1.1. Background of the Study

Education is the base for reasoning. Regarding this, Vidyarth (2015) described that unlike literacy which means knows how to read and write, education is to be able to reason, to use our ability to read and write to our benefit and to be able to gain our spectrum of knowledge by trying to surge deeper into the literate knowledge imparted to us. In the same way as summarized from Gravity (2011), education plays a very important role in people’s life; for living a luxurious life or for living a better life, people should be educated. Education helps people to show their best by their mind and spirit. It gives people a lot of knowledge in whatever aspects. Education plays a vital role in people’s success in the personal growth. For determining what is good or what is bad for people, education will help them. Without education a person is incomplete, so education makes man a right thinker and a correct decision-maker. Education is the solution of any problem; it is the only education which promotes good habits, values and awareness towards anything like terrorism, corruption and much more.

Education is used to accelerate the reduction of poverty in a sustained manner. As inferred on MoE (2010) that launched the fourth Education Sector Development Program (ESDP IV) by Government of Ethiopia and spanned from 2010/11-2014/15, Ethiopia’s development strategy is summarized as the Agricultural-Development-Led Industrialization (ADLI) to transform Ethiopia into a middle-income country. Its broad objectives are to modernize agriculture and improve its efficiency and productivity, ensure food security, create employment opportunities and enhance the country’s foreign exchange earnings with the aim to promote the development of a vibrant industrial sector and accelerate overall economic growth if supplemented by education. It demands on the other hand that human resources development be strengthened by training competent and innovative people with special attention to engineering, technology and natural sciences, through introducing high quality science and mathematics curricula at primary and secondary schools and the recently adopted policy of the university intake ratios in favor of science & technology. But, if students do not acquire significant knowledge and skills, Ethiopia will not be able to compete within a global economy. It is necessary therefore to shift attention to quality concerns in general and to those inputs and processes which translate more directly into improved student learning and which help change the school into a genuine learning environment (such as: quality-focused school supervision, internal school leadership, increased student participation, school-community partnerships).

In order to improve such situation variety of school improvement program have been taken place since 1978 as described on Edmonds (1982) that was carried out in five cities of USA starting from 1978-1981 on four models of school improvement program including: The grassroots site-based reform model; Locally mandated reconstitution; A nationally recognized whole school reform and partnership with a local external partner (Borman et al., 2000). By taking in to consideration the lessons learned from supporting basic education programs in different regions of the world, in 2001 a plan began drafting basic guidelines for the school improvement program. These were then adapted and developed and each interested country where Plan has a presence selected 10 primary schools to pilot the program. Until 2004 as described on (Sathyabalan et al., 2004), 20 countries were implementing the school improvement program in hundreds of primary schools across Africa, Asia and America.

Based on this, the government of Ethiopia launched a major nationwide reform program, GEQIP (General Education Quality Improvement Program), in primary and secondary schools, aimed to improve the quality of general education throughout the country (MoE, 2008).The package was composed of a number of components and sub-components which are complementary to each other and form part of an integrated school effectiveness model. Among the components of the package one is planning of school improvement and of resource use by schools (MoE, 2008; 2010). But, as identified by MoE (2010), the capacity to implement SIP at school and Woreda level is still limited. The SIP monitoring and evaluation system is not yet well established. In the same way as 2014/15 annual report of Somali Regional Education Bureau and Kebridahar City administration education office (SEB, 2015) indicated the implementation (practice) of SIP in secondary school (9-10) did not achieve the target of ESDP IV.

The importance of implementing SIP as indicated in school improvement guideline are: first it enables the school to improve the teaching-learning process by systematically increasing the competency, efficiency and motivation of teachers and the management through various techniques (mutual teaching by correcting weakness by self-evaluation and developing strong unity by exchanges the experiences and the realistic practical training). Second, it increases students’ achievement or education and improving the necessary resources for education and to create suitable condition for learning. Third, it increases the participation of parents and the community and their feeling of responsibility by increasing their awareness regarding education and lastly it provides quality of education by providing the necessary resources through the coordination of the community, nongovernmental organizations, in addition to assistance provided by the government (MoE, 2012).

Thus, in the implementation of SIP, leadership takes a lion share (Dea & Basha, 2014). Hence, this study will assess the Perception, Practices and challenges of School Improvement of Program in Kabridahar Government Secondary Schools.

1.2. Statements of the Problem

According to Chapman and Adams (2002), education quality is examined within context, education quality apparently may refer to inputs (numbers of teachers, amount of teacher training, number of textbooks), processes (amount of direct instructional time, extent of active learning), outputs (test scores, graduation rates), and outcomes (performance in subsequent employment). As described by UNICEF (2000), quality education includes learners who are healthy, well-nourished and ready to participate and learn, and supported in learning by their families and communities; environments that are healthy, safe, protective and gendersensitive, and provide adequate resources and facilities; content that is reflected in relevant curricula and materials for the acquisition of basic skills, especially in the areas of literacy, numeracy and skills for life, and knowledge in such areas as gender, health, nutrition, HIV/AIDS prevention and peace; Processes through which trained teachers use child-centered teaching approaches in well-managed classrooms and schools and skillful assessment to facilitate learning and reduce disparities; Outcomes that encompass knowledge, skills and attitudes, and are linked to national goals for education and positive participation in society. Therefore, quality education is the base for all rounded development of any nation that enables individuals and society to make all rounded participation in the development process by acquiring knowledge, ability, skills and attitudes (MoE, 1994). Based on the importance of quality education, Ethiopia has initiated to reform change to improve teaching-learning and school conditions of the country by developing a General Education Quality Improvement Program (GEQIP) which includes six program components: (i) Teacher Development; (ii) Curriculum improvement; (iii) Leadership and Management improvement, (iv) School Improvement Program (SIP); (v) Civic and Ethical Education; and (vi) Information Communication Technology expansions (MoE, 2008).The school as a social institution needs to adjust itself in order to be in a steady state. One of the mechanisms for this adjustment is improving their overall activities in relation with the needs of the student, parent and community at large that accomplished by SIP. The SIP focuses on four major domains (MoE, 2008): Teaching and learning process, school leadership and management, parents-community school relationship, and safe and healthy school environment. As Mekango (2013), each of these domains is equally important, if anyone is weak, the strength and the success of the whole will be affected. Thus the schools should give due emphasis for each domain.

By putting the domains in considerations, MoE (2010) listed key outcome targets of SIP for primary and secondary education expected at the end of 2015/2016 at national level. Among these one is student teacher ratio is 33.3:1 and the others are student section ratio is 40:1 and 70% students were scoring at least 50% in NLA. In line with these key outcome targets according to the 2014/15 annual report of Somali Regional Education Bureau (SEB, 2015 )indicated, student teacher ratio is 27:1;student section ratio is 59:1 and students scored 50% and above in grade 10 NLA are only 56%.

In the same way, the 2015/16 annual report of Kebridahar City administration education office listed, as the student teacher ratio is 43:1; the student section ratio is 62:1 and students scored 50% and above in grade 10 NLA were only 40.71%. Based on these indicators of quality education, implementation of SIP in Kebridahar City administration secondary schools (9- 10) is much below than the national standard and even less than average implementation of SIP at regional level. Thus why, this study is very important in Kebridahar City administration secondary schools (9-10) to identify challenges observed in implementation of SIP. For the failures of SIP, Mekango (2013) concluded that difficulty of understanding of school improvement program, shortage of educational finance, lack of school facilities, and limited support from Woreda education office, cluster supervisors; PTA members and lack of practical training on implementing SIP are the major challenges that hinder the implementation of SIP. This proves the challenges identified by MoE (2010) in implementation of SIP. These includes: low capacity to implement SIP at school and Woreda level and low SIP monitoring and evaluation system. In support of this, lack of support, lack of commitment, lack of incentives, lack of understanding and weak collaboration of stakeholders are the main challenges schools’ leadership experience in the implementation process of SIP (Dea and Basha, 2014). Furthermore, there are other studies carried out in other parts of the country; including the study conducted by Makango (2013) on secondary school of Metekel zone and the study conducted by Dea and Basha (2014) on primary schools in Wolaita Zone Administration.

However, as far as the knowledge of the researcher is concerned, there is no study conducted on Government Secondary Schools of Kebridahar City Administration regarding perceptions, practices and challenges of School Improvement Program.

So, the study area makes it different from other, since every school’s problems are slightly different, this study will be designed, to assess the Perception, Practices and Challenges of School Improvement of Program in Kebridahar Government Secondary Schools. 

1.3. Objective of the Study

1.3.1. General Objective of the Study

The general objective of this study is to assess the perceptions, practices and challenges of school improvement program in Kabridahar government secondary schools

 1.3.2. Specific Objectives of the Study

1. To investigate teachers and school leaders perception about SIP in government secondary schools of Kabridahar town.
2. To assess the practice of SIP with respect to four domains of the program in the schools understudy (Learning and Teaching; Safe School Environment; Leadership and Management; and Community Participation).
3. To explore major challenges that affect school principals in practicing SIP in government secondary schools of the town.

1.4. Basic Research Questions

The following basic research questions will be addressed in the study:

1. How do teachers and school leaders perceive SIP in government secondary schools of Kabridahar town?
2. To what extent is SIP practicing in the schools under study with respect to four domains of the program (Learning and Teaching; Safe School Environment; Leadership and Management; and Community Participation)?
3. What major challenge affects school principals in practicing SIP in government secondary schools of the Kabridahar town?

 1.5. Significance of the Study

Assessing the practices of SIP in secondary schools of the town is believed to generate reliable information that help all concerned bodies to facilitate effective implementation of SIP in the study area. Thus, the researcher believed that the findings of this study have the following significances. It may help school managements to acquaint with the existing practices and factors affecting the effectiveness of SIP leadership; and may gain important ideas on how to become successful in their future endeavor in their respective schools. The findings of this study may also provide pertinent information for Educational Managers, decision makers, and all other stakeholders to take actions on major challenges faced the principals while implementing SIP in government secondary schools of the town. Moreover, it may also help supervisors, teachers, parents, students, and other stakeholders to take part in the efforts made to improve the practices of SIP in secondary schools of the town. Besides, the findings of this study may add bits of information to the existing literature in the areas of SIP implementation; and may serve as additional source of information for those scholars interested to conduct further research on the issue.

1.6. Delimitation of the Study

The challenges facing school principals in practicing SIP may be seen in various schools in the town, Somali and the country at large. Accordingly, it may require carrying out an investigation at all school levels as it provided a comprehensive picture about its implementation and the challenges than what this study would contribute. However, this will be beyond the capacity of the researcher due to various resource related constraints and the purpose of conducting this study. Therefore, to make the study specific and manageable; geographically, the scope of this study was delimited to government secondary schools of Kabridahar town. Kabridahar is preferred as study area, because of the proximity of the study site to the researcher and properly complete the study within the scheduled timeframe. In addition, government secondary schools were selected as a subject of the study because of the researcher’s affiliation to observe and get awareness about challenges related to the issue in those schools while work in secondary school of the town in the past recent five years. Moreover, conceptually, this study was delimited to assess issues related to the perceptions, practices and challenges of School Improvement of Program with particular emphasis in the schools understudy. In this regard, more emphasis would be made on investigating the perception of teachers and school leaders about SIP; extent of its practices with respect to four domains (Learning and Teaching; Safe School Environment; Leadership and Management; and Community Participation); and major challenges facing school principals in leading SIP practicing in their respective government secondary schools of Kebridahar own.

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1. Research Design

 By considering the nature and objective of the study, descriptive research design involving both quantitative and qualitative approach will be employed. Since the purpose of this study was gain a detail insight into school principals’, directors’ and students’ perceptions, practices and challenges conducted in naturally occurring inside and outside contexts. To support this, Cohen, Minion, & Morrison, (2007:205) stated that, many educational research methods are descriptive; that is, to describe and interpret the state of affairs of the issues under the study as it exists. Similarly, Kothari (2004) describing the state of affairs as it exists at present is the central aim of descriptive research design.

3.2. Research Setting

The research was conducted at Qorahey zone Secondary School, which is found in Somali Region, Qorahey Zone Ethiopia. The school was purposely chosen for this study for some reason. One, as to the researchers’ knowledge, no related study is conducted in this school. Second, the researcher is the desire to work for the benefit of the school since the outcome of this research may indicate some solutions. Finally; the geographical proximity of the research place is another factor that contributes to the selection of the target setting. So, the administrators of the schools, teachers, and students (participants of the study) were facilitated the situations to gather the data.

3.3. Participants of the study

Participants of the study were: School Principals and V/Principals, Members of School improvement committee, PTA Members, Inbuilt supervisors from the schools, and Experts from Education Office & CRC Supervisors at Kabridahar town.

3.4. Sample Size

To determine the number of sample respondents for this study, a formula developed by Kothari, (2004:179) and recommended by Cohen et al., (2007:104) in educational research will be employed. To support this, Watson (2001) selecting the error from the desired level of precision 5%-10% and selecting the sample using scientific evidence making the data empirical. Since this formula has been practically tested and used by scholars for more than four a decade, the researchers were considered the formula to determine correctly the appropriate sample size for this study.

n=Z2* p * q * N(e2(N-1))+(Z2* p * q )

Where:

n= the required sample size

Z² = is the abscissa of the normal curve that cuts off an area α at the tails (1- α equals the desired confidence level. The value for Z is found in statistical tables which contain the area under the normal curve. e.g., Z=1.96 at 95% confidence level; and Z²=3.841).

N= the population size (386)

P= the population proportion (assumed to be 0.5 since this would provide the maximum sample size)

q= 1-p

e = is the desired level of precision or margin of error (9% error or 0.09)

3.5. Sampling Techniques

Among the total number of teachers of the schools, the number of sample size determine for this study was selected using simple random sampling technique from each government secondary schools included in this study. Simple random sampling technique was preferred and used to select sample teacher respondents, because this sampling technique gives equal chance for each members of the population the likelihood of probability of being chosen for the study as a sample. Thus, using name list of teachers from work attendance sheet, the sample respondents will be selected randomly until the required number of sample is obtained from each secondary school included in this study. On the other hand, experts from Kabridahar Education Office & CRC Supervisors, Principals and V/Principals and inbuilt supervisors from the schools were selected using purposive sampling technique.

3.6. Data Gathering Instruments

To achieve the study's objectives, questionnaire, interview, and focus group discussion were employed.

 3.5.1. Questionnaire

 The questionnaire was the major data collection instrument to collect primary data from sample respondents. It was found to be appropriate and effective tool to collect data for this study from the respondents, because the sample respondents found in the study areas have sufficient level of education to understand and respond the questionnaire. The questionnaire was prepared separately for different group of respondents. In the questionnaire a set of close-ended and open-ended questions for each specific objective of the study was derived from extensive literature. The close-ended question was developed, with the belief that, it helps the respondents to choose an option from the given alternatives that best fit their responses. In addition, the open-ended question was included in the questionnaire in order to give an opportunity for respondents to express their view, feelings, perceptions, and intensions related to implementation and challenges of SIP in government secondary schools of the town.

3.5. 2. Interview

The purpose of using interview in this study is to collect more supplementary opinion so as to stabilize the data collect through the questionnaire. In this regard, Jacobson (2005) stated that, an interview is used to gather data about the thoughts, outlook and beliefs that the interviewees had about a particular topic. The interview permits greater depth of response which is not possible through any other means. Besides, considering the advantages of its flexibility in which additional questions can be forwarded during the interview session, semi-structure questions will be prepared and administered with Officials from Kabridahar town Education Office that has the responsibility of facilitating and supervising SIP activities in secondary schools of the town.

 3.5.3. Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

Focus Group Discussion (FGD) was held with members of student council to collect data regarding their understanding about SIP, their contribution in the implementation of the program, current practices of the program, and about challenges encountered the schools while implementing the program. Furthermore, various data from official documents were collected and analyzed for this study.

3.4.5. Procedures of Data Collection

Primarily, the questionnaire was prepared in English language. Then pilot test was made on randomly selected respondents from kabridahar District (neighboring district) secondary schools. Based on the comments will be given by those respondents, necessary correction will be made and duplicate the questionnaire will be done considering the sample sizes of each group of the respondents. In order to get permission and collect data requires for the study, the researchers primarily established official relationship with concerned bodies of the schools understudy. Then, selection of the sample respondents and conducting orientation programs for respondents on the purpose of the study and how to fill the questionnaires will be carried-out at respective sample schools. Following the orientations, the set of questionnaire will be distributed to the respondents and their response was collected from them. The distribution of the questionnaire for all sample respondents and the collection of the questionnaire from them was carried-out by the researcher himself with the assistance of two train data collectors. Moreover, in the process of data collection assistance was made for those respondents who did not clearly understood the contents of the questionnaire by the two trained data collectors particularly for respondents which was selected from members school improvement committee and PTA members. Moreover, the interview session was administered with the sample interviewees by the researcher on face-to-face bases and one-to-one bases. This enables the researcher to focus on some specific issues to be raised for different interviewee’s separately during the interview session. The question was raised for the interviewees in af-Somali language during the interview session to reduce communication barriers and to obtain more clarified information regarding the subjects of the study. In addition, the collection of data from secondary sources was made by the researcher with the assistance of one responsible person from the schools understudy.

 3.5. Validity and Reliability of the Data

 In order to assure data quality, the questionnaire prepare for this study was validated and tested at pilot level for its reliability before used as data collection instrument. Primarily, the validity of the instruments was tested by experts to judge the items on their appropriateness and clarity of its contents. Then, the reliability of the questionnaire was tested through pilot study using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient used for all parts and items of the questionnaire.

3.6. Methods of Data Analysis

 To analyze the data obtained from different sources, various methods of data analysis was employed based on specific nature of the data. Therefore, the collected data was checked, classified, arranged and organized according to their characteristics and specific objectives of the study and was prepared for analysis. In order to analyze and interpret the raw data, the quantitative data was tabulated and processed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS V-20). The analyses of quantitative data were made using descriptive statistics, like frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviations and ranges. Besides, t-test results will be used to analysis the presences of significant differences between two groups of respondents’ responses regarding each items of the questionnaire. The results of quantitative data was organized and presented in tables and figures for analysis. Furthermore, analysis and description of them will be made following the data illustrated in each tables and graph. Besides, the qualitative data that was obtain through interview, open-ended questions of the questionnaire, FGD, and from secondary sources (official documents) was discussed in conjunction to the analysis of the quantitative data. This helps the researchers as a supplementary data for triangulation and validation purposes.

3.7. Ethical Consideration

According to Singh (2006.p.221), any researcher who involves human subjects or samples in their research has certain responsibilities towards them. to keep the respondents’ confidentiality and privacy their names was not written on the questionnaire or revealed to anyone.

CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND DISSCUSSION OF DATA 4.1. INTRODUCTION

Table 4 .1: 4.2.1. Analysis of the first research objective on the respondents’’ perceptions towards SIP

Table 4.2: respondents’ response on SIP

NB: Rating scales 1=Very Low, 2=Low, 3=Moderate, 4=High, and 5=Very High.

Concerning perception about school improvement programs both teachers and leaders were asked the questionnaire to indicate their level of agreement using eight items listed in Table 4.2.Accordingly the data illustrated in the table show that, both teachers and leaders level of agreement was found at higher level (M=4.04, SD=1.03). Besides, the mean score calculated for both teachers and leaders responses illustrated in the table shows better understanding of them about the concepts of school improvement program for all eight items. When respondents‟ perception was compared between the two groups of respondents, significant variation was not observed between teachers and Leaders in indicating their perception of SIP for the eight items listed in the Table. Furthermore, the results oft-test calculated for each items listed in Table 4.2 and overall perception of the respondents (t(155,83)=-0.22; P=0.98>0.05) confirmed that, statistically there is no significant differences between teachers and Leaders level of understanding about school improvement programs. That is, teachers and leaders have responded the items synonymously. However, among the eight items of perception, both groups of respondents were rated item number two, that stated about „School improvement programs should focuses on how schools improve student achievements‟(M=4.25,SD=0.92);item number seven, „the core intention of school improvement program is student achievements in terms of learning outcomes‟ (M=4.24,SD=0.87); item number five, „in school improvement doings the involvement of parents/community in school governance and decision-making should be considered as success factor‟ (M=4.18,SD=0.99); and item number eight, „successful implementation of SIP constantly needs competent, committed and informed school leaders at the frontline‟ (M=4.15,SD=1.01) from first to fourth level in ranking orders. Next to the above four items, both teachers and leaders perceived that, „well trained and committed teachers are always required for successful implementation of SIP at any school levels‟ (M=4.01, SD=1.21); and „school improvement is about putting in place a set of welltested processes for identifying the developmental needs of each school‟ (M=4.00, SD=1.23) as 5th and 6th levels respectively. Moreover, item number three and item number four were rated 7th and 8th. Accordingly, teachers and leaders perceived that; „creating an appropriate structure, developing a sound plan and designing a well-established system of communication are the major areas of preparation and readiness to implement a SIP successfully‟ (M=3.84, SD=0.95); and „for success of SIP, understandings of the features of each phases of the program by all stakeholders are always indispensable‟ (M=3.63, SD=1.11). In general, the overall results of the table clearly indicated that secondary schools teachers and leaders in the study area have better theoretical knowledge and understanding about school improvement program. Moreover, there is no significant difference between teachers and leaders in perceiving about SIP.

Preparation and Implementation of SIP

This part comprises the practices of SIP with regards to preparation and readiness of schools; and the actual implementation of the program in the schools understudy.

4.3.1. Preparation and Readiness of Schools

Table 4.3: Extent of Preparation and Readiness of the Schools for SIP Implementation

NB: Rating scales 1=Very Low, 2=Low, 3=Moderate, 4=High, and 5=Very High.

Creating an appropriate structure, developing a sound plan and designing well-established systems of communication are the major of areas of preparation and readiness to implement a SIP successfully. Considering these facts, seventeen items associated with preparation and readiness of schools for SIP implement were administered to the respondents for rating on a five point scales (5 for Very high, and 1 for Very Low). Most of the items were focused on strategies, goals and objectives structure and communication mechanism for the implementation of SIP. As shown in table 4.3, teachers and leaders working at secondary school level were not satisfactorily agreed with all items. Overall results of respondents responses indicated 2.59 mean score (SD=1.02). Moreover, the maximum mean score 3.32 (SD=0.83) regarding item number four and the minimum mean score 2.23 (SD=1.09) for item number one showed insufficiency of preparation among secondary schools of the City for SIP implementation. Besides, the data of the Table indicated that, among seventeen items listed in the table, only five of them were rated above overall mean score (M=2.59). However, the remaining twelve items were rated below the calculated overall mean illustrated in the table. Among these the following items were rated the least mean score: item number one (the extent of preparation of the plan is participatory; M=2.23, SD=1.09); item number seventeen (The extent of resources required for the program are readily available; M=2.28, SD=0.87); item number eleven (The extent of continuous monitoring mechanisms are clearly defined; M=2.39, SD=0.84); item number thirteen (The extent of the plan addresses all the domains of SIP; M=2.41, SD=0.98); item number ten (The extent of evaluation mechanisms are well established; M=2.42, SD=1.01); and item number twelve (The extent of all organs of the school knows their role on SIP implementation; M=2.44, SD=0.98). The above statements indicated that, the preparation of the plan was not participatory; resources required for the program are not readily available; continuous monitoring mechanisms are not clearly defined; the contents of the plan did not addresses all the domains of SIP; evaluation mechanisms for the plan are not well established; and all organs of the school did not properly know their role on SIP implementation. In relation to this, the results of an interview administered with two officials from kabridahar town Education Office also showed insufficiency of preparation and lack of readiness among government secondary schools for SIP Implementation in the City. They said that, the plan was not prepared with the participation of all concerned bodies. Schools did not carry out self-evaluation to prepare the plan. Only school directors prepare and present for School Board’s approval at the beginning of every academic years. They further said that, the participation level of students and parents were not to the required level. Planning activities of SIP was a big burden left for the school principals. In the same way, response obtained from FGD indicates similar responses stated by the interviewees. These showed preparation and readiness of SIP implementation needs the effort and commitment of school teachers and leaders to conduct self-evaluation, and to identify the focus areas that the school should give emphasis. Similarly the schools have to prioritize the problem and allocate adequate budget for implementation. In general, seen from the opinion of teachers and leaders at educational office and secondary school level, who involved at school level; the preparation made by the schools for SIP Implementation seems not adequate. Particularly inadequacy of preparation was identified in areas like involvement of stakeholders on the preparation of the plan, developing appropriate monitoring and evaluation systems, allocating resources required for the plan, addressing all the domains of SIP in the plan, and having proper understanding on their roles in SIP implementation among all organs of the schools understudy. From all the above discussions it is possible to infer that involvement of stakeholders in formulating school strategic plan was very low. Thus, it is possible to say that the practices of planning SIP by participating key stakeholders were low in secondary schools that affect SIP implementation. So, without conducting self-evaluation and identifying specific problems areas of SIP and issues related to major domains of SIP, it is difficult to properly implement the plan and obtain efficient results expected from the program.

Implementation of SIP

 In this sub-section, respondents responses related to the implementation of SIP were presented in tables analyzed. The tables were organized for analysis in to four categories accordance to the domains of SIP: Learning and Teaching; Creating Favorable Learning Environment; School Leadership; and Community Participation. Finally, summary of SIP Implementation in Government Secondary Schools of the City was illustrated in table and graph. Learning and teaching domain is the major determinant of students‟ achievement that indicates what is going in classroom. Not much powerful and sustainable change happened in learning teaching process unless it happens in classrooms (Earl, 2003). This domain focuses on the actual interaction between teachers and students. The implementation of learning and teaching process were rated by the respondents as can be vivid from table 4.4.

Major Challenges of SIP Implementation

NB: Rating scales 1=Very Low, 2=Low, 3=Moderate, 4=High, and 5=Very High.