The Flow of Events during the Lesson

The intention here is to present how a typical CEP class and lesson is delivered, how culturally relevant the lessons are and the various modes of interaction that take place in the classroom. This helps to situate discussion and analysis of how CEP lessons fit into the social constructivist mode. The diary extract below describes how CEP classes were conducted as observed during the research. A typical CEP lesson began with the facilitator dealing with administrative matters such as registration and making sure that pupils had the necessary materials for the afternoon’s activities. The lesson proper then begins with the facilitator revising the previous lesson, usually through questioning. Then he introduces the topic of the new lesson, which is usually written on the board, and develops it at some length through explanation, sometimes incorporating questions into the process. One or more examples, usually taken from the manual or primer, are worked out on the board and discussed.

It is 3.00 pm and I am waiting for the CEP class to begin at Gbulahagu Primary School. According to the local committee chairman, the CEP has been running in the community for the past ten years; the community really likes the CEP classes, which have become almost part of the institutional structure. Given this background, and also having gleaned from conversations with SfL staff that lessons start at 3 pm, I decide to wait for the CEP class after the close of formal school.

Fifteen minutes later, no CEP learners have arrived and I begin to wonder whether today day is one of the days when there is no class, as I have been given to understand that the CEP has two days off a week. Children start trickling in at 3.20. This gives me some hope that I have not been waiting in vain. In the next 10 minutes, all the children are accounted for as well the facilitator, who gets in at 3.25. There do not seem to be any worries at all on the part of either facilitator or learners that lessons are starting almost half an hour later than scheduled.

Surprisingly, lessons kick off immediately all the children are accounted for with very little time for formalities. The facilitator takes a couple of minutes to call the register and then immediately launches into the lesson for the day.

The children are involved right from the beginning of the lesson with revision of the previous week’s lessons. This week, they are discussing fire. The previous week, the class discussed beans. There is therefore a recap of the lesson on beans, including how to cook beans, how to grow beans, and the nutritional value of beans. Children are called to the board to write some of the key words they learned in the beans lesson.

Given the fact that cooking was one of the activities discussed in the beans lesson, I thought the fire lesson would build on that and consider how fire is used for cooking. However, the picture discussion on fire is centred on hunting. I sit through the lesson on fire, which is linked to bush fires and hunting. The lesson is interesting, starting with the picture discussion, which generates lots of interest and all the children participate as they seem to have experience of bush fires and hunting. But I keep asking myself what the connection is between the previous lesson and the current

134 lesson. There is no mention of beans in this new lesson; but there is plenty of writing practice, syllabic drill, and formation of new words. (Researcher’s Diary: 19/04/2011)

The extract shows focus on the children right from the beginning of the lesson. Thus learner involvement permeated the whole lesson flow and this is critical in the discussions that follow in terms of how learner centred the CEP classes are. From time to time, the content covered was summarized and learners asked to attempt some class work. Intermittently, the facilitator asked a few learners to go to the front and write their work on the board, which was discussed and the lesson summarized again. The afternoon ends with the facilitator assigning homework. The lesson flow was invariably interspersed with singing and the occasional short break, which were usually announced when the facilitator wanted to change from literacy to a numeracy lesson. In a follow up discussion with Abdul, the facilitator he was keen to note the following:

The revision of the previous lesson discussed beans so there was no need to bring it up again. The most important thing for this lesson was to build on the experiences of the children. This is the season of hunting and related bush fires as the crops are almost finished and people do not have food, so hunting is very popular now and because the rains haven’t started there is always the danger of bush fires.

Further discussions revealed that the facilitator was a member of the bush fire campaign team. What is critical about the lesson and the follow up discussion is the functional and cultural relevance of the topic for the day. The fact that the lesson was being delivered at the relevant time of the season and the fact that the children were familiar with hunting and bush fires obviously helped in generating the needed interaction for learning to take place. The following is an excerpt from another observation given to further illustrate lesson development, relevance of content and flow.

Today’s topic is Yendi Market. Once again, both facilitator and learners are late. The class starts at 20 past 3.00 instead of 3.00. The facilitator dispenses with the administrative task of registration and goes straight into the lesson for the day. He starts with a discussion of the previous lesson, which was farming. For once, he starts by asking the children to tell the class what they grow on their farms. This is a departure from the manual, which indicates that he should ask the pupils what Mr Aduna grows on his farm. A number of children raise their hands: I count eight children ready to give answers, five of whom are called upon to contribute to the discussion.

F: tell the class what you grow on your farm. L1: We grow yams and millet.

135 L2: We cultivate yams, maize and millet.

[Five pupils give similar answers.]

F: who can come and write the crops they grow on the board?

[Several hands shoot up once again, and six children are asked to go and write various crops in turn on the board.]

F [to the whole class]: Use the words on the board to form your own sentences in your books.

[The children start writing in their exercise books. After a couple of minutes, the facilitator asks them to read out their sentences.]

L1: I like eating yam.

L2: We have a lot of maize on our farm. L3: I ate yam yesterday.

This revision exercise takes about 30 minutes before the day’s lesson starts. I notice that all the children are involved in the revision, and that the facilitator goes round as the children write their sentences in their exercise books. They seem excited talking about what they have been doing on their farms and write sentences about the food they eat.

At the end of the lesson, I ask the facilitator why he deviated from the manual and asked the children about their own farms instead of what the manual directed. He seems uncomfortable with my question and almost apologetic that he deviated from the lesson. I assure him that I am not judging him, but I am only curious since he usually goes by the book. He says he thought it would be more interesting for the children to talk about their own farms since the farming season had begun and all the children were involved one way or another with farming in the village. (Researcher’s diary: 24/05/2011)

Once again the functional relevance of the topic and the curriculum is confirmed in this lesson. What is also pertinent is the level of animation in the class. The fact that all children are eager to participate in the lesson through raising their hands and coming to the board to write or answer questions is a confirmation of how the relevance of the topic and the previous experiences of the children is a critical factor in promoting learner-centred instruction and thus promoting a social construction of knowledge in the classroom. The fact that the children are participating in the construction of knowledge is also evident in the types of answers given by the children above: how they respond verbally, using a variety of sentence construction and tenses, hence not just parroting or copying one another or the teacher. The teacher’s role is in this process is also critical in also ensuring a functional lesson flow as in this case the facilitator is noted to come from the area, familiar with the crops that are

136 grown and has enough professional judgement to steer the lessons away momentarily from the manual towards a more child-centred approach and not merely learner centred. Thus the pupils are his focus of attention, not the manual or the crops. Also important to note is that construction of knowledge in these classes is practical and physical. The facilitator engages the children through the questions and answers in addition to getting them to write their responses in both their books and on the board thus getting the children to really see and demonstrate the new knowledge generated out of the this teacher pupil interaction. However, this functional and cultural relevance can only be instrumental if the teacher utilises instruction and management skills that also encourage participation in the lesson. This key component of the instructional process is presented in the next section.

Figure 6.4: Music interlude in a CEP class