty and Student Achievement in Africa: The case ofNigeria and Swaziland" Teaching and Teacher EducationVol. 5, No.2, pp. 93-113

Lockheed, Mar1aine and Verspoor,Improving Primary Education inRevie,w of Policy Options. TheD.C.

Adriaan et el. (1989)Developing Countries: AWorld Bank, Washington,

Lyon, Hilaryeditors.England:

De. and Migniuo10, Frances Widdowson (1983)Women Teachers: Issues and Experiences.

Open University Press.

Malik, Ahm.ad Nawaz. (1990) "Effects of the Primary EducationProject on Student Achievements and Practices of PrimarySchool Teachers in Pakistan." An unpublished paperproduced in the BRIDGES Workshop on Analysis of SurveyData held at the Academy of E"ducationa1 Planning andManagement, Islamabad, Pakistan.

6

Montero-sieburth, Martha. (1989) Classroom Management:Instructional strategies and the Allocation of LearningResources, Cambridge: Harvard Institute of InternationalDevelopment, BRIDGES project. Research Report SeriesNo.4.

Mumtaz, Khawar; and Shaheed, Farida. (1987) "Women ofPakistan: Two steps Forward. One Step Back?" VanguardBooks, Lahore, Pakistan.

Munoz, Izquierdo Carlos. (1986) "Review of the State-of-the­Art on strategies for Improving Aocess to and preventingDropouts in Latin American Primary Education"Educational Research Center, Mexico.

Munoz, Izquierdo Carlos. and Lavin, Sonia. (1987) "Review ofState-of-the-Art on strategies for Improving Access andRetention in Latin American Education."

Mwamenda, T. S. and B.B, Mwamwenda (1989) "TeacherCharacteristics and Pupils' Academic Achievement"[Botswana], International Journal of EducationalDevelopment, vol.9, No.1, pp. 31-42.

National Education council, (1985) Issues in Education,Ministry of Education, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Nauman, Huma. (1990) "primary Teaching certificate Programin N.W.F.P. A Study". Islamabad, Pakistan.

Nitsaisook, Malee and Anderson, L. W. (1989) "TeacherEffectiveness Research: An example from Thailand"Teaching and Teacher Educati2n, Vol. 5, No.4, pp. 287­302.

Psacharopoulos, G. (1985) "Returns to Education: A FurtherInternational Update and Implications". Journal of HumanResources. No. 20 (4).

Qaisrani, Mohammad Nasim. (1990) "Effect of Teacher Leveland Quality of Formal Schooling and Professional Trainingof Students Achievement in Primary schools of Pakistan."An unpublished paper produced in the BRIDGES Workshop onAnalysis of Survey Data held at the Academy ofEducational Planning and Management, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Qureshi, M. Ikram. (1990) 'iImpact of Pre-Service Training onClassroom Practices in primary Schools of Pakistan." AnunpUblished paper produced i~ the BRIDGES Workshop onAnalysis of Survey Data ~eld at the Academy ofEducational Planning and Management, Islamabad, Pakistan.

7

Reimers, Fernando, Warwick Donald P., and McGinn, Noel F. "AProfile of Primary school Teachers in Pakistan" BRIDGESProject.

Reimers, Fernando and Warwick, Donald P. (1991) "The Impactof Schools on Achievement in Pakistan" Harvard Instituteof International Development. BRIDGES SchoolEffectiveness studies.

Reimers, Fernando and Warwick, Donald P. (1991)on Academic Achievement in Pakistan" Harvardof International Development. BRIDGESEffectiveness Studies.

Rondinelli, Dennis; Middleton, John and verspo~r,

(1990) "Planning Education Reforms ~n

Countries" Duke Press Policy Studies, DukePress.

"InfluenceInstitute

School

Adriaan M.DevelopingUniversity

Rugh, Andrea B. (1990) "Women Enabling Women: TeachingStrategies In Pakistan" A Paper presented at theAmerican Women In Development Conference, Washington,D.C.

Rugh, Anclrea B. (1989) "Effective Classroom Practices inPrimary schools of Pakistan" BRIDGES Project.

Rugh, Andlrea B. with Malik, A.N. and Farooq, R.A.Improving Teacher Effectiveness in Pakistan"School Effectiveness Studies.

(1991)"BRIDGES

Rust, Val D. and Dalin, Per. (1990) Teachers and Teachinain Developing World. Garland Publishing INC., New York.

Hafiz, Sabiha. (1975) Women in Pakistan. Women's Division;Islamabad, Pakistan.

Safa, Helen I. and Leacock, Eleanor "Women's Work" (1986)Bergin & Garvey Publishers, Inc. Massachusetts.

Saha, Lawrence J. (1983) "Soc:ial structure and TeacherEffects on Academic Achievement: A comparative analysis"Comparative Education Review, Vol. 27 No.1.

Schmidt, Ruth. (1987) "Report on Mini-Survey of PakistaniParents: Who are Educating their Daughters?" The WorldBank, Washington, D.C.

Schiefelbein, Ernesto and Simmons, John. (1981) "TheDeterminants of School Achievement: A Review of theResearch for the Developing Countries" InternationalDevelopment Research Center, ottawa, Canada.

8

Schwille, John; Beeftu, Alemu; Navarro, Richard; Prouty,Robert; Raudenbush, Stephen; Schmidt, William; Tsang,Mun; and Wheeler, Christopher (1986) "Recognizing,Fostering and Modeling the Effectiveness of Schools asorganizations in Third World Countries" Institute ofEducational and Research on Teaching and Office ofInternational Networks in Education and Development,Michigan State University.

Shah, Nasra M. (1986) Pakistani Women: A socioeconomic andDemographic profile. Pakistan Institute of DevelopmentEconomics, Islamabad, Pakistan, and East-West PopulationInstitute East-West Center, Honolulu, Hawaii.

Shah, Nasra M. and Muhammad Anwar (1987) Basic Needs, Women,and Development: A Survey of Squatters in LahOre,Pakistan, East-West Population Institute East-WestCenter, HonolulU, Hawaii and International DevelopmentResearch Center, ottawa, Canada.

Spencer, Dee Ann. (1986) "Contemporary Women Teachers::!iiB!Sa!...!l",a!.!n~c"",i"-!n,-,:g:L-..,.,s~c..h~o",o...l-"s,--""a",n",d'--LH,,,O,,,m!!E.e" Research on TeachingMonograph Series.

stromquist, Nelly P. (1989) "Determinants of EducationalParticipation and Achievement of Women in the ThirdWorld: A Review of the Evidence and a TheoreticalCritique." Review of Educational Research, Vol. 59, No.2

Stromquist, Nelly P. (1990) "Daring to be Different: TheChoice of Nonconventional Fields of study byInternational Students." Paper presented at the annualmeeting of American Educational Research Association,Boston, 1990.

Stromquist, Nelly P. (1990) "Women and Illiteracy: TheInterplay of Gender Subordination and Poverty. "Comparative Education Review, February, 1990.

UNESCO (1980) "Comparative Analysis of Male and FemaleIlliteracy" Paris, France.

UNESCO (1987) statistical Yearbook Paris, France.

UNICEF (1980) Small children and Women's Education.Islamabad, Pakistan.

Warwick, Donald P., Reimers, Fernando and McGinn, Noel F.(1989) "The Implementation of Educational Innovations inPrimary Education in Pakistan" BRIDGES Project.

•

9

warwick, Donald P., Reimers, Fernando and McGinn, Noel F.(1989) "Teacher Characteristic::s and Student Achievementin Math and Science" BRIDGES Project.

Warwick, Donald P., and Reimers, Fernando (1991) "GoodSchools and Poor Schools in Pakistan: How They Differ"Harvard Institute of International Development. BRIDGESProject School Effectiveness studies.

(1991) "Who CompletesHarvard Institute of

BRIDGES Project School

warwick, Donald P., Reimers, FernandoPrim,ary School in Pakistan"International Development.Effel::tiveness studies.

warwick, Donald P., Nauman, Huma and Reimers, Fernando(199:L) "Is Teacher Training in Pakistan Worth theInvelstment?" BRIDGES Project School EffectivenessStudies.

Wheeler, Christopher W., Raudenbush, Stephen and Pasigna,Aida (1989) "Policy Initiatives to Improve Primary SchoolQuality In Thailand: Implementation, Constraints andOpportunities for Educational Improvement" BRIDGESProjE!ct.

World Bank (1989) "Female Educational Attainment in LatinAmerica: A Survey." Education and Employment Division;Population and Human Resources Department.

World Ban}:, (1987) World Development Report.

World Bank, (1988) Pakistan Sector Strategy Review.

World Ban):, (1989) "Determinants of Women's Education in theMiddle East and North Africa: Illustrations from SevenCount:ries". Consultant Nagat El-Sanbary. Education andEmplClyment Division, Population and Human ResourcesDepartment.

World Bank, (1989) "Returns to Women's Education." By T.Paul Schultz. Women and Development Division, Populationand Human Resources Department.

World Bank, (1989) "Barriers to Female Education in SouthAsia." By Shahrukh R.Khan. Education and EmploymentDivision, PopUlation and Human Resources Department.

.,.;, ..'

World Bank, (1989) "Female Schooling in East Asia: A Reviewof Glrowth, Problems and Possible Determinants." ByJandhyala B.G. Tilak. Education and Employment Division,PopUlation and Human Resources Department.

10

Wu, Yen-bo (1991). "How do Teachers Talk about their Work" Apaper presented at the conference of the Comparative andInternational Education society at pittsburgh.