1. Page 1 of 20
The Conceptualisation of Quality Education in Zambia
Outline of the dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Education and International Development at the
Institute of Education, University of London.
Maurits W. Spoelder
2010
Abstract
This research paper attempts to generate insight and clarification into the conceptualisations of
quality education in Zambia. Justification comes from the idea that successful quality improvement
needs a shared vision among educational stakeholders. The rationale for a focus on the development
of a quality education system is twofold and based upon its influence on economic growth and
increased social justice. Zambia’s quality education level, based on cognitive test and examination
scores, is low in comparison to other African countries. The research study adopted a qualitative
methodology with a grounded theory approach. Data is collect from 17 national and international
stakeholders in education in April to June 2009. The research concludes that educational
stakeholders hold markedly different conceptualisations on quality education. The pedagogical
process of teaching and learning is generally ignored by the national stakeholders. It is argued that an
amelioration of economic approaches, human rights legislation and broader ideas of social justice is
possible. As an evaluate tool, the comprehensive multidimensional model of the Capability Approach
offers new potential to measure educational quality in the socio-economic and educational context
of Zambia. It should be acknowledged by all stakeholders that to achieve equity in education,
different groups, sometimes, have to be treated unequal. Although this belief runs counter to the
Government of the Republic of Zambia saying of “One Zambia, One Nation,” the current economical
and human resource situation does not allow the country to lift the whole education system at once.
1. Introduction
The debate about quality education in
international development has evolved over
the last two decades. The Education for All
(EFA) movement (UNESCO, 1990) and the
adoption of the Millennium Development Goal
(MDG) 2 on Universal Primary Education (UPE)
led to a focus on providing basic education for
all children. Yet, an expansion of the
education system does not necessarily mean
an increase in quality (UNESCO, 2004, p. 77).
The rationale for a focus on the development
of a quality education system is twofold and
based upon its influence on economic growth
and increased social justice. Recent studies
find that economic growth is not only
associated with the number of years of
schooling but more importantly with
educational quality and cognitive skill
development (Barro, 2001; Hanushek, 2005;
Hanushek, 2009; Hanushek and Wöβmann,
2007; Neri, 2001). The building of a quality
educational system is therefore a critical
challenge imperative on its own and should be
the number one development priority
(Verspoor, 2005). A low internal efficiency of
the education system consumes about 25% of
the scarce educational, financial and human

2. Page 2 of 20
resources allocated to primary education in
the Sub-Saharan African (SSA) region
(Dembélé and Oviawe, 2007).
Zambia is an example were enrolment rates in
primary education have increased
considerably since 2000. Unlike other SSA
countries the quality of education, based on
national and international cognitive test
scores, has not declined. This is a remarkable
achievement in itself, as there has been an
increase in pupil teacher, book, and classroom
ratios. Zambia’s quality level is however low in
comparison to other African countries (IOB,
2008; Mingat, 2005; Postlethwaite, 2004;
Verspoor, 2008b). Children who complete
primary schooling have not gained sufficient
rational reflection and basic competency skills
to live a flourishing life.
To develop a quality education system that
reduces poverty and improves the quality of
life by extending capabilities and empower
individuals, a broad consensus among the
national and international education
development community is essential. This
study develops insight and clarification into
the national and international
conceptualisations of quality education in
Zambia. Justification for the research comes
from the idea that successful quality
improvement has two elements. ‘The first is a
shared vision among educators in the country
on the process of teaching and learning, which
makes explicit the pedagogical assumptions
regarding how children learn, what level of
performance is expected and which
instructional strategies are effective under
which conditions’ (Fullan, 2000 in Verspoor
(2005, p.324)). This then creates the
groundwork for development which will guide
the “what” of a quality improvement
education program. The second is a strategy
of implementation of the reform program
which is of the essence for quality education
to occur. This research will focus on the first
point of creating a shared vision to move
towards the development of education reform
and improved quality EFA. Ownership and
efficiency of aid are important but can only be
achieved if there is harmonisation between all
stakeholders, clarification on the concept of
quality education and agreement on the way
forward.
2. Untangling the concept of
quality in education
Quality as an important aspect of education
has been much debated but less agreed on.
Quality education is clearly a good thing but
it’s also elusive, difficult to measure and
dependent on the perspective of a person in a
context. The idea that education is something
which is reliant on standardised examinations
and educational inputs is outdated. The input-
output model developed during the Coleman
(Coleman et al., 1966) and Plowden reports
(1967) has been replaced by an input-process-
output model which influences schooling in its
context all of which affects educational
outcomes. A critical understanding of
education quality must therefore be grounded
in an analysis of local realities and broader
historical, socio-economic, political, and
cultural contexts (Tikly and Barrett, 2007).
But what is it that defines quality in education
these days? Adams (1993) has attempted to
define quality by drawing distinctions
between efficiency, effectiveness, equity and
quality. He identifies multiple meanings of
quality education and attempts to measure
them. Also Stephens (Hawes and Stephens,
1990; Stephens, 1990; Stephens, 2003)
presented a four pillars approach to
educational quality: relevance, efficiency,
‘something special’ and inclusivity. Stephens
focuses his approach at the classroom level.
Both Hawes and Stephens (1990) argue that

3. Page 3 of 20
quality education should be relevant to
context, need, and humanity. Education
should also be efficient in setting standards,
meeting these standards and improving them.
Quality education should add something
special which goes beyond the usual
expectations of the school and quality
education should be inclusive to all,
irrespective of gender, ability, or wealth
(Stephens, 2003, p. 5). The four pillars of
Stephens (2003) are in line with those of
Adams (1993) and within the discussion on
educational quality and international
development it becomes increasingly clear
that if we are to improve educational quality
what is required is to reach beyond the focus
on inputs to address the key processes of
learning (Samoff, 2007b).
2.1 Traditions within quality education
and development
Within the quality discourse on education and
development there are fundamentally two
traditions that have developed since the
1960’s (Table 1). The traditions represent
wider approaches to educational development
and are related to major development
theories. Distinctions are also made between
those that are more attentive to wider social
relations, inequality, and the need to go
beyond education and those that emphasise
the connection between education and
economic growth (Unterhalter, 2008). These
traditions have grown up together and are to
an extent interdependent (Barrett et al.,
2006).
There is the ‘economic policy’ view of
education which uses quantitative measurable
inputs and outputs of learning. The common
measurement of educational output in the
‘economist’ view is student achievement on
basic cognitive tests as the 3 R’s of reading,
writing and arithmetic. Definitions of quality in
World Bank reports often appear to be closely
linked with learning outcomes (Das et al.,
2004; Fuller, 1986; Independent Evaluation
Group, 2006; Lockheed et al., 1991). Quality
education is further defined by the level of
input. Quality is said to be high when the
school has highly qualified teachers, small
class sizes, enough textbooks, motivated
teachers, classroom discipline and so on
(Mingat and Tan, 1986). The economist view is
strongly influenced by and closely related to
Human Capital Theory (HCT).
The other perspective is the ‘humanist
educationalist’ view on education. The
humanist tradition emphasises educational
processes and uses qualitative research
approaches to measure the quality level.
Judgements of quality are based on what
happens in schools and in the classroom
between the teacher and learner. It is
believed that context and culture strongly
influence the process of learning. Basic
cognitive skills and general knowledge are
considered important but schools are
furthermore seen as a place where learners
acquire attitudes and cultural values (Barrett
et al., 2006).
Quality
Paradigm
Research Focus Evaluative
focus
Learning
tradition
Development
theory
Economist School
effectiveness
School Input-Output Behaviourist Human Capital
Theory
Humanist School
Improvement
Classroom Process Humanist Human
Development/
Human Rights
Table 1: Overview of quality, learning, and development traditions

4. Page 4 of 20
The ‘humanist educationalist’ view is linked to
social human development and the capability
approach which has been pioneered by Sen
(1992; 1999) and Nussbaum (2000; 2006).
While different definitions of the two
traditions are used, distinctions between
these two groups are often referred to within
the international literature. Fuller and Clarke
(1994, p. 120) differentiate the two groups
naming them ‘policy mechanics’ and
‘classroom culturalists’. Riddell (2008, p. 13)
distinguishes the two groups calling them
‘economists’ and ‘educationalists’.
Each of these contrasting approaches is
associated with a large international
organisation in the field of education and
development (Barrett et al., 2006, p. 3). The
‘economist policy’ view dominates the
educational thinking of the World Bank and
IMF that have to calculate the rate of return
and justify their loans for educational
development. United Nations (UN) agencies
like UNICEF and UNESCO, and the majority of
the Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO’s)
take a more ‘humanist’ stand on education.
2.2 Factors influencing educational
quality in developing countries
The long history of research into factors
influencing educational quality, together with
the different conceptualisations by
economists and humanists on the concept of
quality education makes it difficult to present
a definitive list of factors that might work in a
developing context such as Zambia or
elsewhere. Riddell (2008, p. 20) points out
that there are no blueprints and that ‘lessons
from other countries are valuable when
considering different pathways in a particular
country, but without local interrogation of
particular contexts, it is not possible to either
accept or dismiss quality factors.’ The
differences in context within countries is
therefore of critical importance (Schubert,
2005), as inequalities between different
groups in the same country are often bigger
than between developing countries
themselves (UNESCO, 2008, pp. 123-125).
However, numerous reviews on school
effectiveness have been published with regard
to industrialised settings (Sammons, Hillman
and Mortimore, 1995; Scheerens, 1992;
Teddlie and Reynolds, 2000) and for
developing countries (Boissiere, 2004; Fuller
and Clarke, 1994; Hanushek, 1995; Heneveld,
1994; Lockheed and Levin, 1993). Results from
industrialised countries converge around the
importance of five characteristics: (I) strong
educational leadership; (II) emphasis on
acquiring basic skills; (III) an orderly and
secure environment; (IV) high expectations of
pupil attainment; (V) and frequent assessment
of pupil progress (UNESCO, 2004). It is
however important to note that the marginal
efficiency of different inputs is likely to be
greater in ‘developing’ countries than in
‘industrialised’ countries because of the
scarcity of resources (Riddell, 2008, p. 18).
The Association for the Development of
Education in Africa (ADEA) presented seven
pillars of quality improvement (Verspoor,
2005, pp. 323-343): (I) create the opportunity
to learn; (II) improve instructional practice;
(III) manage the challenge of equity; (IV)
increase school autonomy and flexibility; (V)
nurture community support; (VI) ensure a
realistic financial framework; (VII) and respond
to HIV/ AIDS and conflict situations. It is
argued that these seven pillars should be at
the heart of the national strategic framework
to improve education. These pillars are
however context specific and can only be
indicative, as every country needs to consider
their own financial resources and demands.

5. Page 5 of 20
Other reviews of factors influencing
educational quality and effectiveness in
developing countries have been prepared
(Boissiere, 2004; UNESCO, 2004). But as
Boissiere (2004, p. 27) argues in his review of
research ‘firm conclusions specified in great
detail across many countries are not really
feasible, since the research literature shows
how much policy interventions depend upon
context and history.’ I do therefore not find it
useful to go into further detail about factors
influencing quality and refer to Riddell
(Riddell, 2008), Yu (2007), and the EdQual
consortium (Barrett, 2009; Barrett et al.,
2007; Barrett et al., 2006; Tikly and Barrett,
2007).
However, a cautionary note has to be made
about the contemporary debate on pedagogy
(Alexander, 2008; Hardman et al., 2009; Leach
and Moon, 2008). The importance of the
teacher on learning is recognized by a broad
literature (Global Campaign For Education,
2006; McKenzie and Santiago, 2005; Schwille,
Dembélé and Schubert, 2007; UIS, 2006). It is
however argued by Alexander (2008) that the
generalised frameworks used by international
agencies for measuring quality are still not
focusing on the teaching learning process or
pedagogy at all. Instead monitoring of quality
is still highly influenced by an input and output
approach or the use of proxies for the learning
processes. A neglect of international
pedagogical research and a fundamental
confusion about the term quality, its
measurement, and indicators are problems
that we need to face to get to the heart of
improving the quality education situation.
2.3 Education and wider development
goals
Within the education and development
discourse there is a shift taking place from an
economic to a more humanist stand. This
development is well described by Johnson ed.
(2008) who links quality education to equality
and democracy. It is important as educators to
know that whatever view we hold, ‘by working
to make classrooms and schools ‘better’ in
terms of relevant, efficient, creative and
inclusive learning environments we
are.....contributing to the broader, social
efforts to improve the quality of life
(Stephens, 2003, p. 6).’ This brings us back to
the rationale for a good quality education
system for economic growth, as argued by the
economists, and to social justice, as outlined
by the humanists.
However, due to the international
development discussion on aid effectiveness
(OECD and DAC, 2005; 2008) there is an
increased understanding that a relevant
quality education system should contribute to
socio-economic development and wider
development goals such as equality, human
rights, controlling the HIV/AIDS pandemic,
social justice, and democracy. Education is
therefore part of a comprehensive poverty
reduction strategy outlined in Zambia’s Fifth
National Development Plan (FNDP) (GRZ,
2006). The link of a quality education system
to wider development goals has important
implications. Equality of opportunity is at the
heart of social justice theory and a democratic
society. Expansion of an education system
without the full participation of all the
members of society is seen as partial
development (Farrell, 2007; Welch, 2000).
Zambia and all the nations that adopted the
EFA Framework for Action, are therefore not
only confronted with the challenge of
achieving good quality UPE, but also with a
challenge to achieve improved equity, and
equal opportunity to learn (Verspoor, 2008b,
p. 18). The contemporary debate within
quality education and its relationship to
international development thus links
education quality to equity, to equal
opportunities to learn and even to a person’s

6. Page 6 of 20
‘ability to reach a valuable state of living’ (Sen,
1993, p. 30; Sen, 1999). Quality education
cannot be just for the few, it needs to be
quality Education for All.
2.4 Frameworks for quality education
Multiple frameworks on quality education in
developing contexts have been developed
over the years (Beeby, 1966; Hawes and
Stephens, 1990; Pigozzi, 2008; UNESCO, 2004;
Verspoor, 2005). However, a broad holistic
view on quality education development
embedded in a political, cultural and
economic context is, among others, taken up
by UNICEF and UNESCO. UNICEF’s quality
framework consists of five characteristics:
learners, environments, content, processes
and outcomes (UNICEF, 2000, p. 4). UNESCO
(2004) expanded UNICEFs definition of quality
education in its EFA Global Monitoring Report
(GMR) of 2005, which led to the quality
framework in Figure 1. The quality
frameworks of UNICEF and UNESCO are
unique as they are based on education as a
human right. A rights based approach has
important implications for both the content
and processes which may lead to quality
education. The learning content includes areas
such as peace education; improved quality of
life; a humanist response to the HIV/AIDS
pandemic; literacy; and teacher education
(Pigozzi, 2006).
3.0 Quality Education in
Zambia
Zambia was hit hard by the world economic
crisis of the 1970s. The government was
forced to cut the education budget and
consequently the sector became underfunded
(MoE, 2007a; White and Dijkstra, 2003, p.
426). In 2000, the Government spent 2% of its
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on education.
Since then education expenditure as a
Figure 1: UNESCO framework to understand educational quality
Source: UNESCO (2004, p. 36)

7. Page 7 of 20
percentage of GDP has grown steadily to 3.6%
in 2006 (IOB, 2008; MoE, 2007b). Around 2%
of GDP is going to the primary school level
(UNESCO, 2008). Notwithstanding this effort,
the funding level is still lower than three
comparative countries (Kenya, Malawi and
Uganda) where the educational expenditure is
4% to 5.5% of GDP. Zambia devotes 15% of its
domestic discretionary budget to education
(GRZ, 2007; UNESCO, 2008). As a result of
neglect, the education system came to a
standstill. Zambia’s HIV/AIDS crisis
furthermore undermined development of the
country and its educational system resulting in
teacher absenteeism and attrition and causing
a dramatic increase in orphans and vulnerable
children (OVC) (Grassly et al., 2003; Ramos,
2007; Robson and Sylvester, 2007; Visser-
Valfrey et al., 2008).
As a result of long term
underinvestment total enrolment between
1990 and 2000 hardly grew and lagged behind
the population growth (IOB, 2008). Still, the
primary net enrolment rate in 1999 was 68%
and therefore above SSA average (UNESCO,
2008). On the quality level, the literacy rate of
the population deteriorated. In 2001, it is
estimated that 75% of the children who left
primary school were illiterate (World Bank,
2001, p. 70). International comparisons of
learning achievement with other SSA
countries show that Zambia scores relatively
low. The SACMEQ I and II studies illustrate
that Zambia’s literacy scores are declining and
that they are doing poorly in comparison to
other SSA countries (Postlethwaite, 2004, p.
8). Another study by Verspoor (2008b) shows
that Zambia scores below the average of other
African countries (Table 2).
Table 2: Percentage of correct answers on math and language tests of fourth graders
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Nigeria
Zanzibar
Gambia
Niger
Zambia
Côte d'Ivoire
Togo
Senegal
Burkina Faso
Namibia
South Africa
Mali
Malawi
Botswana
Cameroon
Zimbabwe
Madagascar
Uganda
Mauritius
Morocco
Kenya
Tunisia
MLA-Equivalent Test Scores (% correct)
Source: Verspoor (2008b, p. 16)

8. Page 8 of 20
Verspoor used Mingat’s (2005) calculations of
data from UNESCO’s Monitoring Learning
Achievement (MLA) project, and
supplemented this with data from the
CONFEMEN-PASEC, TIMMS, and SACMEQ
assessments. Results show an average of
51.6% which indicates that pupils in Africa
acquire only half of the target content
(Mingat, 2005, p. 112). Zambia’s scores are
way below the average with 43.3%. Mingat
further points out that the variation between
countries from 40% to 70% is high. These
examples draw attention to the sheer scale
and complexity of the quality education
challenge. Millions of children attend primary
school, many for several years, but often
without mastering basic skills (Figure 2)
(UNESCO, 2008, p. 109).
Still, there are positive points to mention. The
introduction of the SWAP created the financial
preconditions for large scale investments in
basic education that led to the abolition of
primary school fees in 2002 (Donge van, 2007;
IOB, 2008). In 2000, there were approximately
5,300 basic schools in Zambia.
In 2006 this number had increased to more
than 8,000 (with the largest growth coming
from community schools). The total number of
classrooms increased from 25,000 to 35,000.
The MoE distributed 1.4 million books. The
total number of teachers increased by 35%,
from 37,000 in 2000 to 57,000 in 2007 (IOB,
2008, p. 80). In addition, gender parity in
primary education was achieved with a GDI
(F/M) of 1.03 in 2006 (IOB, 2008; UNESCO,
2008, p. 99), drop-out rates have been seen to
decline to around 2.3%, and completion rates
for grade 7 have gone up to 88% in 2007
(UNESCO and UIS, 2009). It should be noted
however that the primary school exam in
grade 7 is a non fail exam, and that the
government introduced free examinations at
the grade 7 level as a pro poor policy
intervention.
The investments did not only contribute to
increased amounts of teachers, textbooks,
and classrooms. They also induced new
enrolments. A midterm review of the Ministry
of Education Sector Plan (MoESP), an
investment programme from 2003-2007,
revealed that investments did not meet its
Figure 2: The quality challenge in Zambia: Enrolment, completion, and learning.
100
94
88
30
100
68 67
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Cohort NER Completion Learning
Primary 2007
Primary 1999
Source: UNESCO and UIS (2009), UNESCO (2008), IOB (2008)

9. Page 9 of 20
infrastructure targets and that the sector
could not keep pace with the exponential
growth of the system (Copenhagen
Development Consulting, 2007).
From the beginning of the Basic Education
Sub-Sector Investment Programme (BESSIP) in
1999 up to end of the MoESP in 2007 total
enrolment in primary education increased by
1 million pupils from 1.6 to 2.7 million (IOB,
2008; UNESCO, 2008). The Pupil Teacher Ratio
(PTR) increased slightly from 47:1 in 1999 to
49:1 in 2007 for primary level and from 23:1 in
1999 to 32:1 in 2006 on secondary level
(UNESCO, 2008; UNESCO and UIS, 2009;
Verspoor, 2008a). By combining primary and
junior secondary you get a PTR of 44:1 on the
basic education level. The pupil classroom
ratio is 79:1 (IOB, 2008, p. 74). It should be
clear that the PTR, pupil classroom ratio, and
pupil teacher contact time affect the quality
and learning outcomes of the pupils.
Therefore IOB (2008) concludes that these
investment policies undermined its own
success because more teachers and more
classrooms attract new entrants.
But what effect did the policy interventions of
BESSIP and MoESP have on the quality of
education? A recent study by the Policy and
Operations Evaluation Department (IOB, 2008)
of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs
revealed that the quality of education is still
low. IOB analysed two databases to measure
the impact on learning achievement: the
during BESSIP developed bi-annual National
Assessment Surveys (NAS) (1999, 2001 and
2003) of grade 5 school children in English and
mathematics and the Examination Scores of
grade 7 pupils (2001, 2003, 2005 and 2006).
The analyses were linked to the Education
Management Information System (EMIS)
database of the MoE, the Demographic and
Health Survey (DHS) of 2003 and the
Population and Housing Census of 2000 to
measure for regional background
characteristics of learners, households,
schools and teachers. The results of the IOB
research show that approximately 70% of the
grade 5 pupils do not attain the minimum
level of English and that only 6% actually
achieve the desirable level. With a minimum
level of 40% and desirable level of 70%
(Examinations Council of Zambia, 2006) this
means that 70% of the grade 5 pupils do not
master more than 40% of the target content.
For math, test results from the NAS are
improving, but examination results show an
opposite trend. Annual results on national
level are stable but fluctuations go up to 30-
40% on the provincial level. This raises
questions about the available data used and
suggests that learning achievements are highly
unstable. The weaknesses of the education
system are related to severe underfunding, a
lack of qualified and motivated teachers and
head teachers and a lack of effective
management capacity at the school and
district levels (IOB, 2008). Research by Takei
(2007) further shows a significant teacher
absence rate of 31.1% on average in the
whole of Zambia’s educational system.
Especially in rural, but also urban areas, ‘in-
school’ absenteeism is considered a major
problem.
Despite these challenges there are positive
points. Grade 5 test scores and grade 7
examination scores have not decreased. Test
results for English have remained stable and
results for mathematics have slightly
improved. There are almost no gender
differences. The fact that test and
examination results have not declined is a
remarkable achievement considering the
increase in pupil teacher, pupil classroom and
pupil book ratios since BESSIP in 2000 (IOB,
2008). It also leads to the conclusion that
without improved access, average
achievement would have been better. A

10. Page 10 of 20
classical example of ‘vanishing benefits’
(Ravallion, 2001). This result also contradicts
some of the research on quality education,
whereby it is said that there is a direct trade-
off between improved access and the quality
of education (White, 2004).
The current FNDP seeks a more dynamic
relationship with its cooperating partners. It
looks at general budget support for the sector
to increase national economic growth and
reduce poverty through a SWAp. To achieve
this, a relative shift from the expansion of the
education system towards increasing the
quality of education seems warranted.
Investments in the quality of teacher
education, school management and the
inspectorate are necessary to improve the
effectiveness of the recruitment of teachers
and dissemination of textbooks (IOB, 2008, p.
148). It should be noted however that the
answer does not lie in designing better
reforms. ‘No amount of sophistication in
strategizing for particular policies will ever
work. It is simply unrealistic to expect that
introducing reforms....in a situation which is
basically not organised to engage in
change...will do anything but give reform a
bad name (Fullan, 1993, p. 3).’
4.0 Methodology, approach and
method
The methodology for the research arrives
from the research question: ‘What
conceptualisation of quality education do
national and international educational
stakeholders in Zambia hold? A qualitative
research approach is appropriate as the
research aims to get an in-depth
understanding of the thoughts and
approaches towards quality educational
development. Quality is a dynamic concept.
There are different factors that influence
quality education. This research is therefore
characterised by an exploratory approach to
generate a theoretical vision on quality
education within the Zambian context. As
quality education has to be relevant to the
local needs of the learner it would be
inappropriate to test a certain quality model,
framework, or opinion. It would as well be
unsuitable to test a certain list of factors,
based on school effectiveness or school
improvement studies, which influence quality.
Neither would it be correct to presume or test
a certain quality thought e.g. ‘economist’ or
‘humanist’. As Verspoor (2005, p. 324) talks
about his seven pillars of policy action he
agrees that ‘the relative priority of quality
elements will vary, the combinations will be
different and each country will have to invent
key parts of its own “wheel”.’
Successful quality improvement has two
elements (Fullan, 2000). ‘The first is a shared
vision among educators in the country on the
process of teaching and learning, which makes
explicit the pedagogical assumptions
regarding how children learn, what level of
performance is expected and which
instructional strategies are effective under
which conditions.’ This then creates the
groundwork for the development of a “culture
of quality,” that will guide the “what” of a
quality improvement program. The second is a
strategy of implementation of the reform
program which is of the essence for learning
to occur. This research will focus on the first
point of creating a shared vision to move
towards a culture of quality to create
educational reform and improved learning for
all.
4.1 Grounded theory
The research takes a grounded theory
approach which originated with the work of
Glaser and Strauss (1967). The notion of
grounded theory has been adapted over time

11. Page 11 of 20
to selective purposes predominantly within
small-scale research projects with an
exploratory approach, focused on particular
settings within the social sciences
(Denscombe, 2007, p. 88). The grounded
theory approach emphasises the importance
of empirical fieldwork and data analyses, and
links its explanations to what happens in
practical situations in the real world. It is a
discovery led approach that develops theory
from empirical data. ‘Its basic principle is that
all concepts and hypotheses.....should be
generated in research, rather than produced
prior to, research’ (Gibson and Brown, 2009,
p. 27). The grounded theory approach
therefore contrasts with testing theories and
certain hypothesis. In its classical form the
grounded theory takes an open approach
without any preconceptions of existing
theories. However, an open mind is not a
blank mind. The researcher is ‘informed about
an area, even quite aware of existing theories’
but ‘it avoids using previous theories and
concepts to make sense of the data and thus
is open to discovering new factors of
relevance’ (Denscombe, 2007, p. 91) relevant
to a formulation of the concept of quality
education. This brings us to the constructivist
approach to grounded theory that rejects an
objective reality. It is argued that there is no
objectivity or single reality (Charmaz, 2000;
Guba and Lincoln, 1989). ‘The world consists
of multiple individual realities influenced by its
context (Mills, Bonner and Francis, 2006, p.
2).’
The grounded theory approach is therefore
characterised by the idea of multiple theories.
The first approach to theoretical development
is the substantive theory approach. It is closely
linked to the local empirical situation that
generalizes its outcomes to one specific
substantive area (Glaser and Strauss, 1967, p.
79) e.g. schools, ministry, NGO’s, or
cooperating partners. The other formal theory
is more conceptual, with more general
coverage and application to circumstances
beyond the substantive particular group or
area. Substantive theory is closely linked to
practice; interaction and specific kinds of
settings... while formal theory... operates at a
higher level of generality, such as systems
theory, agency theory, and contingency theory
(Locke, 2001, p. 35). A substantive theory is
therefore a stepping stone for a formal theory,
while a formal theory is based on several
substantive ones (Glaser and Strauss, 1967).
Groups of stakeholders are seen as
substantive groups. Codes, categories and
properties are developed from the substantive
groups to create structure in the data.
‘Comparisons of each category for diverse
substantive groups quickly leads to the
development of properties and... hypothesis
(Glaser and Strauss, 1967, p. 83).’ The
stakeholders have certain thoughts on
education that drives their prioritisation of
educational interventions. These different
thoughts help create codes, categories, and
properties. Ideas on factors influencing
quality, or the process on teaching and
learning between the substantive groups
create a well grounded theory on quality. The
combined thoughts create a formal theory on
the concept of quality education in Zambia.
4.2 Interview Method
Although there is no particular method of data
collection unique for the grounded theory
approach, certain methods lend themselves
better than others. ‘Methods that allow the
collection of data in the ‘raw’ state – not duly
shaped by prior concepts or theories’
(Denscombe, 2007, p. 93) are preferred. The
point is to generate a ‘loose’ theory by
bringing ideas together and accommodate
them, not to test them. Therefore, there is a
preference for unstructured interviews rather
than structured ones. The interview method
has the advantage of allowing more diversity

12. Page 12 of 20
in responses as well as the capacity to adapt
to new developments or issues during the
research process itself (Bell, 2005). The
interview method is best exploited when
applied to the exploration of complex
phenomena by getting insight into people’s
opinions and experiences (Denscombe, 2007,
p. 174) like the quality education concept.
Several national and international educational
stakeholders are selected due to their
influence in developing a quality education
system in Zambia. 17 interviews are carried
out on a one-to-one basis to gather in-depth
information. An interview takes between
thirty and fifty-five minutes. The grounded
theory approach is less concerned about the
sample being an exact representation of the
total population e.g. quality educational
stakeholders, due to the use of theoretical
sampling. The different substantive theories
of the respondents on the concept of quality
education should allow a comparison. ‘The
sample is therefore chosen to allow
comparisons and contrasts with previous
sites.... and verify the developing theory as the
research goes on. This means that, unlike
random sampling, theoretical sampling is a
form of non probability sampling in which the
new sites are consciously selected... because
of their particular characteristics (Denscombe,
2007, p. 95).’
5. Research Findings
Educational stakeholders hold different
conceptualisations on quality. On a national
level, the ministry tends to have an input
based economic approach to quality
concerned with providing basic requirements
as school infrastructure, teachers, and
teaching and learning materials. Schools have
a mixed input-output conceptualisation.
NGO’s take an overall output based approach
to quality education by looking at learning
outcomes of cognitive examination tests. The
process of teaching and learning is generally
ignored by the national stakeholders. The key
learning areas prioritised are reading, life and
technical skills.
On the international level quality education is
directly linked to academic achievement.
Quality education goes beyond, but includes,
examination and memorisation of knowledge.
Education should be measured by how
effectively the learner is able to use
information for socio-economic purposes. A
true measurement of quality education should
therefore be done in society and in the
classroom as the purpose of schooling is
future oriented. INGO’s work on the
boundaries of the education system and the
quality debate. Through pilot projects INGO’s
are important agents of change that help
create critical spaces for discussion with the
other stakeholders. Cooperating partners
acknowledge the importance of a quality
educational system but, due to the changing
environment of donor support outlined in the
Paris Declaration, tend to support and move
forward in partnership with the Ministry
educational agenda and wider PRSP. To
improve the quality education situation,
teachers, educational materials, supervision
and management are prioritised to improve
the basics of reading, writing, and numeracy.
From a national point of view, the education
sector is mainly focused on access and
expansion of the system through school
building and teacher training. On the
international level, a quality education system
is acknowledged as the main target objective
for economic growth and increased social
justice. To achieve a quality education system,
international partners prioritise teachers,
supervision and school management. It is
however felt by the majority of the

13. Page 13 of 20
educational stakeholders that a shift in focus
from access to quality educational
development is taking place although a clear
plan has not been proposed nor adopted.
There is strong harmonisation between and
within the national and international
stakeholders. There are shared beliefs on the
vision and mission of the FNDP educational
sector plan although there can be
disagreement on the methods used to
improve quality. A concern is that the
government sees it’s donors as their main
partners for development. Civil society, the
academic community, and private businesses
are left out of the educational discourse and
action although they are essential for long
term sustainable socio-economic
development.
The future development of a quality education
system is seen as positive by all stakeholders.
However, there are many context specific
barriers that prevent the education system to
reach its desirable quality level. Poverty,
funding, and capacity are the three main
barriers identified. Capacity is possibly the
biggest barrier for improved quality as any
intervention needs qualified human resource
for sustained development. If capacity is high,
interventions will be more efficient and
effective.
6.0 Discussion
The educational conceptualisation of quality
development has implications for policy intent
and pedagogic practice. Educational thinking
in Zambia is dominated by the economic value
of education based on the HCT. The input-
output model used within the HCT neglects
the contextual approach to quality education
and certain ideas of social justice and human
rights legislation as described in paragraph 2.
The economic value of education is certainly
important. It is however not an end in itself. It
is rather a means to an end to live a life that
one has reason to value. Whatever that may
be is personal. Education however, has an
important role in ensuring conditions and
providing opportunities to live a just life.
Providing the opportunity to enter ways of life
and not reproduce sociological forms in
society, requires the state to educate children
in their analytical skills of critical/rational
reflection and comparison usually associated
with autonomy (Brighouse, 2006, p. 19). Yet,
Zambia’s education system is not geared
towards critical thinking or rational reflection.
It is rather a colonial inherited system which is
focused on examination and mastering a
predefined set of facts, outlined in a
curriculum. Research findings show that
children are not able to apply the skills in
society which creates a mismatch between
what is taught and developed in schools and
what is needed in the society for socio-
economic development. Schools and
educational institutions should be oriented
towards the need of the pupils and their
community by giving them the opportunity to
take control of their own learning experience
whereby they have access to resources,
control over work life, and have the ability to
adjust, question, and critically analyse
economic, social, and technological situations
within their own rural, urban, Zambian and or
global contexts. This means that the GRZ,
doubtless in cooperation with its partners,
should develop and support a range of
programs that fits the needs of different
communities and groups of learners. This
requires a shift in thinking from “getting
learners into school or class’ to ‘getting
education to reach the learners”(Verspoor,
2008b, p. 35).
Therefore, I would argue that the current
conceptualisation of the national stakeholders

14. Page 14 of 20
needs to be broadened. An amelioration of
the economic approach, human rights
legislation and broader ideas of social justice is
possible. The capabilities of the learner and
her context should be included in the process
of evaluating educational progress and in
making judgements about educational quality.
Cognitive achievements and years of schooling
are incomplete proxies for the measurement
of quality education (UNESCO, 2004, p. 46).
As an evaluative tool, the comprehensive
multidimensional model of the Capability
Approach (CA) offers new potential to help
conceptualise and measure quality education.
“The CA is a broad normative framework for
the evaluation and assessment of individual
well-being and social arrangements, the
design of politics, and proposals about social
change in society” (Robeyns, 2005, p. 94).
Unlike other quality education measurements,
the CA can take account of the contextual
constraints to a quality education system from
a personal, social, and environmental level.
The CA therefore extends the evaluation of
education systems and reforms and does not
only look at inputs, processes or outcomes of
learning. Capacity within the educational
system is a barrier to achieve quality
education in Zambia. For example, if two
Zambian girls fail a grade 9 Mathematics test,
they both ‘function’ the same but their
capabilities could be different. The CA requires
that besides the functioning’s we evaluate and
take account of the opportunities or freedom
that the two pupils had to pass the
Mathematics test. It could be that one of the
pupils received teaching from a well prepared
teacher, in a high class urban area, who is
motivated by her parents. The other pupil
could be taught by an often absent, low
motivated, and overworked teacher with low
capacity in a rural area with little financial and
parental support structures.
The CA offers a method to evaluate
educational (dis)advantage, marginalisation
and opportunities to be free. The functioning
of the two Zambian girls is the same, they
both failed the test, but they have different
freedoms to succeed due to the capacity and
attendance of their teacher, economic
environment, and educational support of their
parents. Hence, the multiple determinants
used by the CA go further than schooling
outcomes or functioning’s promoted like
reading, writing, technical and social life skills.
It is argued that quality should include the
capabilities that make these functioning’s
achievable like having been taught to read,
having access to school books, being allowed
to talk freely in a society, and develop
conditions to have freedom of choice and
opportunities. The distinction between
capabilities and functioning is very useful and
important in education as the measurement
of functioning’s, as done by the NAS and
international cognitive tests, can give too little
information on what is actually preventing
children to live a life they have reason to value
(Walker and Unterhalter, 2007).
Secondly, from a national point of view, the
education sector is focused on access and
expansion of the system through school
building and teacher training. It is
acknowledged by the respondents that quality
is important but the focus goes mainly to
achieve MDG 2 of UPE. This brings us to the
politics of quality reform. Unlike access
reforms, quality reforms are unpopular with
politicians and other educational
stakeholders, as they rarely produce tangible
results quickly (Grindle, 2004). Quality
education reforms regularly create job losses
and often they require painful change for
construction workers and material
manufacturers. They additionally require
decentralisation and loss of control over
budgets, people, and decisions for the centre.

15. Page 15 of 20
In addition, it takes time before quality
reforms have an impact on socio-economic
development. Politics are influential on the
success and development of a quality
education system and they therefore
contribute to the low focus and prioritisation
of the national stakeholders towards quality
education reform policies.
As we have seen from chapter 3, education is
part and parcel of a wider poverty reduction
strategy (PRSP) (GRZ, 2006). Zambia as a
landlocked country with low economic
growth, a low tax base, the adoption of a neo-
liberal economy based on a single export
commodity are severely constraining
economic growth (Collier, 2008) and therefore
highly dependent on foreign assistance.
Strong harmonisation between the
educational stakeholders is a crucial to reduce
poverty and increase funding as two main
barriers influencing the quality education
situation. A major challenge for governments
is to create capacity and ‘form partnerships
with NGO’s and communities to respond to
local demand, take account of the context and
cope with the economic constraints while at
the same time deliver an educational service
that is of equivalent quality and allows
students to pursue their education if they so
whish’ (Verspoor, 2008b, p. 37).
The argument made by Samoff et al. (Samoff,
Sebatane and Dembélé, 2001) to focus down
on specific institutions and schools is
important. Currently Zambia does not have
the financial or human capacity to improve its
quality education system overnight. Targeting
of specific educational institutions to find out
what works and what not in a specific context
is the start of educational reform and the
development of sustainable collective
‘learning organisations’ (Senge, 2006). Then,
as it becomes clearer what has worked and
what has not, expanding the pilot to other
settings is necessary for other people to
benefit. It should be acknowledged by the GRZ
that to achieve equity groups sometimes have
to be treated unequal (Gardner, 1961;
Oxenham, 2005; Samoff, 2007a). Although this
runs counter to the GRZ believe of “One
Zambia, One Nation,” the current economical
situation does not allow the country to lift the
whole education system at once.
Only by recognising diversity, creating a
relevant curriculum, training competent
teachers and nurturing community support for
more equal opportunities to learning will
deliver social change and economic growth. Of
course learning is influenced by classroom,
school, community and other factors as
argued in paragraph 2. The question is not on
what to do, but what to do first. Interventions
should therefore be prioritised on the value
towards the child’s learning process which in
itself should be relevant to local needs, socio-
economic prosperity and a sustained learning
environment.

16. Page 16 of 20
References
Adams, D. (1993), Defining Educational Quality. Arlington, VA: Institute for International Research.
Alexander, R. (2008), Education For All, The Quality Imperative and The Problem of Pedagogy.
London: CREATE Pathways to Acces Research Monograph no. 20.
Barrett, A. M. (2009), The Education Millennium Development Goal Beyond 2015: Prospects for
Quality and Learners. Bristol: EdQual.
Barrett, A. M., Ali, S., Clegg, J., Hinostroza, J. E., Lowe, J., Nikel, J., Novelli, M., Oduro, G., Pillay, M.
and Tikly, L. (2007), Initiatives to Improve the Quality of Teaching and Learning: A Review of
recent Literature. Background Paper for Global monitoring Report 2008. Bristol: EdQual.
Barrett, A. M., Chawla-Duggan, R., Lowe, J., Nikel, J. and Ukpo, E. (2006), Review of the ‘international’
literature on the concept of quality in education. Bristol: EdQual.
Barro, R. J. (2001), 'Human Capital and Growth'. American Economic Review, 91 (2), 12-17.
Beeby, C. E. (1966), The Quality of Education in Developing Countries. London and Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Bell, J. (2005), Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time Researchers in Education, Health
and Social Science. (4 ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press.
Boissiere, M. (2004), Determinants of Primary Education Outcomes in Developing Countries,
Background Paper for the Evaluation of the World Bank’s Support to Primary Education.
Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Brighouse, H. (2006), On Education. London and New York: Routledge.
Charmaz, K. (2000), 'Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods'. In N. K. Denzin and Y.
E. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of qualitative research (2 ed., pp. 509-535). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, R. and York, R. (1966),
Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Collier, P. (2008), The Bottom Billion. Why the poorest countries are failing and What Can Be Done
About It. New York: Oxford University Press.
Copenhagen Development Consulting. (2007), Review of the Ministry of Education Sector Plan
Zambia. Lusaka: Copenhagen Development Consulting.
Das, J., Dercon, S., Habyarimana, J. P. and Krishnan, P. (2004), When Can School Inputs Improve Test
Scores? Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Dembélé, M. and Oviawe, J. (2007), 'Introduction: quality education in Africa–international
commitments, local challenges and responses'. International Review of Education, 53 (5),
473-483.
Denscombe, M. (2007), The good research guide: for small-scale social research projects. (3 ed.).
Berkshire: Open University Press.
Donge van, J. K. (2007), 'Flexible SWAps for Strategic Policy-making: Reflections on the Zambian
Experience'. Development Policy Review, 25 (4), 473-494.
Examinations Council of Zambia. (2006), Zambia's National Assessment Survey Report - 2006.
Learning achievement at the middle basic level. Lusaka: Ministry of Education.
Farrell, J. P. (2007), 'Equality of Education'. In R. F. Arnove and C. A. Torres (eds), Comparative
Education: The dialectic of the global and the local (3 ed., pp. 129-150). Lanham: Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers.
Fullan, M. (1993), Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Routledge.
Fullan, M. (2000), 'The Return of Large-Scale Reform'. Journal of Educational Change, 1 (1), 5-27.
Fuller, B. (1986), Raising School Quality in Developing Countries: What Investments Boost Learning?
Washington D.C.: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ World Bank.
Fuller, B. and Clarke, P. (1994), 'Raising school effects while ignoring culture? Local conditions and
the influence of classroom tools, rules, and pedagogy'. Review of educational research, 64
(1), 119-157.

17. Page 17 of 20
Gardner, J. (1961), Excellence: can we be excellent and equal too? New York: Harper and Row.
Gibson, W. J. and Brown, A. (2009), Working with Qualitative Data. London: SAGE publications.
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967), The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative
research. Chicago: Aldine.
Global Campaign For Education. (2006), Teachers For All: what governments and donors should do.
Johannesburg: Global Campaign For Education.
Grassly, N. C., Desai, K., Pegurri, E., Sikazwe, A., Malambo, I., Siamatowe, C. and Bundy, D. (2003),
'The Economic Impact of HIV/AIDS on the Education Sector in Zambia'. AIDS, 17 (7), 1039-
1044.
Grindle, M. S. (2004), Despite the odds: the contentious politics of education reform. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
GRZ. (2006), Fifth National Development Plan 2006-2010. Broad based wealth and job creation
through citizenry participation and technological advancement. Lusaka: Government of the
Republic of Zambia (GRZ).
GRZ. (2007), 2008-2010 Medium Term Expenditure Framework and the 2008 Budget. Lusaka:
Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ)/ Ministry of Finance and National Planning.
Guba, E. G. and Lincoln, Y. S. (1989), Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage.
Hanushek, E. A. (1995), 'Interpreting recent research on schooling in developing countries'. The
World Bank Research Observer, 10 (2), 227-246.
Hanushek, E. A. (2005), Economic outcomes and school quality. Paris: UNESCO IIEP/ International
Academy of Education.
Hanushek, E. A. (2009), 'The Economic Value of Education and Cognitive Skills'. In G. Sykes, B.
Schneider and D. N. Plank (eds), Handbook on Education Policy Research (pp. 39-56). New
York: Routledge.
Hanushek, E. A. and Wöβmann, L. (2007), The Role of Education Quality in Economic Growth.
Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Hardman, F., Abd-Kadir, J., Agg, C., Migwi, J., Ndambuku, J. and Smith, F. (2009), 'Changing
pedagogical practice in Kenyan primary schools: the impact of school-based training'.
Comparative Education, 45 (1), 65-86.
Hawes, H. and Stephens, D. (1990), Questions of Quality: primary education and development.
London: Longman.
Heneveld, W. (1994), Educational Quality: Defining What's Important. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Independent Evaluation Group. (2006), From Schooling Access to Learning Outcomes an Unfinished
Agenda: An Evaluation of World Bank Support to Primary Education. Washington D.C.: World
Bank.
IOB. (2008), Primary Education in Zambia: IOB Impact Evaluation no. 312. The Hague: Netherlands
Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Policy and Operations Evaluation Department (IOB).
Johnson, D. (ed.) (2008), The Changing Landscape of Education in Africa. Quality, equality and
democracy. Oxford: Symposium Books.
Leach, J. and Moon, B. (2008), The power of pedagogy. London: Sage.
Locke, K. (2001), Grounded theory in management research. London: Sage.
Lockheed, M. E. and Levin, H. M. (1993), 'Creating effective schools'. In M. E. Lockheed and H. M.
Levin (eds), Effective schools in developing countries (pp. 1-19). London: Falmer Press/ World
Bank.
Lockheed, M. E., Verspoor, A. M., Bloch, D., Englebert, P., Fuller, B., King, E., Middleton, J., Paqueo,
V., Rood, A., Romain, R. and Welmond, M. (1991), Improving Primary Education in
Developing Countries. Washington D.C.: Oxford University Press for the World Bank.
McKenzie, P. and Santiago, P. (2005), Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing And Retaining Effective
Teachers. Paris: OECD.
Mills, J., Bonner, A. and Francis, K. (2006), 'The development of constructivist grounded theory'.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5 (1), 1-10.

18. Page 18 of 20
Mingat, A. (2005), 'Options for a cost-effective allocation of resources'. In A. M. Verspoor (ed.), The
Challenge of Learning: Improving the Quality of Basic Education in Sub-Saharan Africa (pp.
107-137). Paris: ADEA.
Mingat, A. and Tan, J. P. (1986), On the Quantity Quality Trade-Off in Education in Developing
Countries, International Conference on Economics of Education: Tackling the New Policy
Issues, June 23-25. Dijon, France: Institut de Recherche Sur L'Économie de L'Éducation.
MoE. (2007a), National Annual Work Plan and Budget. Lusaka: Ministry of Education (MoE).
MoE. (2007b), National Implementation Framework 2008-2010. Lusaka: Ministry of Education (MoE)/
Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ).
Neri, F. (2001), Schooling Quality and Economic Growth: Economics Working Papers 01-05:
Department of Economics, Faculty of Commerce, University of Wollongong.
Nussbaum, M. (2000), Women and human development: the capabilities approach. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Nussbaum, M. (2006), 'Education and Democratic Citizenship: Capabilities and Quality Education'.
Journal of Human Development, 7 (3), 385-395.
OECD and DAC. (2005), Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. Ownership, Harmonisation, Alignment,
Results and Mutual Accountability. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development, Development Co-operation Directorate, Development Assistance Committee,
28 February - 2 March.
OECD and DAC. (2008), Aid Effectiveness. A Progress Report on Implementing the Paris Declaration.
3rd High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness. Accra: Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development, Development Assistance Committee, 2-4 September.
Oxenham, J. (2005), 'What is the problem of equity in quality?'. In A. Verspoor (ed.), The Challenge of
Learning: Improving the Quality of Basic Education in Sub-Saharan Arica (pp. 69-86). Paris:
ADEA.
Pigozzi, M. J. (2006), 'What is the Quality of Education? (A UNESCO perspective)'. In K. N. Ross and I.
J. Genevois (eds), Cross National Studies of the Quality of Education: planning their design
and managing their impact. (pp. 37-50). Paris: UNESCO/ IIEP.
Pigozzi, M. J. (2008), Towards an Index of Quality Education. Paper presented at the International
Working Group on Education, 10-11 June.
Plowden Report - Central Advisory Council For Education (England). (1967), Children and their
Primary Education Volume 1&2. London: HMSO.
Postlethwaite, T. N. (2004), What do international assessment studies tell us about the quality of
school systems? Background paper prepared for the Education for All Global Monitoring
Report 2005 - The Quality Imperative. Paris: UNESCO.
Ramos, L. (2007), Analysing the response of a teacher training institution to HIV and AIDS: a case
study from Zambia. Breda: UNESCO.
Ravallion, M. (2001), 'The Mystery of the Vanishing Benefits: An Introduction to Impact Evaluation'.
The World Bank Economic Review, 15 (1), 115-140.
Riddell, A. (2008), Factors Influencing Educational Quality and Effectiveness in Developing Countries:
A Review of Research. Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft Fur Technische Zusammenarbeit
(GTZ).
Robeyns, I. (2005), 'The capability approach: a theoretical survey'. Journal of Human Development, 6
(1), 93-117.
Robson, S. and Sylvester, K. B. (2007), 'Orphaned and vulnerable children in Zambia: The impact of
the HIV/AIDS epidemic on basic education for children at risk'. Educational Research, 49 (3),
14.
Sammons, P., Hillman, J. and Mortimore, P. (1995), Key characteristics of effective schools: a review
of school effectiveness research. London: Institute of Education, University of London.
Samoff, J. (2007a), 'Education for All in Africa: Still a Distant Dream'. In R. F. Arnove and C. A. Torres
(eds), Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local (pp. 357-388).
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

19. Page 19 of 20
Samoff, J. (2007b), 'Education quality: the disabilities of aid'. International Review of Education, 53
(5), 485-507.
Samoff, J., Sebatane, E. M. and Dembélé, M. (2001), Scaling up by focusing down: Creating space to
expand education reform, Biennial Meeting of the Association for the Development of
Education in Africa, 7-11 October 2001. Arusha: ADEA.
Scheerens, J. (1992), Effective schooling: Research, theory and practice. London: Cassell.
Schubert, J. (2005), 'The reality of quality improvement: Moving toward clarity'. In A. Verspoor (ed.),
The Challenge of Learning: Improving the Quality of Basic Education in Sub-Saharan Africa
(pp. 53-65). Paris: ADEA.
Schwille, J., Dembélé, M. and Schubert, J. (2007), Global perspectives on teacher learning: improving
policy and practice. Paris: UNESCO/ International Institute for Educational Planning.
Sen, A. (1992), Inequality reexamined. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, A. (1993), 'Capability and well being'. In M. C. Nussbaum and A. Sen (eds), The quality of life.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, A. (1999), Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Senge, P. M. (2006), The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. London:
Random house.
Stephens, D. (1990), 'Qualitative Factors in Education, Research and Development: A Position Paper'.
International Journal of Educational Development, 10 (2/3), 143-149.
Stephens, D. (2003), Quality of Basic Education. Background Paper for Global Monitoring Report
2003/4 - Gender and Education for All: The Leap to Equality. Paris/ Oslo: UNESCO.
Takei, H. (2007), Teacher Absenteeism in Zambian Schools: magnitude, structure and teacher
perspectives, Unpublished dissertation as partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Arts in Education and International Development. London: Institute of
Education, University of London.
Teddlie, C. and Reynolds, D. (2000), The international handbook of school effectiveness research.
London: Falmer Press.
Tikly, L. and Barrett, A. M. (2007), Education Quality - Research Priorities and Approaches in the
Global Era. Bristol: EdQual.
UIS. (2006), Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global needs for 2015. Montreal: UNESCO
Institute of Statistics.
UNESCO. (1990), World Declaration on Education for All and Framework for Action to meet Basic
Learning Needs, Adopted by the World Conference on Education for All: Meeting Basic
Learning Needs, 5-9 March, Jomtien, Thailand. Jomtien: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2004), EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005 - The Quality Imperative. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2008), EFA Global Monitoring Report 2009 - Overcoming inequality: why governance
matters. Paris/ Oxford: UNESCO/ Oxford University Press.
UNESCO and UIS. (2009), Education in Zambia, UIS statistics in brief. [Online]. Available at:
http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=121&IF_Languag
e=eng&BR_Country=8940. Last accessed 29 July 2009.
UNICEF. (2000), Defining Quality in Education. Paper presented at the Meeting of The International
Working Group on Education, June, Florence.
Unterhalter, E. (2008), 'Social Justice, Development Theory and the Question of Education'. In R.
Cowen and A. M. Kazamias (eds), International Handbook of Comparative Education (pp. 771-
790). Netherlands: Springer.
Verspoor, A. M. (ed.) (2005), The Challenge of Learning: Improving the Quality of Basic Education in
Sub Saharan Africa. Paris: ADEA.
Verspoor, A. M. (2008a), At the Crossroads: Choices for Secondary Education and Training in Sub-
Saharan Africa. Washington: World Bank Publication.
Verspoor, A. M. (2008b), 'The Challenge of Learning: Improving the Quality of Basic Education in Sub-
Saharan Africa'. In D. Johnson (ed.), The Changing Landscape of Education in Africa. Quality,
Equality and Democracy. (pp. 13-43). Oxford: Symposium Books.

20. Page 20 of 20
Visser-Valfrey, M., Brown, C. R., Abagi, O., Buabuttra, T. and Nalwamba, C. (2008), Improving the
education response to HIV and AIDS: Lessons of partner efforts in coordination,
harmonisation, alignment, information sharing and monitoring in Jamaica, Kenya, Thailand
and Zambia. Geneva: UNAIDS/ Inter-Agency Task Team on Education.
Walker, M. and Unterhalter, E. (eds) (2007), Amartya Sen's capability approach and social justice in
education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Welch, A. R. (2000), 'Quality and Equality in Third World Education'. In A. R. Welch (ed.), Third World
Education. Quality and Equality (pp. 3-27). New York: Garland Publishers Inc.
White, H. (2004), Books, Buildings, and Learning Outcomes. An Impact Evaluation of World Bank
Support To Basic Education in Ghana. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
White, H. and Dijkstra, A. G. (2003), Programme aid and development, beyond conditionality.
London: Routledge.
World Bank. (2001), Zambia Public Expenditure Review. Public Expenditure Growth and Poverty: A
Synthesis. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Yu, G. (2007), Research Evidence of School Effectiveness in Sub-Saharan Africa. Bristol: EdQual.