kenya tvet baseline 2011.pdf

8/10/2019 Kenya TVET baseline 2011.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kenya-tvet-baseline-2011pdf 1/113



TIVET ICT Baseline Survey Draft Report

of 114

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... 6

Summary of Findings and Recommendations ................................................................ 7 1. Policy and Vision ............................................................................................................................... 7

2. Curricula

and

Assessment

.................................................................................................................

8

3. Pedagogy ........................................................................................................................................... 9 4. ICT Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................ 10 5. Organization, Management and Administration ............................................................................ 11 6. Professional Development .............................................................................................................. 13

Introduction and Background ..................................................................................... 15

Background ....................................................................................................................... 15

Education and Training in Kenya ........................................................................................ 16 TIVET System ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Statistics in the TIVET Sector ............................................................................................................... 19 ICT in Education Initiatives in TIVET in Kenya ..................................................................................... 20 Studies

on

ICT

in

Education

in

Kenya

..................................................................................................

20

Justification for the Baseline Survey .................................................................................. 21

Objectives of the Survey .................................................................................................... 22 General Objective ............................................................................................................................... 22 Specific Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 22 GESCI and MoHEST Partnership .......................................................................................................... 23

Methodology Used ............................................................................................................ 23 A mixed methods approach ................................................................................................................ 23

Design and pre‐test phase ............................................................................................................. 23 Test phase ...................................................................................................................................... 24 Full implementation phase ............................................................................................................ 24

Survey Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 25

Findings ...................................................................................................................... 26

General information .......................................................................................................... 26

1. Policy and Vision ............................................................................................................ 29 1.1 Vision of TIVET Institutions ........................................................................................................... 29 1.2 Institutional policy application on ICT use in TIVET institutions ................................................... 30

1.2.1 Awareness of Policies, plans or directives for ICT in Education and Training ....................... 30 1.2.2 Implementation of national TIVET ICT Policy ........................................................................ 31 1.2.4 Level of satisfaction with Policies and Plans ......................................................................... 32 1.2.5 How is ICT Policy implemented ............................................................................................. 33

1.2.6 Challenges

with

TIVET

and

ICT

Integration

...........................................................................

34

1.3 General Policy & Vision Comments ............................................................................................... 36

2. Curricula and Assessment .............................................................................................. 38 2.1 Existence of ICT courses and integration ...................................................................................... 38 2.2 ICT tools Integration in various courses ........................................................................................ 40 2.3 Existence of Basic IT Courses ........................................................................................................ 42 2.4 Examination of IT Courses ............................................................................................................. 42 2.5 Specific skills with IT ...................................................................................................................... 43




of 114

2.6 Equipment available during examination ..................................................................................... 43 2.7 Existence of IT standards within the Curriculum .......................................................................... 44 2.8 View of IT Personnel on use of ICT by Lecturers and Students ..................................................... 44 2.9 General Curricula & Assessment Comments ................................................................................ 45

3. Pedagogy ....................................................................................................................... 47 3.1 Requirement of lecturers to use ICT ............................................................................................. 47 3.2 Purpose of ICT use ........................................................................................................................ 48 3.3 Usage profile by lecturers ............................................................................................................. 50 3.4 Comfort level lecturers ................................................................................................................. 52 3.5 Strategies to encourage ICT use .................................................................................................... 52 3.6 General Pedagogy Comments ....................................................................................................... 53

4. ICT Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 53 4.1 IT infrastructure ............................................................................................................................ 54

4.1.1 IT department ....................................................................................................................... 54 4.1.2 IT Equipment ......................................................................................................................... 55 4.1.3 Location of equipment .......................................................................................................... 56 4.1.4 Local Area Network ............................................................................................................... 56 4.1.5 Website, email and Virtual Learning Environment ............................................................... 57

4.1.6 Internet access ...................................................................................................................... 57 4.1.7 Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training .................................................... 58

4.2 ICT usage ....................................................................................................................................... 60 4.2.1 Equipment availability and usage.......................................................................................... 60 4.2.2 Code of conduct, Policies and guidelines related to IT ......................................................... 61

4.3 Content and software ................................................................................................................... 61 4.3.1 Software ................................................................................................................................ 61 4.3.2 Standards .............................................................................................................................. 62 4.3.3 Operating Systems ................................................................................................................ 63

4.4 Maintenance and Support ............................................................................................................ 63 4.4.1 Maintenance ......................................................................................................................... 63

4.5 General ICT Infrastructure Comments .......................................................................................... 64

5. Organization, Management and Administration ............................................................. 66 5.1 Planning ........................................................................................................................................ 66

5.1.1 Affiliation with other organizations ...................................................................................... 66 5.1.2 Education Management and Information Systems (EMIS) ................................................... 69 5.1.3 E‐learning .............................................................................................................................. 69 5.1.4 IT systems available ............................................................................................................... 69 5.1.5 Use of IT systems ................................................................................................................... 71

5.2 Financing ....................................................................................................................................... 73 5.2.1 Sources of support and/or income ....................................................................................... 73 5.2.2 How is the Internet and Computers paid for ........................................................................ 74 5.2.3 Annual budget available for ICT ............................................................................................ 75 5.2.4 How is ICT funded and how equipment is paid for ............................................................... 75

5.3 General

Organization

and

Administration

Comments

..................................................................

78

6. Professional Development ............................................................................................. 80 6.1 Professional Development ............................................................................................................ 80

6.1.1 ICT Training Provision and Courses Attended ....................................................................... 80 6.1.2 ICT Training content .............................................................................................................. 81 6.1.3 Motivation for Training Course Attendance ......................................................................... 82 6.1.4 P

referred training methodologies .................................................................................................... 84




of 114

6.1.5 General Professional development comments ..................................................................... 85 6.2 Competency Importance‐Development Survey & Training Needs Assessment ........................... 86

6.2.1 HoD, Lecturer & Instructor Competency Importance Rankings ............................................ 87 6.2.2 Gap Analysis TNA .................................................................................................................. 90 6.2.3 General TNA comments ........................................................................................................ 94

Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................ 95

1. Policy and Vision ............................................................................................................ 95

2. Curricula and Assessment .............................................................................................. 97

3. Pedagogy ....................................................................................................................... 99

4. ICT Infrastructure ......................................................................................................... 100

5. Organization, Management and Administration ........................................................... 102

6. Professional Development ........................................................................................... 104

Annex ....................................................................................................................... 107

List of

Tables

and

Figures

.................................................................................................

107

List of Institutions that participated in the survey ............................................................ 109

Related documentation ................................................................................................... 111

References ....................................................................................................................... 112




of 114

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

CAD Computer Aided Design

CAI Computer Assisted Instruction

CAM

Computer Aided

Manufacture

CEN Central Province

CNC Computer Numerical Control

COA Coast Province

EAS Eastern Province

EMIS Education Management Information System

HoD Head of Department (respondent)

ICT Information and Communication Technologies

KTTC Kenya Technical Teachers College

MOHEST

Ministry for

Higher

Education

Science

and

Technology

MOYAS Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports

NAI Nairobi Area

NEA North Eastern Province

NYA Nyanza Province

ODL Open and Distance Learning

RVA Rift Valley Province

TIVET Technical Industrial and Vocational Training Institutions

TNA Training Needs Assessment

TTI Technical Training Institutes

VLE Virtual Learning Environment.

WES Western Province




of 114

Executive Summary

Kenya is working towards becoming a middle income economy and eventually a knowledge

society by implementing Vision 2030. Kenyan education and training institutions can play a

central role in creating a human resource base to enhance science and technology

industrialization, and thus aid the development of a knowledge economy.

Given that the TIVET sub‐sector is critical to the development of industry required human

capacities, high quality training services must be delivered by the sector to enhance the

productivity and competitiveness. Good and competitive TIVET systems in developing and

emerging economies provide highly skilled labor to attract direct foreign investments. Hence the

need to enhance skills of graduates of the TIVET systems through provision of quality training

services that are markedly enhanced by ICT. Some of the benefits of utilizing ICT for

Given that the Technical Industrial Vocational Education Training (TIVET) sub‐sector is critical to

the development of industry required human capacities, high quality training services must be

delivered by the sector to enhance the productivity and competitiveness. Good and competitive

TIVET systems in developing and emerging economies provide highly skilled labor to attract

direct foreign investments. Hence the need to enhance skills of graduates of the TIVET systems

through provision of quality training services that are markedly enhanced by ICT. Some of the

benefits of utilizing ICT for training include enhanced access to technology, greater equity, and

an improvement in the quality of education management. The complexity of integrating

Information

and

Communication

Technologies

(ICT)

in

education

demands

careful

planning

and execution. ICT integration in TIVET must consider ICT use in specific skill areas because

technological innovations and developments in industry today are ICT biased and demand

graduates competent in the use of ICT. This requires trainers and trainees to have the necessary

skills to support the use of ICT for teaching and learning. Specialized ICT skills are required in the

work place for production and communication, and are seen as an essential complement to

traditional content knowledge, in courses such as engineering, science, and accounting.

There is also a requirement for a comprehensive, holistic and realistic strategy to be developed

with all key stakeholders. Such a strategy should address issues of student and Instructor ICT

competencies;

curriculum

and

assessment

integration;

content

development

and

delivery;

pedagogical approaches; leadership and management; linkage to industry for relevance;

institutional capacities to use ICT effectively; monitoring and evaluation; and utilization of

appropriate technologies. This calls for systemic collection and analysis of data on the level of

ICT use in the TIVET institutions. Conclusions drawn from this analysis can be used to inform the

development of an ICT integration strategy and implementation plan for TIVET. It can also serve

as a baseline for future research, monitoring and evaluation in the TIVET sector




of 114

This report is informed by a baseline survey using a mixed methods approach (qualitative and

quantitative) to examine the complexities of ICT deployment in TIVET institutions in Kenya in

2010. The authors stress that this is just one process of a number required to overhaul ICT

integration in teaching and learning in the TIVET sub‐sector. Questionnaires and focus group

protocols were developed to gather data on 6 system domain indicators of ICT use that are

modeled on the UNESCO framework for ICT professional competencies and development paths

(UNESCO 2007, p12). The 6 system domains encompass Policy and Vision, Curricula, Pedagogy ,

ICT Infrastructure, Organization & Management and Professional Development . Questionnaires

were administered in 38 out of the 43 public TIVET Institutions representing 88% of the total

number. Focus group discussions were carried out in a small number of institutions to gather

data on stakeholder attitudes, values and opinions on the use of ICT in TIVET course delivery.

Summary of

Findings

and

Recommendations

The survey findings will grant the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology

(MoHEST) and other sector stakeholders access to current data required for planning and

prioritization. For implementation purposes, the recommendations as presented by domain

below, can be considered self ‐contained strategies. Alternatively they can, as recommended, be

addressed within a coherent policy framework.

1. Policy and Vision

Findings from

the

baseline

clearly

indicate

that

the

majority

of

TIVET

institutions

do

not

have

a

formal ICT policy, ICT work plans or ICT guidelines. Of the few institutions that have an

institutional ICT policy only a fifth have developed ICT work plans to realize the policies and

made subsequent budget allocations. Although a high level of confidence has been registered in

the relevance of existing ICT policies, respondents cast doubt on institutional capacity for policy

implementation.

At the national level policy gap appears to hinder institutional management from providing

strong administrative departmental support to ICT integration in curriculum delivery. This has

resulted in a significant implementation deficit with regard to ICT integration in TIVET

courseware, with much of the activities being carried out ad hoc. The heavy investment in ICT

infrastructure in the institutions is largely harnessed for basic ICT skills acquisition in most of the

institutions, and as a core course offering for those students who are taking Computer studies as

their core course.

Recommendations:




of 114

1. Define clear national policy parameters for ICT integration into TIVET, including new

policies where appropriate and/or needed: With the increase in demands for new skills

and increased access to new technologies, there is the need to re‐examine the policy

frameworks which govern TIVET in Kenya. The report recommends that MoHEST leads a

multi‐stakeholder process to develop an ICT Integration Strategy in TIVET education. The

strategy will further detail priorities, budgets, and planning which will in turn provide

the framework within which TIVET institutions can plan and implement the integration

strategy.

2. Develop institutional level guidelines and plans for ICT Integration: Defined

institutional level guidelines must be provided to all TIVET institutions to ensure

standardisation (and hence equity). These can be developed based on the final ICT

Integration Strategy.

2.

Curricula

and

Assessment

The findings from the baseline indicate that curricula and assessment requirements have a

direct impact on the use of ICT in TIVET Institutions. ICT is widely taught as a subject in a

majority of the institutions where there is a defined curriculum for it and this curriculum is

assessed at the national level. When the curriculum does not provide any standards or

guidelines for ICT usage in its delivery, the use of ICT will remain concentrated in the use of e‐

mails, communication and ICT literacy.

Although lecturers and HoDs are generally aware of the necessity to use ICT in the 21st Century,

there are no enabling factors to encourage them to do so. Institutional support mechanisms for

ICT usage and deployment of ICT are lacking. Curriculum overload and consequent teaching to

the test were noted to greatly influence ICT integration practices in the institutions.

Since the curriculum and assessment approaches are silent on how ICT should be used, there

are fragmented efforts in the use of ICT for instruction and most of these are individually driven.

Although a minority of the students indicated that TIVET curriculum offerings were adequate

and relevant for their future professional requirements, most of the students expressed

concerns that both the TIVET curriculum and assessment systems were outmoded. The general

consensus emerging

through

the

discussions

was

that

curriculum

revision

is

needed

to

enable

student graduates to meet requirements for today’s competitive and innovative market place.

In addition, ICT course provision was seen to be irrelevant by the students in their specialist

fields with technical software often being unavailable or used for demonstration purposes in a

theoretical delivery format.

Recommendations:




of 114

3. Introduce ICT as a core skill for all entry level students: The majority of students enter

the TIVET institutions with low or no ICT skills. It is therefore recommended that a

curriculum be developed for all entry level students to ensure that they acquire good

foundational ICT skills which they will further build on while completing their elected

courses. Where already offered, the curriculum can be revised. MoHEST and

stakeholders can also explore globally recognized options or other internationally

certifiable ICT courses that are aligned to the job market and for which students can

earn additional certifications. This could also be at a national level.

4. Review course schedules and timetables to allow for sufficient learning and practise

time as it relates to the acquisition of ICT skills: Apart from its presence as a curriculum

subject, there needs to be sufficient learning and practise time to enable trainees to

acquire ICT competencies. Additional attention needs to be given to ensure that

adequate time is built into class schedules to accommodate this. This it should also be

noted, will be in direct correlation to the ratio of computers and other IT resources to

students (see

recommendations

under

IT

Infrastructure).

5. Determine (based on industry input) crucial ICT skills sets per curriculum/course area:

It is noted that the curriculum is not in‐step with Industry requirements. Partnerships

with Industry are weak except where there is student attachment independent of TIVET

institutions. The report recommends greater Industry involvement in TIVET education.

The report recommends that ways be explored of making the curriculum and

assessment relevant through ICT

6. This could include but not be limited to: curriculum, occupational standards and levels

of competency (ies).

3. Pedagogy

The most popular use of ICT in TIVET institutions is for research and accessing information as

well as tutoring in computer science and computer literacy. ICT resources are mostly used for

developing lecturers’ own knowledge and for teaching students about computers. Facilitation

of virtual learning environments or using ICT to develop students’ 21st Century skills is not yet

common practice. Lecturers are aware of the potential of ICT to enrich teaching practices but

they have neither the skill‐sets nor the access to ICT facilities to efficiently integrate the new

tools and methodologies in curriculum instruction.

Although a majority of the institutions require Heads of Departments (HoDs) and lecturers to

use ICT, this requirement is not being met in a systemic and systematic way due to the absence

of an enabling environment with tools, structures, and policies. More than 15% of the

institutions do not have requirements for ICT use in coursework and almost 20% of the lecturers

are not using ICT at all in their teaching and learning.




of 114

The registered frequency of use of ICT in teaching practice was rated poorly. Where it does

occur it is on an ad hoc basis. This is partly due to low ICT comfort levels among lecturers and

HoDs. Since the art of teaching and learning through and with ICT is largely driven by individuals

rather than institutional policy, ensuring that HoDs and lecturers are comfortable with ICT would

greatly enhance ICT uptake.

Recommendations:

7. Finalise the ICT Competency Framework and formally adopt this as the guideline for

the ICT skills standard for TIVET instructors: Significant work has already been

undertaken on the ICT Competency Framework, and the discussions around that have

been instrumental in the design of this baseline. The report therefore recommends that

this be validated and formally adopted as a measure to guide pre‐service and in‐

servicing training of TIVET lecturers. It is recommended that the process be completed

as soon as possible, as this will also help to facilitate several of the other

recommendations outlined

in

this

report.

8. Review the curriculum at the level of the teacher training institutions: The curriculum

of the TIVET trainers should be reviewed and aligned with the above mentioned

competency standards. Access to tools and resources at the level of the educational

institutions should also be planned for and provided with more emphasis placed on

acquiring new pedagogical techniques. As it is expected that this process will occur in

parallel with several other recommendations given, a phased approach is also

suggested.

4. ICT Infrastructure

Most institutions have implemented ICT policies by providing staff and students with access to

ICT. Data collected from the institutions suggests that most institutions use the computer lab

access model combined with laptops and projectors for integration. Most of the equipment has

been acquired in the last two‐three years. Adequate data on student population, to analyze if

the ratio of students per computer is adequate was not collected. Focus group discussions

indicate that students do not have enough access to the infrastructure in the schools except for

those students taking ICT as a core course.

About half of the institutions have their own IT department. Personnel in most institutions have

interconnected computers.

Server

profile

suggests

a basic

network

model,

with

a more

complex

and secure environment evolving in the future. Though the average number suggests that both

students and teachers have access to the equipment, even after hours and on weekends, it

seems that many institutions continue to rely mainly on traditional non‐ICT resources in their

course delivery since modern ICT tools are either not available or not plentiful enough.




of 114

Connectivity is a priority issue that needs to be addressed in many institutions. While some

institutions have Internet access it is not always available or available to everyone. Technology

provision is greatly hampered by issues related to access in the form of infrastructural resources

provision; currency of the resources (hardware and software); scheduling of access to

technology; decentralization of resources within the institution to increase access for students

other than those taking the ICT course; and increased access during students free time to allow

individualized learning.

Basic IT policies and plans seem to be in place, but more advanced policies will be needed in the

near future. Institutions use Windows as the main operating system with Open Source software

hardly being mentioned. Software tools available for integration are quite limited, suggesting a

need for development in this area. Software has in most cases been acquired with institutions’

own funding.

Recommendations:

9. Explore sustainable and cost effective options for connectivity for all TIVET

institutions: The report recommends that the Ministry begin to explore sustainable and

cost effective options for addressing the connectivity challenge for the TIVET

institutions. This can include facilitating public private partnerships with telecom

operations (individually or collectively). Additional work would have to be done to

determine the bandwidth needs to support the attainment of educational goals.

10. Develop standard guidelines for infrastructure at training labs, workshops and other

facilities: ICT requirements for training facilities must be detailed in order to allow for

better planning both at the national and institutional levels.

11.

Develop standard technology models for TIVET institutions: In order to ensure equity

across the board, a standard technology model should be developed for all TIVET

institutions. This should include specifications as they relate to hardware and software.

12. Software, content and Internet access should be improved: In order to satisfy

educational needs and adequately serve the number of students. Lecturer and student

ability to evaluate standard educational content should be improved in order to deepen

subject knowledge. This is a capacity building activity that could be taken on by the

MoHEST.

5. Organization, Management and Administration

Education Management Information Systems (EMIS) are not widely used in TIVET institutions

and there is no guideline governing their use. Data and information required for planning

remains scarce. Wherever EMIS is in use it is introduced with applications for finance,




of 114

administration and procurement. IT‐systems that are more integrated into course delivery and

require two‐way communication are not common.

The data implies that sensitization efforts for TIVET management regarding the opportunities

and demand for IT systems in education management could be valuable in helping institutions

seize so far unrealized opportunities.

IT management systems are not transparent from national to provincial to institutional levels.

Furthermore, lecturers and administrators at TIVET institutions are not trained in how to utilize

the data that is available. It seems that the use of web tools and other ICT related resources

required for service delivery is not frequently discussed at the institutional level. As a result,

initiatives designed to make the best use of ICT remain a matter of personal ambition rather

than an institutional directive.

Both

equipment

and

connectivity

is

foremost

funded

by

the

institutions

themselves.

Since

institutions predominantly are funding their operations through government contributions,

tuition fees and internally generated incomes, these are indirectly also the sources supporting

computer equipment acquisition. The Government provides development funding that the

institution can use for development related activities under which ICT procurement falls. TIVET

institutions do not seem to have elaborate partnerships with the private sector except during

student attachment opportunities.

Almost one third of the institutions do not have an ICT specific budget, signaling that ICT is not a

priority issue for a significant number of institutions. The institutions that have an ICT specific

budget specify mainly ICT infrastructure such as hardware, software and maintenance of

equipment. Professional development (i.e. use of ICTs) is only present in 33% of the budgets and

hence not as prioritized. The different priorities between equipment and classroom

integration/training in ICT budgets at institutional respective departmental level indicate

inconsistent priorities by different professional groups at TIVET institutes.

Recommendations:

13. Define types of Education Management Information Systems (EMIS) needed at the

institutional level to inform national as well as institutional planning: The TIVET

institutions have

access

to

data

and

information

that

is

critical

at

a number

of

levels

–

including the national level – of planning. However, the baseline survey reveals that

collection and use of this data/information is not systematically undertaken. There is a

need to structure data collection and storage and issues such as frequency of data

collection must also be addressed. The report also recommends that a sub‐set of the

questions used for purposes of this baseline be included in such a management

information system.




of 114

14. Earmark/Allocate ICT funding as an explicit part of development funding: The report

recommends that the Government earmark a percent of the development funding given

to the institutions specifically for ICT acquisition, purchase and maintenance. Clear

guidelines must be developed to guide this process.

6. Professional Development

Opportunities for ICT professional development have been ample for HoDs but limited for

lecturers. Peer learning is the modality of picking up ICT skills informally in institutions. There is

an opportunity for institutions to formally recognize internal resources and develop programs

for institution‐based staff development. Programs could take the form of short regular in‐house

workshops using external and internal resource supports to promote experimentation and

strategies for ICT integration across curricular program areas.

Lecturer motivation

for

acquiring

technology

and

occupational

literacy

to

use

ICT

at

a functional

and practice level is integral to enhancing their professionalism and coursework delivery.

However there is little focus in the findings on the potential use of ICT as an instructional tool or

the pedagogical integration of ICT for enhancing TIVET course delivery in a proactive and

responsive manner. There is a need to define the important teacher technology competencies

for ICT integration as an instructional tool so as to avoid limiting the effective integration of ICT

in TIVET provision.

Teacher confidence presents a particular challenge for ICT integration, even in instances where

teachers have had training and where there is adequate infrastructure. This lack of confidence

hampers effective implementation. Teacher training that is skills focused may thus be ineffective

in building teachers’ capacities to integrate the use of ICT into curriculum practice. There is a

need to modernize training provision and curricula to reflect the use of technology to enhance

critical thinking and higher order problem solving strategies and skills.

The preferred modality for ICT course delivery is a blended approach for face‐to‐face and online

provision. There is a great demand for training in basic ICT literacy and training related to ICT

usage in the specialist fields of their TIVET course programs as in ICT applications in engineering

and sciences. Although the institutions are supportive of HoDs and lecturers use of ICTs and

actually require

them

to

use

ICTs,

an

enabling

environment

to

actualize

this

policy

is

far

from

ready. This includes equipping the HoDs and lecturers with the skills required for the use of ICT

as a personal level and also in curriculum delivery. On‐going opportunities for professional

development in a tertiary sector which requires lecturers to keep abreast with their specialist

field and the demands of industry are required.

Recommendations:




of 114

15. Expand options for TIVET lecturers to purchase/own ICT equipment at reduced prices:

This can be achieved through Public‐Private‐Partnerships; the Ministry can facilitate

direct purchase of ICT equipment by TIVET lectures at reduced prices or through an

arranged check‐off system with arrangements between the financier and the employee.

This can be provided as a part of the incentives for increasing lecturer use, and comfort

with using ICTs.

16. Facilitate periodic (regular) upgrade of ICT competencies for all lectures, regardless of

the courses they are teaching: This can be organized at the national level, using a train‐

the‐trainer approach to ensure that at least a set number of lecturers/facilities are

trained. Alternatively it can be organized at the institutional level using a school‐based

approach where the institution organizes seminars/in‐house training that are supported

by internal ICT experts and practitioners. External expertise from national institutions

such as the Learning Resources Centre Project in Kenya Technical Teachers College

(KTTC) could be established to build capacity in lecturers and teachers not only to learn

how to

use

ICT

but

to

use

ICT

to

learn.

17. Provide opportunities for on‐line learning: With an identified progression path for

lecturers, school‐based courses can be provided through institutions of higher learning

or the TIVET lecturers training college (KTTC). Collaboration with Industry could also

provide avenues where lecturers upgrade their skills with the latest technologies and

skills.

18. Reduce the capacity gap: Provide training in the key areas for technology integration in

course provision identified by respondents as being of high importance and having a low

level of development.




of 114

Introduction and Background

Background

There is

a commonly

accepted

view

that

education

systems

globally

will

need

to

effect

changes

to prepare their citizenry to participate in the new global knowledge‐based economies. 21st

Century competencies have been defined as the skills, knowledge and attitudes that current and

future generation of learners will need to compete in the 21st Century global marketplace1. The

Education Reform Group under the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) notes that:

“If the current generation is to develop 21st Century Competencies, existing educational systems

must be modified. First, educational systems must generate clear standards that lay out the

knowledge, skills and attitudes that students should be acquiring at each grade level. Second,

teacher preparation and professional development should be reworked to incorporate training in

teaching key competencies. Third, public policies must support schools in their efforts to

prioritize 21st Century Competencies. Fourth, researchers will need to develop new ways of

measuring mastery of these competencies and tracking the relationship between these

competencies and success in tertiary education, the workforce and beyond. Finally, resources

and tools to facilitate integration should be designed, tested and distributed 2”.

Preparation in 21st Century competencies requires an emphasis in primary and secondary

schools on learning general skills and competencies. These include communication,

mathematics and science skills, new literacy skills, problem‐solving and interpersonal skills, as

well as skills needed to learn other subjects (Spring, 2008 p339). Preparation for knowledge‐

based jobs

will

require

post

‐secondary,

vocational

and

higher

education

investment

for

building

capacity in technical and discipline specific skills, in science & technology, research and

development and for fostering equality of opportunity and social cohesion (King and Palmer

2010, p6).

As new technology is a key driver in economic growth (UNESCO 2003, p11; King and Palmer

2010, p37), Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is fast becoming a critical tool

for preparing and educating students with the required skills for the global workplace. In this

regard, technology plays a double role; both educating students so that they can continually

adapt

to

a

work

world

of

continuous

technological

innovations,

and

making

it

easier

for

students to access the world’s bank of knowledge (World Bank, 2003, cited in Spring 2008,

p337). ICT can contribute to the development of important “new millennium” skills such as

critical thinking, information retrieval, analytical capacity, problem solving, communication and

2 APEC Human Resources Development Wiki - 21st Century Competencies




of 114

ability to understand and manipulate new media. The use of ICTs in Technical and Vocational

Education and Training can provide opportunities for developing more innovative ways to bridge

the gap between institutional laboratories and the real practice of the workplace (UNESCO

2003, p12). In essence ICTs are engines for growth and tools for empowerment and they can

have profound implications for education change and socio‐economic development (UNESCO,

2008 p7).

In Kenya, as in many countries in the region and globally, education and training is seen as the

core strategy for building human capital for socio economic development, and for enhancing its

ability to create employment, innovation and wealth. The Government of Kenya is also well

aware of the potential benefits of ICT use in Education. This is evident from the official

statements in national plans and policy documents (Kenya Vision 2030(2007), Poverty Reduction

Strategy Papers (2005), and the National ICT4D policy (2006)). Kenya has developed a number of

initiatives on ICT in Education across the different levels of Education and Training. These

initiatives have

mainly

been

at

the

level

of

pilot

or

demonstration

projects.

There

has

not

been

a

large scale deployment of ICT at any level as a result of a national and holistic plan.

Under the auspices of Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology (MoHEST), activities

relating to ICT in Technical, Industrial and Vocational Education and Training have been more

frequent and these include: sensitization workshops for institutional managers, capacity building

programs for HoDs, CISCO training was for lecturers who will be teaching in CISCO networking

academies that are being set up in TIVET institution under MoHEST

Institutional managers have also taken their own initiatives by enhancing their infrastructure

capacity at the institutional level through organizing their own capacity building programs for

lecturers to

take

up

and

utilize

ICT

in

teaching

and

learning.

However,

these

initiatives

represent

disparate degrees of implementation from institution to institution.

Technical Industrial Vocational Education Training (TIVET) institutions are expected to adopt and

integrate ICT in administration, classrooms, laboratories and workshops. Further, the

institutions are expected to use ICT tools for research and collaboration with other organizations

including industry. This is expected to enrich students learning experiences by aligning the

teaching and learning with industry requirements and expectations.

Education and Training in Kenya

Education and Training in Kenya falls under three Ministries:

1. The Ministry of Education oversees Basic education (Early Childhood Education,

Primary, Secondary, Adult and Non‐Formal education, and Teacher education)




of 114

2. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports house a Directorate of Youth Training which

oversees more than 750 Youth Polytechnics. Youth Polytechnics train graduates from

primary schools and secondary school who choose to follow the alternative education

system due to various reasons. Nevertheless, it is still possible for them to access the

highest level of education as shown in Fig. 1 below.

3.

The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology is mandated to oversee

Higher and Technical education, Science, Technology and Innovation. Higher education

includes universities; Technical education includes Institutes of Technology and

Technical Institutions and universities of technology.

Kenya’s formal education system is known as the 8‐4‐4 system. This consists of a primary school

cycle of 8 years, secondary cycle of four years and a minimum of four years in the university.

Secondary school leavers who do not proceed to university directly may choose to join TIVET

colleges for two year craft courses or three year diploma (technician) courses. Such students

have

the

option

of

proceeding

to

university

to

take

their

preferred

degree

courses

with

appropriate credit transfers as indicated in Figure 1.

Primary school leavers who do not join secondary school may join the many Youth Polytechnics

(YPs) which are also considered to be TIVET institutions although under a different Ministry

(MOYAS). Figure 1 demonstrates how all these students can access the highest level of

education irrespective of the entry level.




of 114

Figure 1 ‐ 2 – Education and Training Structure in Kenya (Source: Sessional Paper No. 1 of 2005)

TIVET System

The TIVET institutions include National Polytechnics, Technical Teachers Colleges, Institutes of

Technology, Technical Training Institutes, Industrial Training Centres, Youth Polytechnics,

Vocational Training Centres and other Private Commercial Colleges. The Directorate of Technical

Education under the Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology oversees the

Institutes of Technology, the Technical Training Institutes, the two National Polytechnics and the

Kenya Technical Teachers College. There are five major areas of training in TIVET institutions

are: Engineering, Health and Applied Sciences, Business Studies, Institutional management and

Information Technology /Computer Science. Although these are the major areas of training,

there are more than 60 other courses offered in TIVET institutions.

There are 48 TIVET institutions under the purview of the Ministry of Higher Education, Science

and Technology

in

Kenya

with

5 being

university

colleges,

2 being

national

polytechnics,

1 being

a technical teachers college 14 being Institutes of Technology and 26 being Technical Training

Institutes (TTIs). Institutes of Technology were originally initiated by communities whereas the

others were initiated by the government. There are 43 TIVET institutions in Kenya with 14 being

Institutes of Technology and 26 being Technical Training Institutes (TTIs). Institutes of

Technology were originally initiated by communities whereas the TTIs were initiated by the

government. However they are all funded and regulated by the government. Recently there has




of 114

been an upgrading of TIVET institutions to Universities of Technology but this is also countered

by an upgrading of Youth Polytechnics to TIVET Institutions.

Prospective trainees in TIVET institutions are required to have obtained specific aggregate and

subject grades in secondary school examinations to join craft or diploma courses. In general,

craft courses take two years while diploma courses take three years. However, each level has a

specified number of contact hours including industrial attachment; 2310 hours for Craft and

2970 hours for Diploma.

The lowest level of TIVET formal training is Artisan. The levels that follow are, in ascending

order, Craft, Diploma and Higher Diploma. Bachelor of Technology degrees are being offered by

some of the universities in Engineering.

Statistics

in

the

TIVET

Sector

There are 48 TIVET institutions under the Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology.

Of these two are Polytechnic University Colleges and 3 university colleges under mentorship

towards becoming degree awarding institutions. Out of the 48, TIVET institutions, 26 are

Technical Training Institutes (TTI) and 14 are Institutes of Technology (IT). In addition, there are

two National Polytechnics and the Kenya Technical Teachers College (KTTC). KTTC is the

institution where lecturers in TIVET institutions are trained. This institution is also largely

involved in the in‐servicing of TIVET lecturers and Instructors from Youth Polytechnics. Among

the TTIs seven are newly established and already admitting students. There are three IT’s that

are currently being developed as constituent colleges of specific public universities. The

Government, with support from Development Partners, is establishing a total of eight new TTIs,

at least one in each of the country’s (former) eight provinces. The establishment of five other

technical training institutes is being funded entirely by the Kenya Government.

There are numerous TIVET institutions under other Ministries and Government agencies which

offer courses in areas relevant to the mandates of the respective organizations. Some 537 TIVET

institutions are privately owned and offer specialized training to employees of the owner

organizations or for commercial purposes by investors. Most of the commercial colleges offer

business and information technology (IT) courses. The Directorate of Technical Education (DTE)

under

the

MoHEST

regulates

the

private

institutions

through

registration,

accreditation

and

quality Assurance. The curricula offered in these private institutions are not regulated by the

Government.

The curricula in use in TIVET, like all others below degree level, are approved through the Kenya

Institute of Education (KIE) in all courses and final examinations prepared by the Kenya National

Examinations Council. Some programs in the TIVET institutions, however, are accredited by




of 114

foreign examining organizations or professional organizations in Kenya and elsewhere. Among

these, there is CISCO and Pitmans UK.

Typical enrolment figures for Polytechnic Universities are about 10,000 students each, while the

National Polytechnics have an average enrolment of 6,000. The Technical Training Institutes and

Institutes of Technology category have a general approximated population of 2,000 students for

the established institutions and lower numbers for the new institutions.

ICT in Education Initiatives in TIVET in Kenya

There have been various ICT in Education initiatives in the country at all levels of the education

system. The Kenya Country Report, ICT in Education Survey carried out by GESCI (Swarts and

Wachira 2009) identifies some of the major ICT4E initiatives in TIVET in the country. Among the

initiatives are:

• The establishment of a Learning Resource Centre at Kenya Technical Teachers’ College

(KTTC) which offers training in education management and integration of ICT in technical

education for institution managers, lecturers and students.

• The Kenya Education Network Trust (KENET) Initiative seeks to establish a permanent

high speed internet infrastructure in institutions of higher learning and research

institutions. The initiative already has on board most of the universities in the country and

is increasing its membership among TIVET and research institutions.

• The Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology is supporting a program to

integrate ICT in TIVET. This initiative had an initial focus of building infrastructure capacity

in institutions, through provision of computers. The second area of focus has been

enhancing Lecturer capacity to deliver curricula using ICTs; an initiative that is being

implemented with support from the Development Partners.

• The Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology has entered into agreements

with some ICT industry players to increase quality and relevance of IT courses and

capacity of TIVET lecturers for course delivery. This partnership has led to the provision in

TIVET of industry accredited IT courses, which are delivered online in accredited

institutions.

Studies on

ICT

in

Education

in

Kenya

The following three studies and reports have been carried out with a specific focus on ICT in

Education in Kenya, namely:

1. ICT in Education Options Paper (MoEST; USAID; EDC; AED, 2005)




of 114

2. Integrating ICT in Teacher Training: A Case Study of the Learning Resource Centre of the

Kenya Technical Teacher Training College (Janessens‐Bevernage, Cornille & Mwaniki,

2005)

3. Survey of ICT in Education in Africa (infoDev, 2007)

4. Kenya ICT4E Situational Analysis (GESCI, 2009)

Of the four reports above, the GESCI Situation Analysis (2009) presents the latest information on

ICT use in TIVET in Kenya. However, it does not provide baseline data adequate for the

development of a strategy for ICT integration in TIVET. The other surveys also do not provide

sufficient data on ICT use in the TIVET sub‐sector to adequately inform current policy and

strategy for ICT integration. For the purpose of developing a strategy and implementation plan

for ICT in TIVET, the Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology in partnership with

GESCI has conducted a baseline survey of ICT in TIVET in Kenya, focusing on the Institutions

under the Ministry governance.

Justification for the Baseline Survey

Kenya is working towards becoming a middle income economy by implementing the Vision 2030

socio economic development blueprint. At the same time, the country is actively involved in

developing its Science, Technology and Innovation (ST&I) human resource base to enhance

science and technology based industrialization. Towards this end, the government has

established several institutions to tap the skills and knowledge of professionals trained locally

and abroad. However, to achieve this, the national education and training system must play its

role

in

producing

not

just

the

right

numbers,

but

by

developing

the

right

quality

of

manpower

required to serve in key growth sectors of the economy.

The TIVET sub‐sector is critical for the development of skilled personnel required by industry.

Training services delivered by the sub‐sector therefore need to be of high quality in order to

increase the productivity and competitiveness of graduates. It is recognized that good and

competitive TIVET systems in developing and emerging economies attract direct foreign

investments; this is due the availability of highly skilled labor in the economy. This kind of

system must embrace technology both in its content and methods.

One way

of

enhancing

the

quality

of

training

is

through

the

utilization

of

ICT.

Other

benefits

of

utilizing ICT include enhancing access, equity and quality of the management of the sub‐sector.

However, the complexity of properly integrating ICT in education requires careful planning and

execution. ICT integration in TIVET must consider ICT use in specific skill areas; trainers and

trainees are required to have the necessary skills to support the use of ICT for teaching and

learning. Institutions are expected to produce graduates who are competent in the use of ICT in

the workplace in their respective skill areas because computer technology permeates all areas




of 114

of work in most fields. Specialized ICT skills are required in the work place for production and

communication. These skills are seen as an essential complement to content knowledge, in for

example, engineering courses, science, and accounting.

This situation calls for the development of a strategy for ICT in TIVET and a plan for its

implementation. However, to develop the strategy, a detailed and up to date baseline data on

the level of use of ICT relevant capacities in TIVET in Kenya is required. The data, when analyzed

will provide information that is required by planners to develop the strategy for a holistic

approach to integrating ICT in TIVET. It is against this background that this TIVET baseline survey

was carried out. The data was analyzed and synthesized to provide information for decision

makers and planners on the appropriate strategies for integrating ICT in TIVET.

Objectives of the Survey

General Objective

The goal of the survey was to establish baseline information and data on the level of utilisation

of Information communication technologies in TIVET institutions under the purview of the

Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology. This was with the aim of provide data

and information required for decision making and strategic planning for the purpose of

enhancing ICT usage for teaching, learning and management in TIVET institutions.

Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the baseline survey are:

•

To determine the availability of ICT policy and implementation plan in institutions under

the purview of MoHEST; and where applicable the extent of their success

• To determine the ICT hardware, software and connectivity infrastructure in place in

TIVET institutions.

•

To

determine

lecturers’

ICT

competence

and

development

path

for

continuous

professional development.

• To establish availability of digital content for TIVET in institutions; their standards and

sources.

•

To determine the extent of usage of ICT tools and resources in teaching and learning

• To determine availability, competence and structures for the development of ICT

technical support staff.




of 114

• To establish availability and usage of Education Management Information Systems

(EMIS) in TIVET institutions and Ministry offices.

• To determine the extent of collaborations with the private sector and other

organizations for developing ICTs in TIVET.

• To find the level of awareness of learners and lecturers on specific ICT tools in use in

industry in their respective skill areas and their competence in using the tools.

GESCI and MoHEST Partnership

The Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology in partnership with GESCI for the two

year period of 2010 – 2012, has identified the following activities for immediate action during

that period:

• Conduct a baseline survey on ICT in TIVET in the Ministry and in institutions

countrywide.

• Development of a Lecturers’ ICT in TIVET Competence framework.

• Development of the ICT in TIVET Digital content evaluation framework

This report is a result of a baseline survey that was carried out in TIVET institutions countrywide

in the third quarter of 2010 as a result of the MoHEST‐GESCI partnership. The baseline should

provide a focus for the partnership based on the parameters defined in the parties’

Memorandum of Understanding. Through this report, issues related to ICT use in TIVET

institutions will emerge which GESCI in collaboration with the Ministry will address throughout

the partnership

period.

Methodology Used

A mixed methods approach

The baseline was carried out using a mixed methods approach combining qualitative and

quantitative methods to examine the complex intervention of ICT deployment in the TIVET sub‐

sector.

Design and pre‐test phase

•

Questionnaires

were

structured

to

provide

baseline

information

on

the

breadth

and

depth of ICT use in TIVET institutions along six system components, namely policy,

curriculum, infrastructure, organization & management, pedagogy, professional

development were used. The questionnaires were developed on the basis of inputs on

the six systems component for ICT integration contributed by participants in a

stakeholder consultation workshop. The workshop was facilitated by MoHEST in

partnership with GESCI in the Kenya Institute of Education in June 2010. The




of 114

questionnaires were targeted at the ministerial, institutional, departmental and

individual levels.

• An infrastructure instrument to gauge the existence of ICT infrastructure in the

Institutions was developed for IT Technicians.

• Focus group discussions were designed in order to sample lecturers and students

attitudes, values and opinions on ICT use. The sample group was chosen to enable

national teams to better understand the issues and challenges encountered in TIVET

institutions while attempting to integrate technology use in course delivery.

• A Training Needs Analysis (TNA) tool was developed on the basis of 26 ICT Lecturer

competencies contextualized by stakeholders in the June consultation workshop. The

tool was used to measure stakeholder perceptions of the importance of each

competency and their perceived level of developmental on each competency.

Test phase

•

The data

collection

was

carried

out

initially

through

field

visits

in

four

TIVET

institutions

in the Rift Valley and Western provinces during the last quarter of 2010. These initial

visits provided opportunities for piloting the data collection instruments through

administering the questionnaires and carrying out the focus group discussions. A team

comprising of 2 Technical Officers from the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and

Technology and GESCI specialists conducted the field surveys.

Full implementation phase

• Subsequent to the pilot visits, field visits were followed‐up in another 16 institutions in

the same provinces and four institutions in Nairobi.

•

Official letters explaining the rationale behind the research as well as providing the

questionnaires were sent to the Institutions in advance to allow them to make relevant

preparations. The administration of the questionnaires and surveys, and the conducting

of the focus group discussions took an average of half a day to complete in each

institution.

• A further set of questionnaires and TNA surveys were sent by email and post to the 16

institutions not visited.

• An additional IT questionnaire was completed by IT technicians at a training event in

JKUAT in October 2010. This questionnaire was later sent to the institutions that were

not represented

during

this

training.

Please refer to page 109 for a List of Institutions that participated in the survey and the question

and interview protocols.

Collected data was treated with anonymity and only the institution and role of each of the

respondents was registered.




of 114

Survey Limitations

•

The short duration of the field research to conduct a baseline on ICT in TIVET in the

complex landscape of the Kenya TIVET sector was challenging. The baseline represents a

snapshot of the institutional landscape at this juncture. More in‐depth studies would be

required to address some of the issues that have emerged as well as on‐going

monitoring to measure progress against the baseline indicators.

• Focus group interviews in some cases were conducted with large groups of stakeholders

which limited participation in the discussion.

• The small sample of lecturers surveyed on competency importance and development

during the field research limits the validity of the results. The accuracy of the

stakeholder perceptions on the importance and development levels of the

competencies would also depend on their thoroughness and objectivity in completing

the survey. Results from this survey can serve for the baseline purposes to identify

general performance

gaps

and

training

needs

for

an

initial

period

of

action.

Training

and

performance gaps will evolve and will need to be monitored constantly for updating

program development.

• There was the inability due to time limitations to survey all faculties and to map the

baseline findings against a parallel baseline from employers who ultimately employ

graduates from these institutions. This would have provided a much clearer picture of

what is missing. This will however be mitigated by ensuring that Industry is involved in

the development of the ICT Integration Strategy.




of 114

Findings

Findings are drawn from four target groups: (1) HoDs, (2) Lecturers (3) IT Technicians and (4)

Students. Face‐to‐face interviews, questionnaires and focus groups were used as methods of

data collection.

The

questions

raised

were

used

to

measure

the

level

of

awareness

and

also

the

existing practices in the use of ICTs in TIVET institutions in Kenya. Tools used in the integration

of ICTs were investigated and a rating of where and how computers are used in curriculum

subjects provided. The awareness of the HoDs and lecturers on how ICTs can be used in

different trade areas was also gauged. The findings are categorized under systems domains of

Policy and Vision, Curricula, Pedagogy, ICT infrastructure, Organization & Management and

Professional development.

General information

Several instruments were used to collect data from the various target groups as presented in the

annex. Data was collected from 38 institutions which represented 88% of the targeted

institutions. Questionnaires were administered to a total of (220) Management personnel

identified as Heads of Department, practitioner personnel identified as Lecturers (inclusive of IT

Coordinators) in the 38 institutions. Of those the following were completed:

• 109 Management Questionnaires, from 35 institutions

• 89 Lecturer questionnaires, from 25 institutions

• 35 ICT technician questionnaires, from 35 institutions.

• 199 Training Needs Assessment questionnaires, representing the view of 100 managers

and 99 lecturers from 38 institutions.

Table 1 presents a composite demographic profile of the respondents based on the responses to

the TNA questionnaire according to the variables of gender, age, number of years of

professional experience, qualifications, job hierarchy in relation to the Management and

Lecturer groups.




of 114

Table 1‐ Demographic profile of the TIVET respondents to the TNA questionnaire (n = 199)

Frequency Valid percentage

Gender

Male 132 70.6

Female

55 29.4

Heads of Department

Male 61 32.6

Female 33 17.6

Lecturers

Male 71 38.0

Female 22 11.8

Age

Under 30 17 11.0

30

–

50

129 83.2Over 50 9 5.8

Job designation

Head of Department 100 50.3

Lecturer 99 49.7

Qualifications

Diploma 92 50.3

Bachelors Degree 63 34.4

Masters Degree 28 15.3

Years of experience

Less than

5

86 47.3

5‐10 66 36.3

11‐20 28 14.1

More than 20 2 1.0

Specialist areas

Business Studies (BUS) 42 21.9

Applied Sciences (APP) 34 17.7

Information Technologies (ICT) 57 29.7

Engineering (ENG) 45 23.5

Agriculture (AGR) 2 1.0

Food & Beverage ( F&B ) 3 1.6

Hospitality

(HOS)

1 0.5Administration ( ADM ) 3 1.6

Clothing and Textiles (CT) 1 0.5

Electrical / Electronics (ELE) 1 0.5

Automotive (AUT) 1 0.5

Building (BUL) 1 0.5

Mechanical (MEC) 1 0.5

Province




of 114

Table 1‐ Demographic profile of the TIVET respondents to the TNA questionnaire (n = 199)

Frequency Valid percentage

Central 42 21.9

Nairobi 25 13.1

Rift Valley 31 16.2

Western

33 17.3Nyanza 32 16.8

Eastern 22 11.5

Coast 0 0.0

North Eastern 6 3.1

Table 1 ‐ Demographic profile of the TIVET respondents

Source: Survey on ICT Use in Technical Industrial and Vocation Education Training in Kenya

Note: Some of the demographic questions were not answered by all respondents, thus, the variation in the actual

frequency numbers in each category. Unfortunately, many respondents left various sections of the questionnaire blank,

and this therefore adds to the difficulty in interpreting the results.

Respondents to the TNA questionnaire were from seven provinces in Kenya, with Nairobi

Central Province (21%), Western Province (17%), Nyanza Province (16%), Rift Valley Province

(16%), Nairobi (13%) and Eastern (11%) furnishing the most respondents and North Eastern

Province furnishing a small but significant set of respondents (3%). There were no respondents

from Coast Province. Of the respondents, 50.3% (100) were HoDs and 49.7% (99) were lecturers.

Of those providing details of their gender, 70% (132) were men and 30% (55) were women. Of

these 32% (61) were male HoDs, 17% (33) were female HoDs, 38% (71) were male lecturers and

11% (22) were female lecturers. Of those who reported on their qualifications, 50% (92) had

diploma qualification, 34% (63)a Bachelor’s degree and 15% (28) a masters degree. Of those

who reported on experience 47% (86) indicated that they had less than five years of experience,

36% (66) between five and ten years of experience, 14% (28) between 11 and 20 years of

experience and 1% (2) with over 20 years of experience. Of those who reported on specialist

expertise, 29% (57) were specialists in Information Technologies, 13% (45) in Engineering, 21%

(42) in Business Studies and 17% (34) in Applied Science. The remaining 5% (13) of respondents

declared themselves specialists in the areas of Agriculture, Food & Beverage, Hospitality,

Administration, Clothing and Textiles, Electrical Engineering, Automotive engineering, Building

and Construction, Mechanic Engineering.

Based on

the

demographic

profile

presented

in

Table

1,

it

can

be

seen

that

the

majority

of

the

respondents were male, between the ages of 30 and 50, working as a Head of Department or

Lecturer, having a degree or a diploma qualification, mostly specializing in IT, Business Studies,

Engineering or Applied Science, representing most of the provinces with the exception of Coast

province and with less than ten years teaching experience.




of 114


Policy and Vision is defined here as:

A principle or course of action mandated by the national government which provides for the

mandate, goals, objectives, standards, scope, strategies and activities, organizational structure

and plan,

budgetary

provision,

with

an

accompanying

master

plan

developed

and

implemented

by the Ministry regarding ICT use in Education and Training.

The purpose of gauging the policy environment and the accompanying vision is to determine

presence or absence of commitment and support of policy makers and educational authorities

to the systematic integration of ICT in Educational and Training systems.

The focus of the survey under the policy component was to determine the existence of ICT

policy/plans at the national, sector, and or institutional level, and also to assess if and how these

policies were applied in the TIVET institutions. This included a focus on:

• National Policies for ICT in Education & Training

• National policies/ vision for ICT use in TIVET programs and how they are related

• Projects/ Initiatives for ICT use in course provision

• Institutional policy application on ICT use in TIVET institutions

1.1 Vision of TIVET Institutions

According to the respondents in the questionnaires, it seems that most institutions have an

institutional vision.

Out

of

the

HoDs

who

responded

to

the

question

on

institutional

vision,

23%

(17) indicated that their institutions have a broad vision to be centres of excellence / model

institutions / market leaders / world class institutes in Technical / TIVET training. Other

respondents indicated their institutions as having a vision that is slightly narrower, 19% (14)

indicating a focus on Research and Technology, 13% (10) indicating a focus on Entrepreneurship

and Technology, 11% (8) indicating a focus on Innovation and Technology, and 5% (4) indicating

a focus on Business/Management and Technology.




of 114

Institutional visions

To be a centre of excellence / model institution / market leader / world

class institute in...

Number

of

answers %

Technical / Technical, Industrial, Vocational Education & Training 17 23%

Entrepreneurship and Technology 10 13%

Research and Technology 14 19%

Innovation and Technology 8 11%

ICTs/Computers and Technology 4 5%

Business/Management and Technology 7 9%

Other 15 20%

Total 75 100%

Table 2‐

Institutional Visions

1.2 Institutional policy application on ICT use in TIVET institutions

1.2.1 Awareness of Policies, plans or directives for ICT in Education and Training

When asked about their awareness of policies plans or directives for ICT in Education and

Training, 70% (76) of the HoDs and 76% (68) of the lecturers indicated that they were aware of

such policies at the national and/or sector level.

When

asked

about

the

existence

of

plans,

49%

(53)

of

the

respondents

indicated

that

their

institutions had a written or documented plan for ICT use in course provision. Further, ICT

guidelines and ICT department policies existed at approximately a third of the institutions

according to both HoDs and Lecturers. ICT work plans have been developed according to 17%

(18 HoDs) and 20% (17 lecturers) of the respondents.

Existence of ICT Policies and

Plans, according to HoDs Yes No No answer

Institutional ICT Policy 53 49% 50 46% 6 6%

ICT

Department

Policy

26

24%

77

71%

7

6%

ICT Workplans 18 17% 85 78% 6 6%

Institutional ICT Master Plan 7 6% 94 86% 6 6%

ICT Guidelines 29 27% 74 68% 6 6%

Budget for ICT workplan

implementation 19 17% 83 76% 5 5%

Table 3‐ Existing policies and plans‐ HoDs




of 114

While 18% (16) lecturers acknowledged that there was an institutional ICT Master Plan, only 6%

(7) of HoDs recognized that such plans existed. A budget for the ICT work plan implementation

also existed according to 22% (19) of the lecturers and 17% (19) of HoDs.

Existence of ICT Policies and

Plans, according to Lecturers Yes No No answer

Institutional ICT Policy 43 49% 43 49% 1 1%

ICT Department Policy 25 29% 61 70% 1 1%

ICT Work plans 17 20% 69 79% 1 1%

Institutional ICT Master Plan 16 18% 70 80% 1 1%

ICT Guidelines 26 30% 60 69% 1 1%

Budget for ICT work plan

implementation 19 22% 67 77% 1 1%

Table 4‐ Existence of ICT policies and plans ‐ Lecturers

In general both lecturers and HoDs seem to be very aware of policies relating to ICTs.

1.2.2 Implementation of national TIVET ICT Policy

When asked about the implementation of the national ICT policy at institutional level, 46% (50)

of the HoDs and 82 % (72) of the lecturers considered their institutions to be implementing

National/TIVET ICT policy in Education & Training.

Of those respondents who provided reasons for the non‐implementation of National/TIVET ICT

policy by

institutions,

the

lack

of

infrastructure

was

listed

as

the

main

issue

according

to

both

HoDs (44% / 7 respondents) and lecturers (33% / 6 respondents). For lecturers however, the lack

of ICT policy/information is an equally important cause of non‐implementation with 33% (6)

confirming this to be the case. There was 25% (4) of HoDs on the other hand who stated that a

lack of human resources was the second most significant reason for not implementing

National/TIVET ICT policy. Further, a lack of policy information was raised by just 13% (2) of

HoDs. A lack of resources and human resources in particular was raised by 6% (2) of lecturers.




of 114

Accordi ng to HoDs, insti tutions are no t impl ementing ICT4E

Policies because of a lack of...

13%

44%

25%

6%6%

6%

Policy/Information

Infrastructure

Human resources

Resources

Don't know

Other

Figure 3: Reasons for not implementing ICT policies – HoDs

Accordi ng to Lectu rers, i nsti tutions are no t impl ementing

ICT4E Poli cies because of a lack of...

33%

33%

11%

11%

6%6%

Policy/Information

Infrastructure

Human resources

Resources

Don't knowOther

Figure 4: Reasons for not implementing ICT policies ‐ Lecturers

1.2.4 Level of satisfaction with Policies and Plans

In a question where respondents were asked about satisfaction with ICT in Education and

Training

policies

and

plans,

88%

(91)

of

the

HoDs

agreed

that

the

existing

policy/plans

were

relevant and applicable to their institution but only 59% (63) agreed that they were adhering to

all the policy requirements. Among lecturers, 85% (76) agreed that the existing policy/plans

were relevant and applicable to their institutions but only 58% (52) agreed that they were

adhering to all the policy requirements.




of 114

When asked if the institution was trying its best to adhere to ICT policy requirements, 80% of

both HoDs and Lecturers agreed (86 HoDs s/ 72 lecturers). As many as 52% (56) of HoDs

disagreed with the statement that existing ICT policies were outdated and/or difficult to

implement as also did 63% (56) of lecturers.

Level of satisfac tion of HoDs w ith Policies and Plans

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

The existing

ICT in

Education

policy/plans

are relevant

and applicable

to our

We are

adhering to all

the policy

requirements

as expected of

education and

training

We are trying

our best to

adhere to the

policy

requirements

as expected of

education and

The existing

ICT in

Education

policy/plans

are outdated

and/or difficult

to implement

Strongly Agree

Agree

Undecided

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Figure 5‐ Levels of satisfaction with policies and plans ‐ HoDs

Level of satisfac tion of Lecturers with Policies and Plans

05

101520253035404550

The existing ICT

in Education

policy/plans are

relevant and

applicable to

our institution

We are

adhering to all

the policy

requirements

as expected of

education and

training

We are trying

our best to

adhere to the

policy

requirements

as expected of

education and

The existing ICT

in Education

policy/plans are

outdated and/or

difficult to

implement

Strongly Agree

Agree

Undecided

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Figure 6‐ Levels of satisfaction with policies and plans – Lecturers

1.2.5 How is ICT Policy implemented

Findings indicate similar patterns among HoDs and lecturers perceptions on policy

implementation.




of 114

Figure 7 – How is ICT Policy Implemented – Lecturers and HoDs

Both HoDs and lecturers identified the most common way institutions engaged for

implementing ICT policies was in offering ICT as a separate course, i.e. a measure that targets

mainly the students (77% (51) HoDs ‐ 72% (63) lecturers). The second most common

implementation method was integration of ICT in management and administration of the

institution where a larger percentage of HoDs naturally acknowledged these efforts: (HoDs 73%

(48) / lecturers 57% (50)). The integration of ICT into the teaching of technical subjects however

was not as common (HoDs 48% (34) / lecturers 52% (42)). Both HoDs and lecturers perceived

that this level of integration would require more support training of lecturers in how to make

use of ICT in their teaching and the actual use of ICTs in the classroom (HoDs 62% (41) /

lecturers 53% (46))

These results

are

not

very

surprising.

The

challenges

for

policy

implementation

are

many

given

the inadequate infrastructure and equipment that can only be accessed through computer labs

that are occupied most of the time by students taking ICT as a subject. These results also verify

the lack of human resource capacity as a barrier to institutional implementation of ICT policies.

Further, these responses show that most efforts of ICT policy implementation are taking place

outside of actual course delivery. ICT integration in classroom practice is less frequent than ICT

as a standalone subject or its use in administration and management.

1.2.6 Challenges with TIVET and ICT Integration

Lecturers and HoDs identified the following as challenges that TIVET institutions face in general

course provision.

• Inadequacy of equipment/ infrastructure was by far the most commonly stated

challenge acknowledged by 36% (39) of HoDs and 56% (50) of lecturers




of 114

•

The second most common challenge was obsolescence of curriculum, courses and

equipment raised by 27% (29) of HoDs and 26% (23) of lecturers, followed closely by

Technology literacy (ICT teachers and ICT literacy courses) with 26% (28) of HoDs and

24% (21) of lecturers. HoDs also noted a lack of infrastructure as one of the major

challenges for TIVET in general.

Challenges w ith TVET course provision, according to HoDs

and Lecturers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

PolicyManagement

Obsolescence-curriculum-courses-equipment

Adequacy-T-L-facilitiesInfrastructure

Technology LiteracyFunding

Lecturer-Qualifications

Lecturer-AttitudesLecturer-shortage

Lecturer-experience-industry

No answer Other

Figure 8‐ Challenges with TIVET course provision – HoDs and Lecturers

Regarding challenges for ICT integration in course provision:

• Both HoDs and lecturers noted a lack of ICT infrastructure and ICT equipment as the two

most significant challenges; acknowledged by 37% (40) / 50% (55) of HoDs and 28% (25)

/ 27% (24) of lecturers.

•

24% (26) of HoDs emphasize limited ICT skills and literacy among lecturers and 22% (24)

raise the lack of ICT specific lecturers as the major challenges for integrating ICTs to

TIVET course provision. 20% (18) of the lecturers on the other hand pointed out

insufficient ICT training opportunities and 19% (17) observed that the curriculum is not

responsive to the use of ICTs




of 114

Challenges with ICT integration in TIVET course provis ion,

according to HoDs and Lecturers

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

ICT infrastructureICT Policy

ICT equipment

ICT curriculum

ICT contentICT pedagogy

ICT teachers

ICT literacyICT training

ICT cost

Lecturer-student att itudeNo answer

Other

Figure 9‐

Challenges with

ICT

integration

in

TIVET

course

provision

–

HoDs

and

Lecturers

In interpreting these findings, it is clear that inadequate training and learning infrastructure,

facilities and equipment present the greatest challenge facing TIVET course delivery in general

and ICT integration in particular. Human resource capacity is the second major challenge and

specifically the ICT skills of lecturers. Training efforts that address ICT literacy and awareness of

possibilities with ICT use arise as a prioritized issue.

Further, the TIVET curriculum does not accommodate ICT integration. During the focus group

discussions it became clear that what is not in the curriculum is not taught. A modernized

curriculum that involves ICT integration would encourage lecturers to use ICTs in their course

delivery. However, such a change would have to be accompanied by training possibilities for

lecturers to enable them deliver the new curriculum.

1.3 General Policy & Vision Comments

The policy and vision findings show that most of the TIVET institutions do not have documented

ICT policy, ICT work plans or ICT guidelines. Among the few institutions that have an institutional

ICT policy only a fifth have developed ICT work plans to realize the policies and made

subsequent budget

allocations.

As

a result

there

is

a significant

implementation

gap

regarding

ICT integration in TIVET provision.

The ICT policy gap on a national level seems to hinder strong administrative support for

institutional management and even though ICT sometimes are debated in staff meetings, the

actual planning and implementation of ICT use is not forthcoming. However, both lecturers and

HoDs are aware of the ICT policies that do exist and there is a high level of confidence in the




of 114

relevance of these. The institutions have a willingness to adhere to policy requirements but

barriers such as lack of infrastructure and required human resource capacity stand in the way of

implementation together with the absence of institutional implementation/work plans.

A lack of infrastructure and access to ICT facilities poses the greatest challenge to implementing

ICT policy together with limited capacity of lecturers to efficiently use ICT in course delivery. ICT

facilities and access to equipment is limited. It is clear that the ICT infrastructure at the

institutions has to be expanded, updated and access for students and lecturers increased.

Measures to increase infrastructure setups as well as expand access to the existing ICT

equipment should be explored. ICTs are today mostly incorporated in TIVET through separate

ICT courses or through management and administration procedures. The integration of ICT at

the classroom level is not very substantial which clearly affects the quality of education offered

to students in a negative way. Besides the need for improved training and learning

infrastructure and equipment, it is critical to address the ICT literacy among lecturers and their

awareness of

the

possibilities

and

potential

of

ICT

use

in

their

teaching.

The

modernization

of

the TIVET curriculum to include ICT specifics is an important vehicle for ICT utilization in the

classroom. However such a measure must be accompanied by training offered to lecturers so

that they are empowered with ICT literacy.




of 114

2. Curricula and Assessment

Curriculum is defined here as curriculum to teach ICT (as in computer literacy). ICT integration is

defined as the use of ICT in the delivery of curriculum subjects to improve education outcomes.

The main curriculum for TIVET education in Kenya is developed by the Kenya Institute of

Education (KIE). The Ministry in‐charge of TIVET Education in Kenya allows the institutions to

offer a certificate of attendance in ICT proficiency at the institutional level. At the more

professional level national certification bodies such as the Kenya National Examination Council

(KNEC) and Kenya Accountants and Secretaries National Examinations Board (KASNEB) are

involved in the assessment and certification.

The purpose of the survey under this component was to determine whether ICT use/integration

in core curriculum delivery is standardized and whether this is guided by any directives. The

survey questions

sought

to

determine

the

existing

national

policies

for

technology

use

in

TIVET

curricula and assessment. The findings in this section present an overview of ICT courses and the

integration of ICT in teaching and learning practices in TIVET institutions. Specifically, the survey

sought to:

• Determine the objectives for ICT use in TIVET programme provision

• Determine the use/application of ICT for instructional purposes

• Identify the standards for ICT use in institutions

• Establish the impact of national examinations on ICT use in courses

2.1 Existence of ICT courses and integration

According to questionnaire respondents, when asked how ICT is offered to students, 83% (52) of

the HoDs and 67% (58) of the lecturers indicated that ICT is offered as a separate subject. This is

followed by ICTs being offered as a subject/unit within different courses according to 30% (19)

of HoDs and 31% (27) of lecturers. Finally 24% (15) and 19% (16) of HoDs and lecturers

respectively indicated that ICT is being used as a tool to improve curriculum subject delivery. In

focus group discussions many students commented on ICT course offerings as being inadequate

and centered on a commercial IT provider package for basic word‐processing and typing skills

Overall

ICT

integration

in

TIVET courses

was

noted

to

fall

under

three

different

categories

of

practice:

•

ICT in administration;

• ICT in teaching (note preparation, document processing and demonstrations through

online video clips);




of 114

•

ICT for research (lesson preparation and information search and retrieval);

Integration of ICT into teaching and learning practices was listed as being influenced by the

availability of Infrastructural resources, necessity, and time. Lecturer resistance, a lack of

institutional mandate and a lack of capacity building to support integration were listed as factors

inhibiting the use of ICT in curriculum delivery. In focus group discussions, stakeholders

commented that access to ICT after regular classes and during the weekend are restricted as

most computer labs remained closed when students were free. A number of students described

technology tools in use in the institutions as archaic and lacking capacity to accommodate most

of the new software in the market‐place.

Infrastructural challenges were cited as the biggest impediment to the use of ICT in course

provision as demonstrated in Figure 9 below.

Challenges with ICT integration in course provision , accordingto lecturers

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

InfrastructureICT equipment

ICT trainingICT curriculum

ICT costICT teachers

Lecturer-student attitudeICT Policy

ICT literacy

ICT pedagogyICT contentNo answer

Figure 10 ‐ Challenges with ICT integration in course provision – HoDs and Lecturers.

According to IT technicians, 66% (23) of the institutions have specific equipment and/or

software available for integration of ICT into teaching and learning.

Table 5 below describes the equipment in more detail:

Tools available

for

ICT

integration

Number of

institutions

% of surveyed

institutions

Laptops/computers 15 43%

Projectors 15 43%

Internet connectivity 5 14%

Cameras 4 11%

Specific subject software 5 14%

Other hardware or software 5 14%




of 114

Table 5 ‐ Tools available for ICT integration

The registered high percentage of institutions offering ICT as a subject could be explained by the

fact that most institutions are offering ICT as a standalone course in the diploma colleges. The

ICT departments are provided with the required infrastructure in terms of hardware and

software.

The

high

respondent

rating

of

ICT

offering

as

a

unit

within

different

courses

could

partly be attributed to ICT policies in a number of institutions which advocate for the provision

of technology literacy courses to all students so that they graduate with basic ICT skills. The

lowest percentage register was for ICT integration in institutional practices. This low percentage

could be attributed to a number of factors which were highlighted during the focus group

discussions, including:

• Inadequate ICT hardware resources

• Lack of appropriate software to enhance curriculum delivery outcomes as attested to by

archaic

technology

tools

which

may

not

be

able

to

run

software

in

technical

subjects

which require high hardware specifications

• Lack of skills among lecturers to integrate ICTs in the curriculum

• Lack of time as practices of using ICTs were noted to be time consuming. This is because

of the centralized location of computers in the lab with resources that are overstretched

between the ICT department and other departments

• Lack of time due to curriculum overload

• Nature of the curriculum is such that it does not recognize, encourage or provide

guidance on how and when ICT should be used

•

Application of ICT in subjects is not assessed in the examinations and as such the

practice is not given as much attention and priority

• The design of the classrooms is not appropriate for ICT use

2.2 ICT tools Integration in various courses

On courses in the institutions where computers and related technologies are used 88% (50) of

the HoDs indicated that these are used in Computer Science/IT courses. This contrasts very

sharply with the other areas that were listed all of which fall well below 20%.

Figure 10

shows

the

ICT

tools

integration

practices

in

TIVET

courses.

The

highest

ratings

occur

mainly under the “sometimes” category which indicates that ICT tools integration is mainly

carried out on an ad hoc basis. In focus group discussions Lecturers indicated that they used ICT

mainly as a result of necessity, convenience, pressure from peers and students and policy

requirements in their performance contracts.




of 114

ICT tools Integration in va rious courses, according to HoDs

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

70%80%90%

100%

C o m p u t e r / I T

c o u r s e s

A c c o u n t i n g /

B u s i n e s s

H e a l t h & A p p l i e d

S c i e n c e

M a t h e m a t i c s /

S t a t i s t i c s

E l e c t r i c a l &

E l e c t r o n i c

E n g i n e e r i n g

A u t o m o t i v e


M e c h a n i c a l / C i v i l


B u i l d i n g & C i v i l


I n s t i t u t i o n a l

M a n a g e m e n t

L a n g u a g e s /

C o m m u n i c a t i o n s

S e c r e t a r i a l

Alw ays

A lot

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

Figure 11 ‐ ICT integration practices ‐ HoDs

While comparing the departments it becomes clear that the departments with the highest

frequency of ICT integration other than the ICT Department are the Electrical Engineering and

the Engineering Departments.

Mathematics, Institutional Management & Hospitality, Languages and Communications

Departments registered the lowest use of ICT in course delivery and actually had the highest

rating

in

never

having

used

ICT

in

their

coursework.

Surprisingly

Secretarial

courses

are

also

among the lowest in the use of ICT tools.

The high percentage rating in the ICT Department can be attributed to the fact that ICT is the

tool of trade in the department. The use of computers on an ad hoc basis could have a bearing

on the fact that guidelines and policies for ICT use are not clearly articulated by the Ministry, the

Institutions, the Curriculum or the Examining Bodies.

The curriculum has a significant influence on the take‐up of ICT. Whereas it might be assumed

that ICT new computer technologies would be used in secretarial courses, the current

curriculum

is

still

based

on

the

traditional

technology

of

the

typewriter.

However,

the

institutions are adopting the computerized secretarial curricula according to their level of

preparedness.

In focus group discussions, it was reported that Language and Communication curricula still

emphasizes verbal and non formal communication without considering technology as a




of 114

courses is indicative of the high level of awareness of the necessity to produce graduates with

ICT skills. However, this is restricted to basic ICT proficiency training.

2.5 Specific skills with IT

Lecturers and HoDs are cognizant of the requirement of ICT use in specific trade areas. Both

categories of respondents perceived that there was a need for greater allocation of time in

specific skill areas in the TIVET programs. The requirement for more ICT access time was

acknowledged by more than 80% (160) of both Lecturers and HoDs. Findings from other sections

within this report also indicate that accessing ICT resources is a challenge, especially for

students outside the ICT department.

This finding indicates that access to ICTs is an issue in specific trade areas. While thinking about

the level of access to ICTs, and the infrastructural challenge, it is also important to think about

the ICT

deployment

policies

in

institutions.

Additional computer lab time may also require a certain level of flexibility, creativity,

organizational and administration support from both at the administration and IT department

levels. The IT technician should therefore act as a support person for all other departments.

2.6 Equipment available during examination

When asked about the ICT tools and equipment provision for students during final

assessments/examinations, a majority of the respondents noted the use of four main categories

of ICT tools in examinations: Computers, printers, storage media and software. Some 14% (15)

of HoDs indicated that there are no ICT tools and equipment provided during examinations in

their institutions, and Internet connectivity is usually disabled during examinations.

In focus group discussions stakeholders explained that student project work project assessment

is carried out at the end of each TIVET course. Stakeholders reported that every student has to

use ICT to complete the project. This may range from the requirement of submitting the final

project in word processed formats to calculations using spreadsheets and graphical

representations through the use of software. This may be carried out by the individual students

or

through

assistance

from

commercial

centers.

The

internet

is

disconnected

during

examinations to avoid examination cheating either through email correspondence or searches

on the internet. There is also a high use of technology in examination by the ICT Department

where ICTs are tools of trade. This is not the case in non‐ICT departments.




of 114

2.7 Existence of IT standards within the Curriculum

A majority of the lecturers indicated that there are no specific standards within the curriculum

for ICT usage. Some 18% (16) of lecturers also indicated that standards were limited to

institutional policy on basic ICT literacy skills for all students.

It is worth noting that even when lecturers indicate that there are standards for ICT usage, this is

currently restricted to computer proficiency. This may be a policy rather than a standards issue.

2.8 View of IT Personnel on use of ICT by Lecturers and Students

On being asked how ICT is being used by lecturers and students, 80% (28) of the IT technicians

indicated that lecturers used ICT mainly for instructional purposes, and for communications and

lesson preparation in the second place (77%, 27). They also noted the main use of ICT by

students is communications (63% ‐ 22 answers). ICT is used least for project‐based learning

(29%,

20)

and

(11%,

4)

by

both

lecturers

and

students

respectively

and

the

use

of

ICT

for

research is surprisingly low with IT technician ratings indicating 49% (17) and 34% (12) use

among lecturers and students respectively.

View of IT personnel on use of ICTs by lecturers and students

77%

63%

80% 77%71%

34% 29%

49%

9%

63%

23% 23%17%

57%

14% 11%

34%

14%

0%10%20%30%40%50%

60%70%80%90%

C o m m u n i c a t i o n s

C o n t e n t

d e v e l o p m e n t

I n s t r u c t i o n a l

p u r p o s e s

L e s s o n

p r e p a r a t i o n

P e r s o n a l u s e

( e m a i l s )

P r o f e s s i o n a l


( o n l i n e

P r o j e c t b a s e d

l e a r n i n g

R e s e a r c h

O t h e r

Lecturers

Students

Figure

12‐

Uses

of

ICTs

by

lecturers

and

students ‐

IT

Technicians

Communication in this case could be interpreted as email communication and use of social

networks. The low level of research could indicate that students are highly dependent on what

the teachers provide in the form of teaching. The lecturers are not using ICT to carry out

research and this may indicate a curriculum that does not require them to be inquisitive. The

low percentage register in project‐based learning could also be explained by curriculum




of 114

requirements. Projects are only carried out at the end of the course in the final year. The high

percentage register in lesson preparation could also be attributed to the fact that this is from

the perspective of the ICT technician and could be more associated with lesson preparation in

the ICT Department.

2.9 General Curricula & Assessment Comments

The findings above indicate that curricula and assessment requirements have a direct impact on

the use of ICT in TIVET Institutions. The lack of ICT focus in the curriculum has resulted in

fragmented efforts in the use of ICT for instruction. However, ICT is widely taught as a subject in

a majority of the institutions. When the curriculum does not provide standards or guidelines for

ICT usage in course delivery, the focus is on the techno‐centric skills and basic ICT literacy and

not in the development of 21st Century skills.

Infrastructural challenges

were

also

noted

to

greatly

influence

ICT

integration

practices

in

the

institutions. Other factors included lecturer ICT competencies, institutional support mechanisms

for ICT usage, infrastructure deployment, time management, curriculum workload, and

assessment of and for learning and the use of ICT, as essential conditions for leveraging

technology in TIVET curriculum practice. Although the lecturers and HoDs are generally aware of

the necessity to use ICTs in a model for 21st Century curriculum provision, there are few enabling

factors to encourage them to do so.

Although a minority of the students indicated that the TIVET curriculum offerings were

adequate and relevant for their future professional requirements, most of the students

expressed concerns that both the TIVET curriculum and assessment systems were outdated.

There was a general consensus which emerged from the focus group discussions that the

curriculum needs to be revised to meet the requirement of student graduates with technology

skills sets. The curriculum should be sufficiently adequate to meet the demands of today’s

competitive and innovative market place. In addition, ICT course provision was seen as

irrelevant by the students for their specialist fields with technical software often being

unavailable or used for demonstration purposes in a theoretical delivery format.

According to the students, there are a number of issues emerging under the component of

curriculum and

assessment.

These

include:

• Lecturer resistance where there is no institutional mandate and no capacity building to

support integration;

• Access where labs are closed after regular classes requiring students to seek and pay for

extra‐curricular technology upgrades outside the institution;

• Archaic technology tools in use in the institutions;




of 114

• Low computer to student ratios; and

• A disconnect between institutional curriculum with market place practices.

In interpreting the student’s reflections on ICT use in the TIVET curriculum, it would seem at first

that the lack of ‘hard’ facilities (hardware and software) may be the easiest target for blame in

relation to lack of ICT integration in course delivery. Yet many institutions have made great

strides in upgrading facilities and improving access. The cause of concern may in actual fact be

existing capacity, management structure and policy. By addressing these softer issues a culture

of ICT use in curriculum design and course delivery and assessment may be better cultivated and

lead to increased use of ICTs in TIVET institutions




of 114

3. Pedagogy

Pedagogy is here defined as the level of expertise on the use of appropriate applications and

other ICT tools (internet, database management, spreadsheets, graphics, presentation tools,

web page designing, statistical tools, e‐mailing, collaborations, etc.) as well as the frequency of

use to enhance specific teaching strategies by teachers.

The purpose of the Pedagogy component of the survey was to measure the level of lecturer

confidence and expertise to guide the direction of learning, to control learning environment

activities and to plan for future training programs. Other areas of focus included the level of

lecturer expertise to guide choices of ICTs to be used and corresponding content areas; to

determine how regularly lecturers use ICTs for curriculum delivery; and to enable institution

administrators to understand why ICT is frequently used or not used and what steps to take to

encourage and to increase use.

In particular the survey sought to look at:

• Comfort level of lecturers in using the available technology to execute their teaching

strategies

• The regularity with which these available tools are used

• Types of student‐centred approaches for learning and assessment that are

encouraged/used

3.1 Requirement of lecturers to use ICT

When the questionnaire respondents were asked whether the institution required HODs and

lecturers to use ICT, 78% (85) of HoDs and 81% (72) of lecturers interviewed indicated that they

are required to use ICTs.

Lecturers/instructors/tutors are r equired by the

institution to use ICT, according to lecturers

No answer

2%

Yes

81%

No

17%




of 114

Figure 13 – Requirement of lecturers to use ICT – view of HoDs and Lecturers

These findings would indicate that a clear majority of the TIVET institutions require lecturers to

use ICT to some extent. A slightly larger proportion of HoDs than lecturers did not respond to

this question which could be a sign of lacking awareness of these requirements.

3.2 Purpose of ICT use

Findings indicate that ICT is used mainly for research and accessing information as attested to by

54% (59) of HoDs and 75% (67) of lecturers. The second most popular use is for teaching

computer literacy skills and teaching about computers (i.e. computer science) according to 45%

(49) of HoDs and 62% (55) of lecturers.

Purpose of ICT use according to Lecturers and HoDs

Main 4 uses

54%

55%

62%

75%

36%

38%

45%

54%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

As teaching/learning tool for teaching other

subject areas apart from ICT

Development of student ability to use basic

application programs

Training for developing computer skills

Conducting research /accessing

information applicable to course content

HoDs

Lecturers

Figure 14 – Purpose of ICT use – Main 4 uses – Lecturers and HoDs

Other ways in which the computers are put to use include developing students' ability to use

basic application programs and using ICT as a teaching/learning tool for teaching other subject

areas apart from ICT according to 36% (39) and 54% (48) of HODs and lecturers respectively.

HoDs indicated that they use ICT for management and administration with 35% (38) of

respondents indicating the categories of teaching management 34% (37) indicating school

administration and management as frequent usage areas. Lecturers on the other hand are more

frequently

using

ICT

for

conducting

research

to

keep

up

to

date

with

business

&

industry

standards according to 49% (44) of respondents and 47% (42) mentioning production of digital

resources & materials to support coursework.

There were 12% (13) and 7% (8) of HoDs who attested to using ICT to create virtual learning

environments and foster on‐line collaboration groups while the corresponding responses from

lecturers were 7% (6) and 3% (3). 13% (14) of HoDs and 22% (20) of lecturers indicated that they




of 114

use ICT for developing students’ 21st Century skills (listed as logic, reasoning, critical thinking and

problem solving competencies & skills). Table 5 below presents the different ways in which

respondents indicated ICT use in greater detail.

Purpose

of

ICT

use

in

TIVET

courses

HoDs Lecturers

Answers Yes % Answers Yes %

Conducting research /accessing information applicable to course content 59 54% 67 75%

Training for developing computer skills 49 45% 55 62%

Development of student ability to use basic application programs 41 38% 49 55%

As teaching/learning tool for teaching other subject areas apart from ICT 39 36% 48 54%

Conducting research to keep up to date with business & industry standards 36 33% 44 49%

Helping with school administration and management 37 34% 38 43%

Producing digital resources & materials to support coursework 30 28% 42 47%

Information presentation (slideshows, multi‐media material‐ videos, audio, graphics 32 29% 38 43%

Teaching management (tracking of student attendance, performance levels,

instructional objectives mastered, reports, grades etc) 38 35% 27 30%

Communication with students, colleagues, parents, industry etc 34 31% 30 34%

Using in test administration, scoring and analysis 20 18% 38 43%

For playing games and fun 26 24% 31 35%

Occupational simulations in practical technical sessions/classes 21 19% 31 35%

Completing, returning and evaluating course work (through e‐mail) 20 18% 20 22%

Enabling multi‐media slideshow/ project presentations by students 22 20% 18 20%

Development of logic, reasoning, critical thinking and problem solving competencies &

skills 14 13% 20 22%

Developing individualized learning programs 19 17% 12 13%

Using / adapting specific software for technical areas 18 17% 10 11%

Support face to face coursework experiences (e.g. online tutorials, e‐portfolios etc) 13 12% 10 11%

Creating virtual learning environments 13 12% 3 3%

Fostering collaborative on‐line groups 8 7% 6 7%

Other(please specify) 0 0% 2 2%

Table 6‐ Purpose of ICT use in TIVET courses

The responses show that HoDs in general rate institutional use of ICT lower than lecturers rate

their individual ICT use. This could be a sign of lecturers using ICT much more than HoDs and

that

HoDs

are

not

fully

aware

of

the

ICT

use

taking

place

in

the

classrooms

or

among

the

lecturers.

As evidenced by Table 6, the most popular use of ICT in TIVET institutions is for research and

accessing information as well as tutoring in computer science and computer literacy. However,

ICT is also frequently used to develop students’ ability to use basic application programs and as

a teaching/learning tool for other subject areas outside of ICT. HoDs also use ICT for teaching




of 114

and school management and administration whereas lecturers are more inclined to use ICT to

keep up‐to‐date with industry standards and to develop digital resources that they can use in

their tutoring. Conducting research and using ICT in their coursework was highlighted in focus

group discussions as one way in which students use ICT. Research mostly relates to information

searches on the internet while the ICT use in coursework mostly relates to report writing,

document processing and statistical analysis. Analysis of the above findings further indicates

that ICT resources in institutions are mostly used for developing lecturers’ own knowledge. To

this end lecturers undertake research and engage in teaching about computers / ICT literacy.

They don’t generally facilitate virtual learning environments and or engage students’ in the

acquisition of 21st Century skills. Even though lecturers clearly see the potential of ICT to change

classroom dynamics through the creation of motivated and active learners ‐ learners that

engage in dialog and reflection with the lecturer rather than passively listening and taking in

information. This vision has not been actualized. Lecturers do acknowledge the ICT role a vehicle

for innovation in their teaching. They also admit that ICT makes their work easier and more

efficient but

they

seem

to

lack

the

knowledge

required

for

effective

utilization

of

ICT.

Access

to

new teaching materials and tools at their institutions were also cited as being inadequate.

Worth noting is that 12% (13) of HoDs say they are using ICT to create virtual learning

environments compared to 3% (3) of lecturers which represents an exception to the overall

results of HoDs lower rating of ICT use compared to lecturers. The use / adaptation of specific

software for technical areas receives a higher rating by HoDs (17% / 18 respondents) compared

to lecturers (11% / 10 respondents).

3.3 Usage

profile

by

lecturers

When HODs were asked to gauge the usage profile of ICT for teaching by lecturers in the

institution, the following patterns emerged;

• According to HoDs, 17% (17) of lecturers did not use ICT at all for teaching and learning.

Lecturers indicated that this would be 19% (17).

• According to HoDs 13% (13) of lecturers used ICT on a daily basis for teaching and

learning. Lecturers estimated that this would be about 22% (20)

•

Most lecturers have been using computers for a few years, with 42% (37) using them for

more than

five

years.

17%

(15)

of

lecturers

are

very

new

to

computers

and

have

been

using them for less than one year at the time of the study.




of 114

Frequency of ICT use in teaching process, according to

Lecturers

seldom (a few

times a year), 11%

Occasionally (a

few times a month),

26%

Often (tw ice or a

w eek), 21%

Very of ten (every

day), 22%

never (I don’t use

ICTs), 19%

Figure 15– Frequency of ICT use in teaching process ‐ Lecturers

Frequency of ICT use by Lecturers in teac hing proces s,

accor ding to HoDs

they don’t use

ICTs

17%

daily

13%

at least three

times per w eek

14%Occasionally (a

few times a

month)

0%

at least once a

w eek (i.e. one

period)

38%

at least once a

month

18%

Figure 16– Frequency of ICT use by Lecturers in teaching process ‐ HoDs

The above findings show that almost 20% of lecturers are not using ICT at all in their teaching

and learning. This result is proportional to the previous statements regarding mandatory ICT use

where approximately 16‐17% of institutions do not require lecturers to use ICT.

The usage patterns of lecturers vary from the point of view of HoDs and lecturers themselves.

HoDs believe

that

lecturers

use

ICT

more

commonly

at

least

once

a week

(38%)

whereas

the

most common response from lecturers was a few times a month (26%). Among lecturers, there

seems to be a group (22%) that is very ICT prone and are daily ICT users, something that was

verified in focus group discussions where participants observed that technology literacy has

become a matter of personal ambition among lecturers in the absence of institutional directives.




of 114

3.4 Comfort level lecturers

When HoDs were asked to estimate the ICT comfort level of the lecturers, 34% (37) of HoDs

consider that Lecturers were comfortable or very comfortable using ICT, compared to what

lecturers say: 59% (52).

Figure 17 – Comfort level of Lecturers in using technology ‐ HoDs

HoDs considered that 62% (67) of lecturers are not comfortable using ICT while 40% (35) of

lecturers indicated that they were uncomfortable.

It would seem from the findings that Lecturers are generally more confident in using ICT than

HoDs think.

Figure 18 –

Comfort

level

of

lecturers

in

using

technology

‐Lecturers

3.5 Strategies to encourage ICT use

The most common way for institutions to encourage ICT use is to provide ICT facilities according

to 24% (36) HoDs and 37% (35) lecturers, and ICT training according to 27% (41) HoDs and 24%

(23) lecturers. An ICT examinations policy was also identified as a common strategy to

encourage ICT use by 10% (15) of HoDs and 16% (15) of lecturers. Table 6 shows other strategies

identified by respondents that are being employed to encourage lecturers to use ICT in TIVET

institutions.

Strategies to encourage lecturers to

use ICT, according to HoDs

HoDs Lecturers

Answers % Answers %

ICT planning policy 18 12% 9 10%

ICT examination policy 15 10% 15 16%

e‐Content policy 12 8% 1 1%

ICT use in TL 14 9% 0 0%




of 114

Strategies to encourage lecturers to

use ICT, according to HoDs

HoDs Lecturers

Answers % Answers %

ICT research 6 4% 0 0%

ICT training 41 27% 23 24%

ICT facilities 36 24% 35 37%

No strategies 4 3% 6 6%

No answer 2 1% 5 5%

Other 3 2% 0 0%

Table 7 – Strategies to encourage lecturers to use ICTs ‐ HoDs

3.6 General Pedagogy Comments

Even though a clear majority of the TIVET institutions require lecturers to use ICT to some extent

slightly more than 15% do not have any such requirements and almost 20% of lecturers seem

not to be using ICT at all in their teaching and learning. Lecturers are generally more

comfortable

using

ICT

than

HoDs

believe.

However,

there

seems

to

be

a

group

of

ICT

prone

lecturers who are frequent users of ICTs and are making major attempts to use ICT in their

teaching on their own initiative.



developing lecturers own knowledge and teaching students about basic literacy skills.

Facilitation of virtual learning environments or using ICTs to develop students’ 21st Century skills

is not yet a common practice. Lecturers are aware of the inherent potential in ICT in teaching

and learning environments but don’t have the skill‐set nor access to facilities to efficiently

integrate the

new

tools

and

methodologies

in

their

pedagogical

instruction

and

practice.

The main strategies being used to encourage ICT use among staff are enabling access to ICT

facilities and providing ICT training in the institutions.


Infrastructure, as defined, can cover a number of dimensions of ICT provision inclusive of: the

existence of an IT department and IT coordinator; the location of equipment, the availability and

usage profiles; software and content; policies and plans; internet access; support and

maintenance.

The purpose of the ICT infrastructure component of the survey was to determine the

availability/non‐availability of infrastructure and ICT facilities in the institutions. The number of

facilities available can determine the level of development of ICT use in the institutions and the

extent by which use of ICT in Education is being enabled by the presence of such facilities.




of 114

This survey focused on examining existing ICT infrastructure and usage patterns at TIVET

institutions. This included:

• Existence of IT department and IT Technician to maintain the infrastructure and support

the users.

• Hardware available including local area network setup and server services.

• Software and Operating systems in use and specific content available.

•

Internet connectivity.

•

Policies and Procedures for equipment installation and maintenance.

• Usage patterns of equipment and Internet.

4.1 IT infrastructure

IT infrastructure comprises all the computer and communications hardware and software used

to manage

administrative,

management

and

teaching/learning

tasks

in

TIVET

Institutions.

This

section presents an analysis based on the responses obtained to the questionnaires on what

type of equipment is available to lecturers and students, what type of software and content is

used, the type and access to the Internet that is available and general satisfaction of HoDs and

lecturers with the IT infrastructure.

4.1.1 IT department

IT Department and Coordinator

An IT department and coordinator is a critical support when institutions seek to integrate IT into

everyday teaching and learning. A total of 44% (48) of the HoDs respondents answered that

their institution had its own IT Department.

``

From the IT technician’s survey it can be deducted that the profile of the coordinator in the

majority of the cases is that of a graduate with a tertiary level diploma (66% ‐ 23 responses) or

certificate from a private course (34% ‐ 12 responses). Also, 60% (21) of IT Technicians said that

they also learned by themselves or on the job. Regarding upkeep of skills, IT coordinators

claimed that this was very demanding with most IT technicians (80% ‐ 28 responses) saying they

updated their skills by themselves at work. There were 29% (10) who were taking courses at the

TIVET

institution,

43%

(15)

who

were

paying

privately

for

courses

and

29%

(10)

who

were

continuing their formal education while working.

Figure 19 – Training received ‐ IT Technicians

As more IT infrastructure is added, and hardware and software needs to be increased, there is

also the need to have qualified personnel that can install, manage and maintain the ICT

equipment. Since all TIVET institutions have some kind of equipment, at some point it becomes




of 114

more convenient, both in efficiency and in cost, to hire dedicated personnel to do these tasks.

The number of TIVET institutions with an IT department is bound to increase over time. The

average IT technician’s profile is that of an intermediate‐level professional that maintains

his/her skills via on‐the‐ job training.

4.1.2 IT Equipment

Respondents were questioned about the type of ICT equipment available, its location and

specifications.

According to HoDs, reliable electricity was available in half of the institutions (55). 31% (34)

indicated that they had to generate their own electricity, 2 (2%) using solar power. Electricity is

a critical factor that is lacking in many institutions, limiting the installation or daily usage of IT

infrastructure.

Figure

20 –

Average

number

of

computers

per

Institution ‐

IT

Technicians

Respondents indicated that ICT was present in TIVET institutions in several ways, with

computers being predominant, as well as related devices like printers and projectors. According

to the IT technicians, most TIVET institutions managed several separate computer labs: four or

more for 29% (10) of them; 20% (7) have three;, 7% (2) have two;, 20% (7) have one; and only

one institution does not have a lab. The average number of computers per institution is 86, with

40% (14) of the institutions having between 50 and 100. The average number of computers per

lab is 21 (average of all the answers) with most institutions (57%) having between 1 and 20

machines available, and 37% (13) having between 21 and 40 computers per lab.

The fact that several institutions have several computer labs suggest a division of uses (i.e. some

for students, other for teachers, etc) or parallel use of smaller groups (use during class, after

class, etc). Lab size is coherent with class size. It might also suggest the installation of labs in

existing classroom infrastructure.

Figure 21 – Average number of computers per Institution ‐ IT Technicians

Regarding the type of computer in use, 84% (2294) of the computers in the institutions have a

Pentium V processor or higher, and 6% are portable computers (laptops). There are 77% (27) of

the institutions that have some kind of server in use. Computer specifications suggest than most

of the equipment has been acquired in recent years (no more than 2 to 3 years ago) and is not

refurbished or donated. A good percentage of laptops suggest mobile use of devices during

classes, probably combined with a projector. Existence of servers and server configuration

suggest the existence of local area networks to share resources.




of 114

4.1.3 Location of equipment

According to the HoDs, 50% (54) indicated that their institution had equipment available in

computer labs, 44% (48) in lecturer’s common room, 35% (38) in their own office and 21% (22)

in the library. Regarding lecturers, 81% (72) of them indicated that they used computers in the

computer lab and 67% (60) in the department’s office.

Location o f computers in TVET Institutions, accord ing to HoDs

50%

21%

4%

35%

12%

44%

5%

0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Computer laboratory/ resource centre

Library

Classrooms

In my office

In the department office

Lecturer/ instructor common room

Administrator’s office

Others (please specify)

Figure 22 – Location of computers ‐ HoDs

It seems that most of the equipment is shared by lecturers and students, as stated by the fact

that it is located in the computer lab. Other equipment, presumably to be used by lecturers

only, is present in their common room or department’s office.

4.1.4 Local Area Network

Of those HoDs who answered the question about the existence of a Local Area Network (LAN) at

the institution, 77% (50) said their institutions had installed some kind of network to connect

some of their computers, while 11% (7) indicated that in their institutions all of the machines

were interconnected. According to IT technicians, 71% (25) of the institutions had some type of

network, with Windows being the main operating system used by 88%( 16) of those with LAN. In

66% (23) of the institutions, technicians indicated that at least one server was available.

The following

graph

lists

the

main

uses

of

the

institution’s

servers:




of 114

Institutions use a variety of connection technologies. According to ICT Technicians, 32% (8) were

connected through wireless and 24% (6) though cell phone.

Lecturers report that they were using internet every day in 30% (27) of the cases and several

times a week in 24% (21). 20% (18) of lecturers said that they never used it.

Connectivity comes out of focus group discussions as a priority issue to be addressed for many

institutions. It seems that only some of the institutions have internet access. When they do, it

might not be always available or available to everyone. A few institutions have Internet available

for all devices and all the times, but that is clearly an exception. When institutions are

connected they use a variety of access technologies: phone line, cable, wireless, cell phone,

ADSL, satellite, which probably indicates adaptability to the best suitable local

telecommunication option.

4.1.7 Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training

HoDs and lecturers were asked four questions regarding the adequacy of equipment, content,

training and internet access for their needs.

• On “The ICT equipment that we have is adequate for our objectives, educational needs

and number of students” , three quarters of the HoDs (73%, 53) seemed to disagree, 18%

(13) of them strongly. Almost the same proportion of lecturers disagreed 72% (74), 19%

(17) strongly.

•

On

“The

ICT

software

and

content

that

we

have

is

adequate for

our

objectives,

educational needs and number of students” 67% (49) of HoDs had some level of

disagreement, while lecturers were 74% (67).

•

On “The teaching staff has an adequate level of knowledge to integrate ICTs into their

subjects” 48% (35) of HoDs had some level of disagreement, while 31% agreed or

strongly agreed. On the other hand, 60% (54) of lecturers disagreed.

• On “The ICT internet access that we have is adequate for our objectives, educational

needs and number of students” 55% (40) of HoDs disagreed, while 60% (54) of lecturers

disagreed.




of 114

Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training

according to HoDs

5% 7% 5% 5%10% 12%

26% 25%

0% 0%

7%1%

55%

48%

34% 34%

18% 19%14%

21%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%60%

The ICT equipment that

we have is adequate for

our objectives,

educational needs and

number of students

The ICT software and

content that we have is

adequate for our

objectives, educational

needs and number of students

The teaching staff have

an adequate level of

knowledge to integrate

ICTs into their subjects

The ICT Internet

access that we have is

adequate for our


needs and number of students

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Dis agree Strongly Dis agree

Figure 24 – Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training ‐ HoDs

Adequ acy of equipment, sof tware, Internet and train ing

according to Lecturers

4% 2%7% 7%

15%11%

22% 22%

7% 8% 8% 8%

53%

49%39% 39%

19%26%

21% 21%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

The ICT equipment that

we have is adequate for

our objectives,

educational needs and

number of students

The ICT software and

content that we have is

adequate for our


needs and number of

students

The teaching staff have

an adequate level of

knowledge to integrate

ICTs into their subjects

The ICT Internet

access that we have is

adequate for our


needs and number of

students

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Dis agree Strongly Dis agree

emis

Figure 25 – Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training ‐ Lecturers

It seems the great majority of HoDs and lecturers agree that the equipment, software, content

and internet access should be improved in order to satisfy their educational needs and

adequately serve the number of students.




of 114

HoDs and lecturer’s opinion is different when it comes to the level of knowledge of lecturers on

ICT integration into their subjects: HoD’s opinion seems to be divided, while 60% of lecturers

don’t agree at all. This seems to imply that lecturers don’t think they are qualified enough, while

HoDs think that they should be.

4.2 ICT usage

4.2.1 Equipment availability and usage

According to 49% (34) of HoDs, all lecturers had access to the institution’s computers. There

were 44% (39) of lecturers who said that the equipment was available to them 10 hours or more

every week. Only 17% (15) said that they had access for one hour or less a week. 78% (69) of

lecturers indicated that they used computers outside of teaching hours. According to the HoDs,

lecturers and students had access to the ICT facilities after class in 41% (28) of the institutions in

the “sometimes” category, with 28% (19) in the “always” category.

According to 36% (25) of the HoDs in institutions that have internet access, all students had

access to the internet. Some 47% (42) of lecturers stated that their institutions sometimes had

equipment available to students after class, while 21% (19) of lecturers indicated that the

computers were always accessible. Another 20% (18) of lecturers stated that the computers

were never accessible. Some 9% (8) of Lecturers stated that in their institutions students had to

pay to use the computers after class. According to IT technicians, 60% (21) of the institutions

had computer labs open after hours, and 31% (11) also open during the weekends.

Most lecturers

seem

to

have

good

access

to

equipment,

both

at

the

institution

and

outside

of

it.

Computer labs at the institutions can be used by lecturers and students after classes and in

some cases even at weekends. Focus group discussions with students revealed that in as far the

use of technology in TIVET institutions goes, the majority of students felt it was the

responsibility of the institutions to ensure that technology was available for course provision.

There are a few also who placed the responsibility on the students.

From focus groups it seems that many institutions continue to rely on traditional non‐ICT

resources in their course delivery since modern ICT tools are not available. However, even non‐

ICT resources such as books and library resources are perceived as insufficient and irrelevant to

course delivery.




of 114

4.2.2 Code of conduct, Policies and guidelines related to IT

There were 29% (32) of HoDs, 49% (44) of lecturers and 54% (19) of IT technicians who said that

their institution had some type of code of conduct for the use of the computers and the

internet.

Other policies or guidelines exist as presented in the following Figure below, according to the IT

technicians:

Existence of ICT-related Policies and Plans

according to IT technicians

63%

34%

71%

51%63%

54%63%

46%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

U s e r p a s s w o r d ,

s e c u r i t y

r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s ,

e t c

C o n t e n t f i l t e r i n

g

C o r r e c t u s e o f t h

e

e q u i p m e n t

R u l e s f o r t h e u s e

o f t h e e q u i p m e n t

( i . e . t e a c h e r s h a v

e

p r i o r i t y , e t c )

P r e v e n t i v e

m a i n t e n a n c

e

U s e r s r i g h t s a n

d

d u t i e s

I T t e c h n i c i a

n

d u t i e s

U s e o f I C T s

i n

o t h e r s u b j e c t

s

o t h e r t h a n I C

T

Figure 26 – Existence of ICT related Policies and Plans ‐ IT Technicians

The number of lecturers and IT technicians that are aware of an existing code of conduct for the

use of computers and the Internet is higher than the number of HoDs, suggesting that lecturers

use the computer lab and shared devices more. In most institutions IT technicians have defined

a series of policies, plans and guidelines for the use of the equipment, suggesting a quite

organized IT department.

4.3 Content and software

4.3.1 Software

According to 26% (26) of HoDs, there were educational software applications (CD ROM and

videos) in their institutions for teaching and learning. Of these, the most relevant software tools

identified

were

Computer

Aided

Design

(CAD)

(23%,

16),

Office

(16%,

11)

and

Programming

tools (19%, 13). According to 54% (44) of HoDs about half of the software was acquired by the

institution with its own resources, while 15% (12) of HoDs indicated that the software was

provided by the teachers. According to IT technicians, 41% (19) of the operating software was

acquired by the institutions and 33% (15) came with the computers.




of 114

There was 28% (14) of lecturers who indicated that they used specific applications for teaching.

The applications that they identified included Office (23%, 12), specific trade‐related

applications (21%,11), CAD (19%, 10), and Programming Tools (15%,8). Regarding the Office

application brand and version in use, IT technicians said that they used Office 2000 or above in

97% (34) of the cases, and Open Office only in 9% (3).

The main software identified to be in use were:

• In 60% (21) of the cases management software with some tailor made, other

commercial

•

In 46 % (16) engineering and CAD software

•

In 40% (14) accounting software, mainly QuickBooks

• In 31% (11) specific e‐learning software

• In 34% (12) statistical software, mainly SPSS

Figure 27 – Software in use‐ IT Technicians

Software tools available for integration are quite limited, suggesting the need to develop this

area. Besides limited financial resources, time and a change in attitude among both lecturers

and students are perceived as necessary to enable adoption of ICT teaching tools. Mainly

lecturers are interested in incorporating models, trade‐specific software, animations and

simulations into their classroom practice. But maybe more emphasis is needed in providing the

actual tools and training to make this integration process easier.

Relevance was also seen as a major driver for increased technology use in TIVET education. This

is because Industry functions are highly computerized today. Relevance could be achieved

through institutions ensuring that all their students are exposed to technology use , current and

latest software and hardware resources. In addition upgrading of lecturers competencies so that

they are also up –to‐date in their skills is critical.

4.3.2 Standards

The

question

related

to

standards

set

at

the

institutional

level

for

content

and

software

acquisition, use and/or development did not yield any significant results. Some HoDs mentioned

existing rules for software acquisition, use of open source (1 case). Technical specialists

mentioned in some cases the existence of software specifications in the IT policy.




of 114

The question on software and content standards yielded little results. It might have been

because the concept was too new or the question was not understood or simply because no

specific standards have yet been set.

4.3.3 Operating

Systems

According to the IT technicians, 94% (33) of the institutions were using MS Windows XP as the

main operating system, and also other MS Windows versions, with only 15% (6) using some

Linux distribution. Dual boot was used in 11% (4) institutions.

Operating System in use in TVET intitutions, accor ding to IT technicians

0%

14%6%

49%

20%11% 14%

0% 3%

94%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

W i n d o w s

9 5

W i n d o w s

9 8

W i n d o w s

M E

W i n d o w s

X P

W i n d o w s

V i s t a

W i n d o w s

7

D u a l b o o t

L i n u x

O t h e r s

d o n ’ t

k n o w

Figure 28 – Operating system in use ‐ IT Technicians

Regarding licensing, IT technicians said that 63% (22) of the operating systems in use were fully

licensed and 23% (8) were partially licensed. 41% (19) of the software licenses were obtained by

the institution,

while

33%

(15)

came

with

the

machine

when

it

was

acquired.

Commercial operating systems from Windows Family seemed to be the most popular choice of

OS, with Linux and dual boot options combined being used in less than 25% of the institutions.

Open source software was scarcely used in general, both for operating systems and Office tools.

The use of latest versions of operating systems suggests new equipment procurement in most

cases. Further, a good percentage of the operating systems seem to be licensed and most of the

cost of acquiring operating systems is paid by the institutions.

4.4 Maintenance and Support

4.4.1 Maintenance

Some 40% (14) of IT technicians indicated that they perform a preventive maintenance of the

equipment every quarter, and 31% (11) every month. Curative maintenance was performed in

most of the cases (66%, 23) when the equipment breaks down. In 80% (28) of the cases the




of 114

maintenance was performed by the IT technician or his/her team members. In 20% (7) by

external companies and in 11% (4) by the hardware providers.

Preventive maintenance figures indicated in general a fair maintenance scheme of equipment in

order to prevent failure, with 85% of the institutions doing some type of preventive

maintenance at least twice a year. The immediate repair of equipment was prevalent among all

the responses is coherent with the data that shows that only 5% of existing PCs and 1% of

laptops were out of order.

The results for the maintenance options suggest that most of the repairs are done by the

institution’s IT personnel, combined with external providers and hardware providers, in a model

that is standard for the market.

4.5 General

ICT

Infrastructure

Comments

The ICT infrastructure component of the survey shows that several institutions have their own IT

department and personnel, even if it consists only of an IT technician or ICT teacher. This is

expected to grow over time as the infrastructure becomes more complex. The data collected

from the institutions further suggest that most of them use the computer lab access model

combined with laptops and projectors for integration. Most of the equipment has been acquired

recently (2‐3 years), and is growing in numbers. Unfortunately there is not enough data on

student population to analyze if the ratio of students per computer is adequate.

Most institutions have their computers interconnected. Server profiles suggest a basic network

model, with a more complex and secure environment evolving in the future. Though the

average number suggests that both students and teachers have access to the equipment, even

after hours and on weekends, it seems that many institutions continue to rely mainly on

traditional non‐ICT resources in their course delivery since modern ICT tools are not available or

not enough. Connectivity to the internet comes out as a priority issue to be addressed for many

institutions from focus group discussions. It seems that only some of the institutions have

internet access. When they do, it might not be always available or available to everyone. A

majority of the students felt that technology provision was greatly hampered by issues related

to access. These issues included infrastructural resources provision, currency of the resources

(hardware

and

software),

scheduling

of

access

to

technology,

decentralization

of

resources

within the institution to increase access for students other than those taking the ICT course, and

increased access during students free time to allow individualized learning.

Basic policies seem to be in place, but they need to be reviewed to meet the requirements of

ICT integration in the near future.




of 114

Regarding software, institutions are noted to use Windows as the main operating system.

Software tools and digital content available for integration are quite limited, suggesting the

need to develop this area. Software has in most cases been acquired with own funding and open

source software is hardly mentioned. Regular preventive maintenance of equipment is

happening in most of the institutions but it is desirable that in the future all institutions comply

with a maintenance plan. Basic policies regarding ICT seem to be in place, but more advanced

policies will be needed in the near future.




of 114


Organization, Management and Administration is within the survey defined as organizational

structures and partnerships associated with implementation of national or sub‐national policy

on ICT. It also includes budget allocations as included in the national and sub‐national or local

budgets, as well as other sources of funds apart from government funding.

This focus of the survey under the Organization, Management and Administration section was to

determine how national bodies are currently planning for ICT deployment in TIVET institutions

from the administrative point of view, including budget and support frameworks that are in

place. Questions were designed to determine if support for national/sub‐national policy on ICT

is manifested through budgetary allocations provided to support implementation of planned

activities. Budget may not only come from the national or local government but could also come

from various government and private sectors to fund specific activities like teacher training, or

testing

in

institutions.

The

presence

or

absence

of

an

organizational

structure

and

formal

support determine whether ICT activities are being implemented as a regular activity or more as

ad‐hoc projects.

5.1 Planning

5.1.1 Affiliation with other organizations

Out of the total 109 HoDs only 12‐23 respondents (11‐21%) indicate that there are partnerships

between TIVET and other organizations. Out of the total 89 lecturer respondents, only 3‐6

respondents (3‐7%) state the occurrence of partnerships. This is based on the multiple options

possible to indicate partnerships with private sector, other education institutions, industry and

other public/private institutions)

TVET Institu tions Partner ships w ith private sector

6%5%

1%3%

1% 1% 1%1%2%

0% 0% 0%1%

2%

0%2%4%6%8%

10%

E q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g

C e r t i f i c a

t i o n

S o f t w

a r e

F u n

d i n g

A t t a c h m

e n t

o p p o r t u n

i t i e s

O

t h e r

HoDs

Lecturers

Figure 29 – TIVET partnerships with private sector – HoDs and Lecturers

Partnerships with the private sector mainly contributed with Equipment according to 6% (7) of

HoDs, Training according to 5% (5) and Software according to 3% (3). Lecturers stated that




of 114

partnerships with the Private sector mainly contributing with training according to 2% (2),

Equipment according to 1% (1), and attachment opportunities according to 1% (1). Responses

provided under the “Other” category mainly reflected respondents being unaware of

partnerships with the private sector, for example stating “Not aware” or “Don’t know” as their

answer.

TVET inst itutions Partne rs hips w ith other edu cation institutions

1%

7%

1%3% 4% 3% 3%

0%1% 1% 1% 1%

0% 0%0%2%4%6%8%

10%

E q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g

C

e r t i f i c a t i o n

P

r o v i s i o n o f

s o f t w a r e

E x c h a n g e

o f

s o f t w a r e

A c a d e m i c

e x c h a n g e /

d i a l o g u e

O t h e r

HoDs

Lecturers

Figure 30 – TIVET partnerships with education institutions – HoDs and Lecturers

Partnerships with other education institutions mainly contributed with Training according to 7%

(8) of HoDs and Exchange of software according to 4% (4). There was 3% (3) of HoDs who stated

that partnerships offered opportunities for of the Provision of software and Academic exchange

/ dialog. Three HoDs pointed out “Other categories” under partnerships with education

institutions; one referring to partnership with Computer for Schools Kenya, one acknowledging

the existence of partnerships with other education institutions (not stating which kind of

partner/partnership) and

one

stating

unawareness

of

this

kind

of

partnerships.

Among

lecturers,

partnerships with other education institutions mainly occurred through Training, Certification,

Provision of software and Exchange of software with 1% (1) acknowledging each category.

TVET institutions Partner ships w ith industr y

1%

4%2%

0%

3%1% 1%

0%1%

0% 0%

2%

0% 0%0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

E q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g

C e r t i f i c a t i o n

P r o v i s i o n o f

s o f t w a r e

A t t a c h m e n t

o p p o r t u n i t i e s

F u n d i n g

O t h e r

HoDs

Lecturers

Figure 31 – TIVET partnerships with industry– HoDs and Lecturers




of 114

HoDs saw partnerships with Industry as mainly contributing with Training according to 4% (4),

Attachment opportunities according to 3% (3), and Certification according to 2% (2) while

lecturers stated that they predominantly contributed with Attachment opportunities according

to 2% (2) and Training according to 1% (1).

TVET Inst itutions Partner ships w ith other private/public/civil/or oth er

organizations

1%

5%3%

0% 0%2% 2%1% 1%

2%0% 0%

1% 1%

0%2%4%6%8%

10%

E q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g

C e r t i f i c a t i o n

P r o v i s i o n o f

s o f t w a r e

A t t a c h m e n t

o p p o r t u n i t i e s

F u n d i n g

O t h e r

HoDs

Lecturers

Figure 32 – TIVET partnerships with other organizations – HoDs and Lecturers

Partnerships with Other private/public/civil/or other organizations contribute with Training

according to 5% (5) of HoDs, Certification according to 3% (3) and Funding according to 2% (2).

Lecturers acknowledged that these partnerships mainly contributed with Certification according

to 2% (2) and Funding, Equipment, Training each receiving 1% (1) of responses.

Partnerships of all sorts are not very common, with only 21% (23) of HoDs and 7% (6) of

Lecturers ‐ as maximum figures – acknowledging their occurrence. Lecturers are less aware of

partnerships than HoDs. This could be a consequence of the information about partnerships and

for example funding more being of a managerial than lecturer nature, but it could also imply

that the effects of partnerships don’t trickle down to classroom practice but stay at the

administrative level.

The Private sector is foremost engaged in partnerships regarding Equipment and Training. It is

worth noting that only one HoD and lecturer respectively acknowledged the private sector

partnerships regarding their potential for attachment opportunities. During focus group

discussions lecturers were positively acknowledging a growing trend of public private

partnerships to

support

institutions

with

equipment

and

capacity

building.

Other education institutions are foremost partners regarding Training as well as Exchange and

Provision of software while partnerships with Industry focus on Attachment opportunities and

Training. Other private/public/civil/or organizational partnerships predominantly relate to

Training and Certification.




of 114

5.1.2 Education Management and Information Systems (EMIS)

Only 24% (26) of HoDs responded to the question about EMIS approach at their institution.

According to 46% (12) of the HoDs who responded, EMIS was predominantly used for Finance,

Administration and Procurement. Hostels and Meals/Catering was also mentioned by 12% (3) of

HoDs, however these were always used in combination with Finance, Administration and

Procurement. Examination and Library components were identified by 8% (2) of the

respondents as in use by their institutions, but always in combination with a Finance,

Administration and Procurement approach.

EMIS approach adopted, according to HoDs

45%

8%8%

12%

27%

Finance, Admini stration &

Procurement

Examination

Library

Hostel & Meals/Catering

Other

Figure 33 – EMIS approach adopted– HoDs

The fact that only 24% (26) of HoDs acknowledge the use of an EMIS at their institution indicates

that a small percentage of the TIVET institutions have implemented an EMIS. When used, the

EMIS seems to be introduced with applications for Finance, Administration and Procurement

since all institutions with an EMIS use it for these purposes. Hostels and Meals/Catering is the

next step in EMIS application followed by Examination and Library components. This outcome is

not very surprising since EMIS are developed to facilitate the administrative part of an

organization.

5.1.3 E‐learning

Only one respondent stated that their department (Applied sciences) was maintaining an e‐

learning management

system

in

its

course

work

provision.

This

indicates

that

TIVET

institutions

have not yet reached this level of ICT integration.

5.1.4 IT systems available

On the question about ‘what IT systems institutions have to enable students to access available

education and training resources and services’ the responses were as follows;




of 114

• 28% (30) of HoDs indicated that their institution had a website with information on

courses, departments & staff etc to enable student access to this information.

•

9% (10) of HoDs stated that their institution made use of on‐line registration for courses

and examinations respectively.

• 7% (8) of HoDs tracked examination results on‐line.

• 7% (8) of HoDs stated that policy documents, research and past examination papers

could be accessed through the institution’s IT‐system.

• 6% (7) of HoDs stated that guidelines related to curriculum, assessment and

examinations were available to students on‐line.

• 4% (4) of HoDs stated that their institutions used Learning Management Systems.

• 3% (3) of HoDs stated that data in electronic portals was exchanged.

IT systems used to enable student access to education and

training, accord ing to HoDs

28%

6%9% 9%

7%

2% 3% 4%

7%

2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

I n s t i t u t i o n w e b s i t e w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n

O n l i n e g u i d e l i n e s

O n l i n e r e g i s t r a t i o n f o r c o u r s e s

O n l i n e r e g i s t r a t i o n f o r e x a m i n a t i o n s

O n l i n e t r a c k i n g o f e x a m . r e s u l t s

O n l i n e c r e d e n t i a l s c h e c k i n g

P o r t a l s f o r i n s t i t u t i o n s

L e a r n i n g M a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m s

A c c e s s t o r e s e a r c h , e t c .

O t h e r

Figure 34 – IT systems used to enable student access to education and training – HoDs

IT systems that make information available to students are most frequently used with

institutional web

sites

as

the

most

common

media

to

enable

students’

access

to

education

and

training resources. IT systems such as Registration for examination and courses where individual

student data is entered are less frequent but practiced at some institutions, and some also

display examination results on‐line.

IT‐systems that are more integrated into course delivery and require two‐way communication

are not as common, only few institutions make use of Learning Management Systems and/or




of 114

exchange data in electronic portals. The lacking integration of IT in classroom practice was also

raised in focus group interviews with Lecturers where some lecturers commented on the need

to sensitize and build awareness at institutional management level on the potential of ICT to

facilitate an environment for course delivery that is more in tune with industry needs. There was

a consensus across discussions that administration while generally supportive remained unclear

on ICT usage in TIVET teaching, learning & management systems. Hence, the data shows that

through sensitization regarding the opportunities and demand for IT systems in course delivery

with TIVET management un‐seized opportunities could be acknowledged.

5.1.5 Use of IT systems

There was 55% (18) of HoDs who agreed that IT management systems were not transparent

from national to provincial to institutional levels. Only 6% (2) of HoDs stated that transparency

was “Good” and “Transparent to a great extent”. Additionally the following results can be drawn

regarding the access to IT systems;

•

9% (3) stated that the IT management systems were made transparent through Web/e‐

learning and Enabled access to information.

• 63% (27) of the institutional offices were not able to analyze information from central

systems due to lack of access to the system.

• 19% (8) of the HODs said that their institutions could not access information from

central systems but stated that they received information.

• 7% (3) could access central systems through network/server while 5% (2) could access

them through

e‐mail.

According to HoDs, 41% (19) of the institutions had not provided lecturers, instructors and

administrators with any training to utilize data. Some 36% (13) of the lecturers agreed that they

had not received any training.




of 114

Degree of training of lecturers, instruc tors and adminis trators

to utilize data

11% 9% 11%

41%

28%

6%8%

44%

36%

6%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%

30%35%40%

45%50%

Adequate

training

Moderate

training

Little training No training Other

HoDs

Lecturers

Figure 35 – Degree of training of lecturers to utilize data – HoDs and Lecturers

Among the respondents who said their institution had provided training, 11% (5) of the HoDs

perceived the institutions as delivering Adequate training, 9% (4) Moderate training and 11% (5)

Little training. Among lecturers the figures were somewhat different with only 6% (2) seeing

themselves receiving adequate training, 8% (3) Moderate training and 44% (16) Little training.

Amid the answers outside of these categories some responses such as “training on‐going”, “ICT

training program was started”, “training required” were registered. These could be

acknowledged as training initiatives even though their scope is difficult to gauge from the

responses.

The majority of HoDs (20 respondents) stated that their institution hasn’t held a strategy

meeting regarding the use of web tools and other necessary resources to leverage service

delivery but at some institutions these kinds of meetings had been taking place;

• 40% (16) HoDs stated that their institution had held a strategy meeting regarding the

use of web tools and other necessary resources to leverage service delivery.

• 9% (8) of lecturers stated that their institution had held a strategy meeting regarding the

use of web tools and other necessary resources to leverage service delivery.

Following the

clear

majority

of

institutions,

IT

management

systems

are

not

transparent

from

national to provincial to institutional levels, nor have the institutions access to analyzing

information from central systems. A large part of lecturers, instructors and administrators have

not received any training to utilize data from IT management systems. The experience of offered

training varies significantly when comparing responses from lecturers and HoDs, with lecturers

generally perceiving the offered training as less sufficient compared to HoDs’ perception. These

responses together with findings from the focus group interviews where participants agreed




of 114

that there was institutional support for ICT training but the timing of institutional courses during

holiday leave was problematic, could imply that the institution offers training that lecturers find

difficult to participate in and hence the discrepancy in responses. However, the data

undoubtedly show that there is an unmet need for further training among lecturers, instructors

and administrators at TIVET institutions on how to utilize data from IT management systems.

Findings also indicate that there is a lack of strategy on how the data should be utilized.

It is not common to arrange for institutional strategy meetings where staff discuss the use of

web tools and other ICT related resources that are required for service delivery, with less than

10% of lecturers and a minority of HoDs being aware of such meetings. Potential reasons for this

could be lack of priority from institutional management (i.e. other meeting agendas are

prioritized), the purpose of such meetings may not be seen as useful if adequate infrastructure

and tools aren’t available at the institution, or that it is expected by management that these

issues are managed by lecturers in the classroom without the need for additional support and

dialogue among

peers.

In

focus

group

interviews

one

participant

also

observed

that

technology

literacy becomes a matter of personal ambition in the absence of institutional directives. In this

way, it would seem that institutions have informal networks of ICT champions of lecturers and

instructors who provide support where the institutional structure fails.

5.2 Financing

5.2.1 Sources of support and/or income

The sources of funding followed the pattern below;

• According to 43% (47) of HoDs, institutions received funding through student fees and

student fees on average represent 58% of the institutions’ total income.

• According to 42% (46) of HoDs, institutions received funding through the Government of

Kenya and this income source represents 38% of the institutions’ total income.

•

28% (31) of HoDs indicated that their institutions generated funds internally and this

funding represented 13% of the institutions’ total income.

• 5% (5) of HoDs indicated that their institutions received funding through partnerships of

different sorts.




of 114

Sources of support or income for the Intitutions,

according to HoDs

42% 43%

28%

5% 3%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%

35%40%45%50%

Government

of Kenya

Student fees Internally

generated

funds

Partnerships Others

Figure 36 – Sources of support or income for the institutions – HoDs

From

the

above

it

is

clear

that

the

majority

of

institutions

are

funded

by

student

fees

and

Governmental support. Student fees are the most significant source of income followed by

Governmental support. Almost one third (28%, 31) of HoDs indicated that their institutions are

also generating other sources of income through their activities.

Only 5% (5) of HoDs indicated that their institutions sought partnerships as a source of funding.

This could provide potential for increasing public private partnerships between TIVET

institutions and the private sector. In focus group interviews lecturers identify a recent thrust

towards public private partnership to support institutions with equipment and capacity building

as a positive development.

5.2.2 How is the Internet and Computers paid for

According to 90% (52) of HoDs and lecturers, their institutions that have Internet access pay for

their internet connection via their collected tuition fees. 5% (3) of respondents said their

institutions pay for their internet connection through operating an internet café

According to IT Technicians, computer acquisition is normally financed by the following means;

• 80% (28) of institutions have acquired computers through own funds

• 23% (8) of institutions have received computers through donations

•

23% (8) of institutions have received their computers through the Government of Kenya

and CFSK (Computers for Schools Kenya)

• Private vendors and NGOs are also listed in connection to computer acquisitions,

providing institutions with 14% (5) and 9% (3) of computer equipment respectively.

• Private donors and PTA are only representing 3% (1) of computer acquisitions.




of 114

Almost all institutions with internet access pay for their internet connection via their collected

tuition fees. Only a very small percentage use income generated by an internet café to uphold

connectivity. Half of the institutions have acquired their computers through own funds.

Donations, contributions from the government, private donors and NGOs have supported the

acquisition of computers less significantly.

Hence, both equipment and connectivity is foremost funded by the institutions themselves.

Since institutions predominantly are funding their operations through Governmental

contributions, tuition fees and internally generated incomes these are indirectly also the sources

supporting computer equipment acquisition.

5.2.3 Annual budget available for ICT

Some 27% (29) of the responding HoDs have an annual budget for implementing the

institutional ICT

plan,

and

ICTs

on

average

constitute

25%

of

the

overall

departmental

budget.

Of the lecturers, 30% (27) stated that their department has a budget for implementation of ICTs

in coursework and that this budget accounted for approximately 19% of the department’s

overall annual budget.

Roughly 30% of HoDs indicated that they had an ICT specific budget which is on par with the

30% of lecturers whose department had a budget for ICT integration in coursework. It is realistic

to assume that the departments that have an ICT budget also are the departments budgeting for

ICT integration in the classroom.

5.2.4 How is ICT funded and how equipment is paid for

Sources of Funding for ICT activities, equipment and

softwa re, accordi ng to HoDs

15%

13%

6%5%

4%

1% 1% 1%0%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

S t u d e n t l e v i e s

T h e

G o v e r n m e n t

G r a n t s

I n c o m e

g e n e r a t i n g

a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e

P T A ’ s

I n d i v i d u a l

d o n o r s ,

p h i l a n t h r o p i s t s

I T I n d u s t r y

O t h e r , p l e a s e

d e s c r i b e

N G O s




of 114

Figure 37 – Sources of funding for ICT activities – HoDs

The survey showed that ICT activities, equipment and software had the following sources of

funding;

•

15%

(16)

of

HoDs

stated

that

ICT

activities,

equipment

and

software

were

funded

through student fees.

• 13% (14) of HoDs stated that ICT activities, equipment and software were funded

through financial support from the government.

• Grants (6%), internal income generating activities (5%), and PTA’s (4%) were identified

as other sources of funding for ICT activities, equipment and software.

The number of responses providing financial figures and percentages to accompany the scope of

these sources of funding was too small to be considered statistically representative.

Sources of Funding for ICT activities, equipment and

softwa re, accordi ng to HoDs

15%

13%

6%5%

4%

1% 1% 1%

0%0%2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

S t u d e n t l e v i e s

T h e

G o v e r n m e n t

G r a n t s

I n c o m e

g e n e r a t i n g

a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e

P T A ’ s

I n d i v i d u a l

d o n o r s ,

p h i l a n t h r o p i s t s

I T I n d u s t r y

O t h e r , p l e a s e

d e s c r i b e

N G O s

Figure 38 – Sources of funding for ICT activities – HoDs

Regarding ICT budget allocation the following status of ICT institutional funding was presented;

• 69% (24) of IT technicians stated that their institution had a budget line for ICT related

activities.

• 88% (21) of the institutions with an ICT related budget specify hardware acquisition.

• 83% (20) of the institutions with an ICT related budget specify Software acquisition and

Hardware maintenance.

• 33% (8) of the institutions with an ICT related budget specify Professional development.




of 114

•

17% (4) of the IT‐technicians at institutions with an ICT related budget state they don’t

know how/if it is broken down on specific ICT categories.

ICT related activities with specific budget allocation

accor ding to IT technicians

88%83% 83%

33%

17%

4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

H a r d

w a r e

a c q u

i s i t i o n

S o f t w a r e

a c q u

i s i t i o n

H a r d w

a r e

m a i n t e n a n c e

P r o f e s s i o n a l


I d o n o t

k

n o w

O t h e r

Figure 39 – ICT related activities with specific budget allocation – IT technicians

Though respondents provided financial figures and percentages to accompany, the scope of

these sources of funding was too small to be considered statistically representative, the little

data provided indicated that contributions from the IT‐industry are significant in terms of

numbers even though only one institution states that it is supported by industry. Also support

from grants

and

PTA’s

seems

to

be

significant

in

amounts.

Almost one third of the institutions didn’t have an ICT specific budget, signaling that ICTs are not

a priority issue for these institutions. At the institutions with an ICT specific budget, the specified

ICT areas were centered on infrastructure such as hardware, software and maintenance of

equipment. Professional development (i.e. use of ICT) was only present in 33% of the budgets

and hence not as prioritized.

Following focus group discussions with lecturers there is a sense that institutions have made

considerable

efforts

to

create

enabling

environments

and

facilities

for

ICT

use

in

TIVET

course

delivery. There are however still a number of factors inhibiting lecturer use of these facilities

including access and training. The absence of clear policy and planning frameworks at

institutional level emerged as a particularly significant factor in rendering support structures

inadequate and fragmented. Lecturers also mentioned the ad hoc nature of ICT budgeting,

absence of centralized standards for equipment procurement and felt there is a need for

capacity building in this area. Lecturer and student competencies is one main category students




of 114

raised in focus group discussions with specific regard to how TIVET is expected to support

technology use and add value to their ICT skills. Students saw lecturers needing training in ICT

use to equip students with relevant ICT skills, but the ICT course provision also needs to become

flexible enough to provide students with adequate ICT training. Students coming from rural

areas tended to have very limited exposure to computers before joining TIVET and hence need

extra support regarding ICTs compared to students from an urban background that come in to

the TIVET as quite technology literate (the urban students many times perceived basic ICT

courses offered as useless and repetitive).

In conclusion, Professional development for lecturers regarding ICT is highly required to improve

ICT integration in TIVET and hence it should be present in the ICT related budget.

The absence of Professional Development efforts however somewhat contradicts the relatively

high budget allocation awarded to ICT integration in coursework. Among the 30% of institutional

departments that

have

an

ICT

specific

budget

for

implementation

of

the

ICT

plan

and

integration

of ICT into coursework, ICT implementation and coursework integration budget posts represent

a significant 19‐25% of the departments’ overall annual budget. These numbers indicate that –

at least budget wise – priority is given to ICT in classroom practise which assumedly should go

hand‐in‐hand with professional development of lecturers. Perhaps institutional management

assume that lecturers have the ability and opportunity to explore and develop their skills

individually through their teaching, while the lecturers themselves in focus group interviews

indicate that institutional timetables and schedules limit their options for experimenting,

exploring and reflecting on the use of ICT in teaching and learning.

5.3 General Organization and Administration Comments

Only 24% of institutions seem to use an EMIS and where it is used, it seems to be introduced

with applications for Finance, Administration and Procurement. IT‐systems that are more

integrated into course delivery and require two‐way communication are not as common. Only

one institution has a department that is deploying an e‐learning management system in its

course work provision. The data implies that sensitization efforts towards TIVET management

regarding the opportunities and demand for IT systems in course delivery could be valuable in

helping institutions to seize so far unrealized opportunities.


Further, lecturers, instructors and administrators at TIVET institutions are not trained on how to

utilize the data that actually is available. The use of web tools and other ICT related resources

that are required for service delivery is seemingly not discussed frequently at the institutional

level. Active dialogue and initiatives on how to best make use of ICTs remain a matter of

personal ambition rather than a case of following institutional directives.




of 114

Both equipment and connectivity is foremost funded by the institutions themselves. Since

institutions predominantly are funding their operations through governmental contributions,

tuition fees and internally generated incomes these are indirectly also the sources supporting

computer equipment acquisition. The collected data does not tell us whether parts of the

Governmental funds are directly tied to acquisition of computer equipment or not. Partnerships

of all sorts are not very common. Partnerships with the Private sector seems to be an interesting

arena to explore regarding student attachment opportunities, but also when it comes to funding

of ICT related equipment and capacity building.

Almost one third of the institutions don’t have an ICT specific budget, signaling that ICT is not a




hence

not

as

prioritized.

However,

among

the

roughly

30%

of

institutional

departments

that

have an ICT specific budget for implementation of ICT plans and integration of ICTs into

coursework, the ICT implementation and coursework integration represent 19‐25% of the

departments’ overall annual budget. This implies that among the institutions that do budget for

ICT, the ICT integration in coursework is a prioritized issue, a view that also is supported by focus

group discussions held with lecturers and HoDs.

To efficiently integrate ICT into classroom practice, lecturers need training in how to make good

use of the new ICT‐based pedagogical tools. The different priorities between equipment and

classroom integration/training in ICT budgets at institutional respective departmental level

indicate inconsistent priorities by different professional groups at TIVET institutes.




of 114


6.1 Professional Development

Teacher development is defined as a systematized, initial and continuous, coherent and modular

process of professional development of educators in accordance with professional competency

standards and frameworks. Teacher development also includes training in the adaptation to the

evolution of change of the profession of teachers and managers of education systems.

The focus of the survey under the professional development component was to determine the

training programs that currently exist in TIVET for professional development in ICT use.

Questions were designed to examine whether there are formal or informal opportunities for

professional development, whether these opportunities involve face to face, online or

institution based training, and whether there are any budget and institutional frameworks in

place to

support

professional

development.

The section also contains the findings from a Training Needs Analysis (TNA) questionnaire

developed to collect information on present ICT capacities and training priorities of lecturers in

the TIVET institutions. The TNA is based on lecturer ICT knowledge, skills and capabilities defined

in the MoHEST draft ICT competency framework.

6.1.1 ICT Training Provision and Courses Attended

When asked about the ICT training programs that they had attended, 66% (72) of HoDs and 27%

(24) of lecturers indicated that they had received training in the previous 3 years. Of the

lecturers who attended training courses 59% (10) indicated that they received basic training,

29% (5) intermediate level training and 12% (2) advanced level. The dominant provider of

training was TIVET mentioned by 39% (7) of lecturers who attended courses, followed by private

providers with 28% (5), MOHEST and the University sectors with 17% (3) each.

It would seem that there have been limited ICT training opportunities for lecturers. In focus

groups discussions with lecturers, participants agreed that training opportunities were few and

that much of their learning in ICT has been informal. They indicated that they picked up their

skills

through

self ‐teaching

or

from

learning

from

other

lecturers.

Informal

contact

and

communication is an effective way of transferring ICT knowledge in a manner that can

complement more formal mechanisms for staff training. There is an opportunity for institutions

to formally recognize the potential for institution‐based staff development that is planned

coherently and in conjunction with formal training and that is focused on national TIVET

curriculum development and priority goals.




of 114

6.1.2 ICT Training content

In another question concerning training needs Lecturers listed some of the modular content of

previous ICT training courses as follows:

•

Operating systems – 17% (15)

• Basic applications – 31% (28)

• CAD/ Engineering – 7% (6)

• Database – 5% (4)

•

Technical IT – 19% (17)

• TIVET Specific – 2% (2)

• Programming 2% (2)

• Content Development 16% (11)

The courses would suggest a training focus on developing basic literacy skills for ICT use in TIVET

teaching and learning practices. There are two kinds of literacy skill sets identified by

respondents in the training areas attended – the first being the generic ICT specific literacy

skills such as the training for use of basic applications, databases, operating systems and

programming. The second ICT skills set identified are the occupationally specific TIVET ICT

literacy skills. The Technical IT and the CAD courses demonstrate respondent interest in ICT

occupational skills acquisition – perhaps for developing technical IT capabilities for working with

digitized control systems or for working with Computer Aided Design (CAD) software in fields

such as Engineering, Architecture or Auto Mechanics. The course interest in content

development presents a focus on technology use as a curriculum tool or mechanism for digital

course packaging

whether

for

computer

assisted

instruction

(CAI)

or

online

instruction.

In lecturer focus group interviews the interest in basic technological and occupationally specific

literacy was verified where participants identified training in basic literacy as a priority. The

literacy priority correlates with a needs analysis study mentioned by participants where study

findings identified lecturer ICT competency as below technology literacy level (MoHEST 2009).

Participants described course offerings by the Kenya Institute of Science & Technology (KIST) on

connectivity, communications and internet which were financed by their institutions to address

technology literacy performance gaps.

The conclusion here may be that lecturer motivation in ICT training is for acquiring technology

and occupational literacy to use ICT at a functional and practice level that is integral to

enhancing their professionalism and coursework delivery. There is little focus in the findings on

the potential use of ICT as an instructional tool or the pedagogical integration of ICT for

enhancing TIVET course delivery in a proactive and responsive manner. A lack of general




of 114

agreement on defining the important teacher technology competencies for ICT integration as an

instructional tool can also limit effective integration.

6.1.3 Motivation for Training Course Attendance

The focus

on

training

for

enhancing

professional

skills

and

course

provision

was

reinforced

in

respondents’ answers on questions concerning their rationale for attending training courses.

The dominant motivation expressed by 61% (54) of lecturers was one of personal growth,

followed closely by 58% (52) who identified career enhancement as a key motivating factor.

There were 51% (45) of respondents who identified the need for training as an additional

motivating factor. Only 4% (4) of lecturers mentioned financial factors and 3% mentioned

prestige factors for course attendance.

Figure 40 – ICT confidence – Lecturers

Another aspect explored was the level of confidence that lecturers felt in using ICT in their

teaching practice. While 20% (18) of lecturers indicated that they were very confident with ICT

use in their classroom practices, there were 27% (24) who said that they felt very unconfident,

15% (13) who felt a little unconfident and 47% (42) who indicated that they were a little

confident with ICT use in practice. When combining the unconfident and little confident

categories it becomes clear that the majority of lecturers, a staggering 89% (79), indicate a

general lack

of

confidence

in

the

use

of

ICT

in

their

practices.

Teacher

confidence

presents

a

particular challenge for ICT integration, even in instances where teachers have had training and

where there is adequate infrastructure. Teachers can still face anxiety in using ICT in classroom

settings. This lack of confidence hampers effective implementation. Teacher training that is

focused on technical skills may thus be ineffective in building teachers’ capacities to integrate

the use of ICT into curriculum practice.




of 114

In another set of questions respondents were specifically asked whether there was a budget for

ICT training provision and whether ICT Training courses were available in TIVET institutions. On

the specific training budget, 37% (40) of HoDs and 33% (29) of lecturers answered in the

affirmative, while training availability garnered an affirmative response from 57% (63) or HoDs

and 44% (39) of lecturers. Regarding impediments to ICT use in practice, among the five most

frequently mentioned by both HoDs and lecturers were:

• Inadequacy of infrastructure and facilities in TIVET institutions

• Lack of access to ICT equipment particularly at departmental level

• Lecturer competencies (knowledge, skills & attitudes) to use technology adequately in

their practices

• Lack of or inadequate ICT training

• Funding at institutional level to support holistic approaches to ICT integration

Teacher professional

development

is

a major

challenge

for

the

implementation

of

technology

enhanced learning. Lecturers can play a crucial role in the adoption and integration of ICT in

TIVET course delivery as they are key players in curriculum implementation and innovation that

is attuned and responsive to changing requirements of industry and business. The evidence in

the survey presents a dichotomy in the findings where on the one hand HoDs and lecturers

acknowledge the opportunities for ICT professional development provided by institutions; on

the other hand practitioners (lectures & instructors) seem unmotivated and have difficulty

applying skills acquired in training in practice. In the lecturer focus group interviews, participants

clarified several challenges for practitioners who wished to apply technology in workplace

practice, including: the absence of institutional ICT policy and planning frameworks; the lack of

management directives to authorize professional development course attendance; problematic

access to the online courses due to connectivity issues; problematic course offerings in the

evenings and during holidays due to work overload; ICT training irrelevance in the absence of

adequate facilities for training application in course delivery.

The evidence would indicate that it is not always the ‘hard’ technological elements of

infrastructure and equipment inadequacies that present the greatest impediments to

technology uptake in TIVET course provision. It may actually be the case that the real need is for

greater attention to be paid to the ‘softer’ less tangible dimensions of ICT integration ‐ related

to

understanding

lecturers’

motivation

and

rationale

for

attending/

not

attending

courses

as

well as developing institutional policy and management structures to encourage and support

lecturer participation in ICT training and integration in practice.




of 114

6.1.4 Preferred training methodologies

Finally respondents were asked about their preferred modality for professional

development provision. While respondents indicated the suitability of several internal

and external options inclusive of e‐Learning, self directed training, institution based,

local and regional workshops, and the preferred modality for both HoDs and Lecturers

was

a

blended

approach

for

face‐to

‐face

and

online

provision.

This

selection

would

perhaps reflect the stress that practitioners feel with the requirement for technology

integration. Their choice of a blended approach would perhaps suggest their need for

both traditional and online training to create enabling conditions, community of practice

support structures and safe spaces for experimentation with the potential of technology

use in their practices. Figure 41– Mode of training – HoDs and Lecturers

In focus group interviews lecturers situated their training requirements in relation to

institutional requirement to understand the needs and expectations of industry and the market

place. One

participant

observed

that

the

lack

of

knowledge

on

the

marketplace

requirements

of

student graduates limited the capacity of the institutions to respond with relevant coursework

and content. A number of participants commented on the institutional –industry linkage as a

pre‐requisite to development of relevant curriculum and authentic learning.

Lecturers commented that currently much ICT training is self ‐administered. Others referred to

ICT course irrelevance in the absence of adequate facilities for course work application. The

majority of lecturers identified training in basic literacy as a priority. Other participants

expressed demand for an intermediate level training related to ICT usage in the specialist fields

of their TIVET course programs as in ICT applications in engineering and sciences. Participants

felt in general that there should be on‐going opportunities for professional development in a

tertiary sector which requires lecturers to keep abreast with their specialist field and the

demands of industry.

Interpreting HoDs and lecturer needs reflects a requirement for training flexibility and a

continuum of courses that are practice based and have application to the TIVET broader agenda

for relevant and authentic learning and course delivery that is proactive rather than reactive to

market place requirements. The focus group discourse also presents a view of the complexity of

capacity building for ICT competency acquisition in the TIVET sub‐sector. There is a need to

consider different

levels

of

maturity

for

developing

technological,

pedagogical

and

occupational

literacy capacity of TIVET lecturers. There is also a requirement to create enabling conditions for

life‐long or continuous professional development for lecturers. These conditions will allow

lecturers to keep abreast of the constant flux of technological change and innovation and to

keep their programs and courses up‐to‐date in line with business and industry standards.




of 114

6.1.5 General Professional development comments


lecturers. Peer learning is the modality for picking up ICT skills informally in institutions. There is


for institution‐based staff development. Programs should be focused on short regular in‐house

workshops using external and internal resource supports to promote experimentation and

strategies for ICT integration across curricular programme areas.

Lecturer motivation in ICT training is for acquiring technology and occupational literacy to use

ICT at a functional and practice level that is integral to enhancing their professionalism and

coursework delivery. However there is little focus in the findings on the potential use of ICT as

an instructional tool or the pedagogical integration of ICT for enhancing TIVET course delivery in

a proactive and responsive manner. There is a need to define the important teacher technology

competencies for ICT integration as an instructional tool so as to avoid limiting the effective

integration of

ICT

in

TIVET

provision.

Use of ICT

The majority of lecturers indicate a general lack of confidence in the use of ICT in their practices.

Teacher confidence presents a particular challenge for ICT integration, even in instances where

teachers have had training and where there is adequate infrastructure. The lack of confidence





Regarding impediments to ICT use in practice, HoDs and lecturers identified 1) inadequacy of

infrastructure and facilities in TIVET institutions; 2) lack of access to ICT equipment particularly

at departmental level; 3) lecturer competencies (knowledge, skills and attitudes) to use

technology adequately in their practices; 4) lack of or inadequate ICT training and 5) funding at

institutional level to support holistic approaches to ICT integration. There is a need for greater

attention to be paid to the ‘softer’ less tangible dimensions of ICT integration ‐ related to

understanding lecturers’ motivation and rationale for attending/ not attending courses as well

as developing

institutional

policy

and

management

structures

to

encourage

and

support

lecturer

participation in ICT training and integration in practice.

Training modalities


provision. This selection would perhaps reflect the stress that practitioners feel with the




of 114

requirement for technology integration. Their choice of a blended approach would indicate their

need for both traditional and online training to create enabling conditions, community of

practice support structures and safe spaces for experimentation with the potential of

technology use in their practices.

The majority of lecturers identified training in basic literacy as a priority. Others expressed

demand for an intermediate level training related to ICT usage in the specialist fields of their

TIVET course programs as in ICT applications in engineering and sciences. Participants felt in

general that there should be on‐going opportunities for professional development in a tertiary

sector which requires lecturers to keep abreast with their specialist field and the demands of

industry.

The following training needs are made visible through the survey;

•

There is

a requirement

for

training

flexibility

and

a continuum

of

courses

that

are

practice based and have application to the TIVET broader agenda for relevant and

authentic learning and course delivery that is proactive rather than reactive to

market place requirements.

• There is a need to consider different levels of maturity for developing technological,

pedagogical and occupational literacy capacity of TIVET lecturers.

• There is a requirement to create enabling conditions for life‐long or continuous

professional development for lecturers. This will enable lecturers to keep abreast of

the constant flux of technological change and innovation and to keep their programs

and courses up‐to‐date in line with business and industry standards.

6.2 Competency Importance‐Development Survey & Training Needs Assessment

During the field research a contextualized ICT Competency importance‐development survey was

conducted with lecturers and instructors in the institutions. The competencies describe the

knowledge, skills and capabilities required of lecturers and instructors to use ICT effectively in

TIVET institutions. Based on the UNESCO ICT competency framework for teachers, the

competencies are organized under the six domains of policy, curriculum, pedagogy,

infrastructure, organization & management and professional development. The competencies

were developed

in

a focus

group

workshop

held

in

KIE

in

June

2010.

The survey involved two questions. In the first question, with the utilization of a level of

importance scale (1 for not at all important , 2 for unimportant , 3 for neither important nor

unimportant, 4 for important and 5 for very important ) lecturers and instructors were asked to

indicate their perceived level of importance on each of twenty‐six ICT Competency Standards for

Lecturers and Instructors drawn from the six domains (policy, curriculum, pedagogy, ICT,




of 114

management & professional development) of the contextualized TIVET framework3. In the

second question, with the utilization of a level of development scale (1.25 for approaching, 2.5

for acquiring, 3.75 for achieving, and 5 for advancing), respondents were asked to identify their

perceived level of development in relation to each competency.

6.2.1 HoD, Lecturer & Instructor Competency Importance Rankings

The following section presents the results of HoD and lecturer ratings of the importance and

level of development of the ICT lecturer competencies.

The purpose is to understand the present capacities (as measured by the competency

framework) as well as to assess the need for short to medium term capacity building options.

• HoDs and lecturers ranked curriculum domain competencies for using ICT tools in the design

of

teaching

and

learning

activities, ICT

domain

competencies

for

using

web

resources

in

support of project/ problem‐ based learning, for using ICT to manage and assess progress of

student projects, policy domain competencies for raising awareness of national and

institutional ICT in Education policy, and professional development competencies for using

ICT to enable staff access to e‐learning courses for professional development, as the six

most important competency standards for a lecturer.

• In contrast ICT domain competencies were perceived to be of less importance by lecturers

and HoDs. These included: the ability to use an authoring environment or tools to design

offline or web resources; the ability to use open‐ended software appropriate to TIVET

subject areas; pedagogy domain competencies such as the ability to use open‐ended tools

and subject specific application to support student collaboration; the ability to use project‐

based learning and ICT tools to support thinking and social interaction; and organization and

management domain competencies such as the ability to apply ICT in classroom

management to support group collaboration & project work.

•

Another noteworthy finding is the low importance attributed by respondents to the use of

ICT resources and assistive technologies to address special education needs.

• These findings would suggest that the focus for HoDs and lecturers in importance

attribution is on competencies for developing their teaching skills to facilitate and deliver

the TIVET curriculum and coursework. The respondents would seem to attribute less

importance on

competencies

for

the

development

of

student

skills

to

support

collaborative,

independent and student directed learning.

• This pattern would seem to be mirrored in the results of the overall weighted mean scores

of each of the six competency domains. Here policy, teacher development and curriculum &

assessment domain competencies were revealed as the most important while organization

3 Please refer to TNA survey in questionnaire set for a detail of the questions.




of 114

& management, pedagogical and ICT domain competencies were revealed as the least

important (please refer to Table 8 below).

Table 8‐ Contextualized ICT Competencies for lecturers

Competencies

Level of Importance

Not at all Important (1), Unimportant (2),

Neither Important nor unimportant (3),

Important (4), Very important (5),

Level of development

Emerging (1.25),

Acquiring

(2.5),

Achieving

(3.75), Advancing (5)

Mean SD

Rank

{out of

26}

Over

all

rank

Mean SD

Rank

{out of

26}

Over

all

rank

Policy 4.615 .106 1 2.30 .004 2

Policy awareness: Awareness of

national/institutional ICT in

Education policy

4.64 .674 3 2.299 .837 7

Classroom practice: Applying

national/ institutional ICT policy in

the classroom

4.59 .644 11 2.305 .853 6

Curriculum &

assessment

4.598 .071 2 2.16 .198

4

Curriculum Planning: Using ICT

tools for course design and lesson

planning

4.62 .607 6 2.255 .867 8

Learning Environment: Using ICT

tools in design of teaching &

learning activities

4.69 .516 1 2.387 .890 2

Student experience: Using ICT tools

to support student understanding

of concepts & their application in

industry

4.62 .663 6 2.362 .921 3

Assessment: Using ICT for

formative & summative

assessment

and

to

provide

feedback on progress

4.60 .531 10 2.066 .884 18

Communication & collaboration:

Using ICT to connect teaching &

learning activities to industry and

market place worlds

4.59 .704 11 2.016 .848 23

Special Needs Education: Using ICT

resources and assistive

technologies to address special

educational needs

4.47 .723 21 1.903 .741 25

Pedagogy 4.508 .115 5 2.09 .029 6

Planning: Using ICT to design

teaching & learning activities

4.62 .755 6 2.135 .893 15

Problem based learning: Using ICT

to identify complex, real‐world

industry related problems to

incorporate in TIVET subject matter

4.56 .582 16 2.060 .858 19

Student experience: Using ICT to

provide support to students for

their deep understanding of

concepts in different technical

areas

4.59 .551 11 2.090 .887 16




of 114

Competencies

Level of Importance





Emerging (1.25), Acquiring (2.5), Achieving


Mean SD

Rank

{out of

26}

Over

all

rank

Mean SD

Rank

{out of

26}

Over

all

rank

Project‐based learning: Using

project‐based learning and ICT

tools to support student thinking

and social interaction

4.41 .690 24 2.060 .830 19


Using open‐ended tools and

subject‐specific applications to

support student collaboration

4.36 .666 25 2.090 .813 16

ICT 4.500 .143 6 2.09 .171 5

Productivity tools: Using open‐

ended software packages

appropriate to TIVET subject

matter areas

4.42 .676 23 2.016 .884 23

Authoring tools: Using an authoring

environment or tools to design

offline and/or web resources

4.28 .933 26 1.865 .887 26

Internet: Using web resources in

support of project/problem‐based

learning

4.67 .542 2 2.217 .960 10


Using search engines, social media

websites and email to find people

& resources for collaborative

projects

4.50 .681 19 2.355 1.044 4

Administration: Using ICT to

manage,

monitor

and

assess

progress of student projects &

progress

4.64 .511 3 2.060 .858 19

Student learning: Using ICT to

enable student communication and

collaboration with students, peers

and the wider community

4.49 .627 20 2.035 .863 22

Organization & administration 4.535 .050 4 2.20 .038 3

Lecturer/ Instructor understanding:

Using ICT to support learning

activities and social interactions

4.57 .580 15 2.236 .928 9

ICT integration: Managing student

learning

in

a

technology‐enhanced

environment

4.58 .543 14 2.148 .871 13

Classroom management: Appling

ICT to support group collaboration

& project work

4.47 .672 21 2.205 .832 12

Acceptable & appropriate uses:

Developing procedures and policies

for ethical, responsible and

appropriate use of ICT to support

4.52 .665 17 2.217 .837 10




of 114

Competencies

Level of Importance





Emerging (1.25), Acquiring (2.5), Achieving


Mean SD

Rank

{out of

26}

Over

all

rank

Mean SD

Rank

{out of

26}

Over

all

rank

teaching & learning

Professional development 4.590 .060 3 2.30 .048 1

Planning: Using ICT to support staff

professional activities

4.52 .777 17 2.431 .916 1

Lecturer/Instructor awareness:

Using Virtual Learning

Environments to link staff to

external experts & communities

4.62 .714 6 2.142 .917 14

Informal learning: Using ICT to

enable staff access to e‐learning

courses for professional

development

4.63 .767 5 2.337 .925 5

Note: The mean scores in bold represent the weighted average of competencies for each domain

HoDs and lecturers were also asked to express the level to which these competencies have been

actually developed in their workplaces in TIVET institutions. Findings revealed that professional

development competencies (mean = 2.30) were ranked as the most developed followed by

policy competencies related to policy awareness and classroom practice (mean = 2.30) and

organization & management competencies (mean = 2.20). Curriculum and assessment

competencies (mean = 2.20), were ranked fourth followed by ICT (mean = 2.06) and Pedagogy

(mean = 2.06) competencies respectively. It is worth observing that respondents placed

competency development

in

the

workplace

in

all

domains

as

hovering

between

emerging

and

acquiring stages of development of ICT competencies.

It is also worth mentioning that traditional ICT competencies, which for many define the focus of

professional development were ranked lowest in relation to development. The more technical

oriented competencies such as, the ability to use ICT productivity tools (rank 26th out of 26) and

the ability to use ICT authoring tools (rank 23rdout of 26) ranked low in terms of the perceived

level of development in the workplace. The more pedagogical oriented competencies such as

the ability to use ICT to support staff professional activities (rank 1st out of 26) and the ability to

use ICT tools to design teaching and learning activities (rank 2nd out of 26) ranked high in terms

of workplace level of development.

6.2.2 Gap Analysis TNA

In an attempt to identify the capacity needs of HoDs and lecturers, the competencies were

mapped onto a development‐importance matrix (Table 9). The mapping is divided into four




of 114

quadrants that distinguish lecturers’ competency groups according to what competencies they

identified as having low and high levels of importance and what they expressed as the low and

high levels of actual development of these competencies within their work practices in TIVET

institutions.

Quadrant I displays issues that are considered by HoDs and lecturers to be low in both

importance and actual level of development in the workplace. Based on the findings, such

competencies include ICT standards for Special Needs Education, Project‐based learning, ICT

open‐ended tool to promote Communication & collaboration, ICT Productivity tools, ICT

Authoring tools, ICT tools to promote student learning with the wider community. It is

important to note that three (out of 5) ICT competencies and two (out of 5) Pedagogical

competencies are included in this category.

Quadrant II includes competencies that are perceived high in the actual level of development

but low

in

terms

of

importance.

Using

search

engines,

social

media

(ICT),

using

ICT

to

support

staff professional activities (professional development), applying ICT to support group

collaboration and acceptable use (organization & management) are all issues in the low

importance and high development quadrant. Noteworthy, is the low level of importance

attributed to the use of ICT to support group collaboration and project work. This may reflect

the highly successful innovation projects that are promoted by MoHEST across TIVET institutions

indicating that there are already high levels of capability in these competency domains.

Quadrant III presents competencies that require the immediate attention of MoHEST and

industry partners as they represent the competencies perceived as of high importance and least

developed in TIVET institutions. The competencies relate specifically to the use of ICT for

improving and enhancing TIVET professionalism and course delivery. Competencies for the use

of technology to connect teaching & learning activities to industry and market place worlds

(curriculum); for the use of technology to support formative & summative assessment

(curriculum); for using ICT to identify complex, real‐world industry related problems to

incorporate in TIVET subject matter (pedagogy); for using ICT to provide support to students for

their deep understanding of concepts in different technical areas (pedagogy); for using ICT to

manage, monitor and assess progress of student projects & progress (ICT); for managing student

learning in

a technology

‐enhanced

environment

(organization

&

management);

for

using

virtual

environments to link staff to internal and external communities and technical experts

(professional development) represent competencies that HoDs and lecturers considered as

having high importance but low levels of actual development in TIVET institutions.

Finally, Quadrant IV contains eight competencies that are considered both high in importance

and actual level of development. These competencies focused on ICT policy awareness and




of 114

practice, ICT curriculum planning and application in teaching and learning, ICT to promote

student understanding and informal networks of learning among teachers and the internet to

access resources to support learning.




of 114

Table 9‐ Quadrant Analysis – Development ‐ Importance matrix

L e v e l o f I m p o r t a n c

e

High

Quadrant III (High Importance – Low Development)

• Communication & collaboration: Using ICT to connect teaching

& learning activities to industry and market place worlds

(Curriculum)

• Assessment: Using ICT for formative & summative assessment

and to provide feedback on progress (Curriculum)

• Planning: Using ICT to design teaching & learning activities

(Pedagogy)

• Problem based learning: Using ICT to identify complex, real‐

world industry related problems to incorporate in TIVET subject

matter (Pedagogy)

• Student experience: Using ICT to provide support to students

for their deep understanding of concepts in different technical

areas (Pedagogy)

• Administration: Using ICT to manage, monitor and assess

progress of student projects & progress (ICT)

•

ICT integration:

Managing

student

learning

in

a technology

‐

enhanced environment (Org & Management)

• Lecturer/Instructor awareness: Using Virtual Learning

Environments to link staff to external experts & communities

(Professional Development)

Quadrant IV (High Importance – High Development)

• Policy awareness: Awareness of national/institutional ICT in

Education policy

(Policy)

• Classroom practice: Applying national/ institutional ICT policy

the classroom (Policy)

• Curriculum Planning: Using ICT tools for course design and

lesson planning (Curriculum)

• Learning Environment: Using ICT tools in design of teaching &

learning activities (Curriculum)

• Student experience: Using ICT tools to support student

understanding of concepts & their application in industry

(Curriculum)

• Informal learning: Using ICT to enable staff access to e‐learnin

courses for professional development (Professional

Development)

•

Internet: Using

web

resources

in

support

of

project/problem

‐

based learning (ICT)

• Lecturer/ Instructor understanding: Using ICT to support

learning activities and social interactions (Org & Management

Quadrant 1 (Low Importance – Low Development)

•

Special Needs Education: Using ICT resources and assistive

technologies to address special educational needs (Curriculum)

• Project‐based learning: Using project‐based learning and ICT

tools to support student thinking and social interaction

(Pedagogy)

• Communication & collaboration: Using open‐ended tools and

subject‐specific applications to support student collaboration

(Pedagogy)

•

Productivity tools: Using open‐ended software packages

appropriate to TIVET subject matter areas (ICT)

•

Authoring tools: Using an authoring environment or tools to

design offline and/or web resources (ICT)

•

Student learning: Using ICT to enable student communication

and collaboration with students, peers and the wider

community (ICT)

Low

Quadrant II (Low Importance ‐ High Development)

•

Communication & collaboration: Using search engines, social

media websites and email to find people & resources for

collaborative projects (ICT)

• Planning: Using ICT to support staff professional activities

(Professional Development)

• Classroom management: Appling ICT to support group

collaboration & project work (Org. & Management)

•

Acceptable & appropriate uses: Developing procedures and

policies for ethical, responsible and appropriate use of ICT to

support teaching & learning (Org. & Management)

Hig




of 114

6.2.3 General TNA comments

HoD and lecturer perceptions of competency importance and their own assessment of their

competency levels of development were mapped on an importance‐development matrix. The

competencies identified

by

respondents

to

be

of

high

importance

and

low

level

of

development

present a capacity gap that is directly related to the practical use of ICT for improving and

enhancing TIVET course delivery. The competencies are:

• The use of technology to connect teaching & learning activities related to industry and

market place worlds;

• The use of ICT to support formative & summative assessment in TIVET coursework ;

• The use of ICT to identify complex, real‐world industry related problems to incorporate

in TIVET subject matter;

•

The use

of

ICT

to

provide

support

to

students

for

their

deep

understanding

of

concepts

in different technical areas;

• The use of ICT to manage, monitor and assess progress of student projects & progress;

• The use of ICT for managing student learning in a technology‐enhanced environment

What is noteworthy is the shift in focus of capacity needs from a techno‐centric approach to

pedagogical integration capacity building that has dominated most training programs in

developed and developing countries. The TNA has clearly identified lecturer needs that are

centered on the pedagogical integration of ICT in TIVET programs. The focus is not on Education

for ICT , but rather on ICT for Education or the use of the ICT tool to improve pedagogical

practices in TIVET course delivery and ultimately to produce student graduates with technical

and innovation skills adequate for the real contexts and challenges of the 21st Century

marketplace.




of 114

Conclusions and Recommendations

The baseline survey as carried out amongst TIVET institutions in Kenya should be recognized as

just one step in the processes needed to overhaul ICT integration in teaching and learning in the

sub‐sector.

The

survey

will

allow

for

the

MoHEST

and

other

sector

stakeholders,

to

have

access

to current and needed data that will enable better planning and prioritization. For

implementation purposes, the recommendations as given per area below, can be considered as

individual strategies, or maybe addressed within a coherent policy framework as suggested

under the recommendations given in the section for Policy and Vision. Where a parallel

approach is taken, careful attention needs to be paid to coordination and harmonization of the

process and this should be led by the MoHEST. Additionally, it should be noted that the

recommendations given should be thought of within the broader context of policies and

initiatives aimed at the wider education sector, as well as for TIVET institutions that were not

initially targeted under this baseline.


Findings from the baseline clearly indicate that the majority of TIVET institutions do not have a

formal ICT policy, ICT work plans or ICT guidelines. Among the few institutions that have an

institutional ICT policy only a fifth have developed ICT work plans to realize the policies and

made subsequent budget allocations. Although a high level of confidence has been registered in

the relevance of existing ICT policies, respondents cast a bit of doubt on its implementation.

Reasons behind the implementation gap are related to the fact that policies may have been

developed

while

the

accompanying

implementation

work

plans

have

not.

The

willingness

to

adhere to policy requirements, in the few institutions that have such policies, is countered by

barriers such as lack of infrastructure, lack of human resources in the form of ICT integration

skills, a lack of policy to have these skills acquired by lecturers and HODs, and lack of

institutional implementation/work plans.

At the national level, the ICT Integration policy gap seems to hinder strong administrative

support of the departments in integrating ICT in curriculum delivery from institutional

management. Although matters related to ICTs are sometimes debated in staff meetings, the

actual planning and implementation of ICT use was noted not to be forthcoming. This has

resulted in a significant implementation gap regarding ICT integration to TIVET as most of the

activities are carried out on an adhoc basis. The heavy investment in ICT infrastructure in the

institutions is mainly being used for basic ICT skills acquisition in most of the institutions and as a

core course offering for those students who are not taking Computer studies as their core

course.




of 114

Recommendations:

1. Define clear national policy parameters for ICT integration into TIVET, including new

policies where appropriate and/or needed:

With the increase in demands for new skills, as well as increased access to new

technologies to support all skills, there is the need to re‐examine the policy frameworks

which govern TIVET in Kenya. Similar to approaches used in the education sector, a

careful analysis must be done of all related sector level policies to ensure that ICT issues

are correctly/appropriately captured. It is recommended that the MoHEST leads a multi‐

stakeholder process to develop an ICT Integration Strategy in TIVET education which will

further detail priorities, budgets, and planning which will in turn provide the framework

within which TIVET institutions can plan and implement the integration strategy. Central

to the strategy will also be the need to define :

a. Policy: general purpose and policy objectives for ICT integration in TIVET

institutions for

a defined

period

of

time

(e.g.

five

years,

2012

–

2017)

b. Strategic objective areas: defining strategic objective areas/priorities for using

ICTs in TIVET for the period

c. Organization and management: technical support requirements, accountability

measures, budgetary and/or incentive structures

d. ICT infrastructure: defining what ICT infrastructure would be required in each of

the TIVET institutions

e. Curriculum: identifying the priorities for ICT integration for the TIVET

institutions, as well as identifying new course offerings that businesses and by

extension the technology dictates; the issue of curriculum will also have to be

looked at within the context of other related policies such as National

Qualifications Frameworks, Occupational Standards and Competency Based

Training (where already in existence or planned)

f. Digital Learning Materials (e‐content): defining priority areas and segments

within TIVET

g. Capacity Building/Enhancement: defining capacity gaps of administrators,

educators, trainers, facilitators, support staff etc. needed for a holistic ICT

integration and developing a plan around which those will be addressed

h. Monitoring and Evaluation: defining mechanisms to be used to monitor

progress and

achievement

of

objectives

for

ICT

Integration

in

TIVET

i. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for the implementation of such a strategy.

It should be noted that any new policy/plan developed should also take into

consideration existing national and/or sector policies. Where appropriate, these will

have to be revised and/or aligned.




of 114

2. Develop institutional level guidelines and plans for ICT Integration: defined

institutional level guidelines must be provided to all TIVET institutions to ensure

standardisation (and hence equity) across the board. This can be developed based on

the final ICT Integration Strategy, and would in fact mirror those components but at an

institutional level.

Addressing policy issues at these two levels i.e. national and institutional would also allow for a

clear differentiation between the responsibilities of various actors within the TIVET sector with

the MoHEST providing the overarching policy framework, while providing guidance to the

implementing institutions.

2. Curricula and Assessment

An understanding of the curriculum affects the progression of ICT in the curriculum from the

awareness stage

to

the

acquisition

of

basic

skills,

to

the

integration

and

overlapping

of

subject

areas with ICT tools to the use of ICT to address larger more complex real world issues.

Assessment should allow a system to determine whether outcomes have been met and provide

a basis for review, evaluation and revision accordingly. Assessment should be at the individual as

well as at the institutional level.

The findings from the baseline indicate that curricula and assessment requirements have a

direct impact on the use of ICT in TIVET Institutions. ICT is widely taught as a subject in a

majority of the institutions and one of the fundamental reasons is because there is a defined

curriculum

for

it

and

this

curriculum

is

assessed

at

the

national

level.

When

the

curriculum

does

not provide any standards or guidelines for ICT usage in its delivery, the use of ICT will remain

concentrated in the use of emails, communication and ICT literacy.

Although lecturers and HoDs are generally aware of the necessity to use ICTs in the 21st Century,

there are no enabling factors to encourage them to do so. Institutional support mechanisms for

ICT usage and deployment of ICTs are lacking. Curriculum overload and its orientation to

assessment which means that lecturers are inclined to teach what is assessed are factors that

were noted to greatly influence ICT integration practices in the institutions.

Since the

curriculum

and

assessment

approaches

are

silent

on

how

ICT

should

be

used,

there

are fragmented efforts in the use of ICT for instruction and most of these are individual driven.

Although a minority of the students indicated that TIVET curriculum offerings were adequate

and relevant for their future professional requirements, most of the students expressed

concerns that both the TIVET curriculum and assessment systems were outmoded. There

appeared to be a general consensus emerging through the discussions of the need for




of 114

curriculum revision to enable student graduates to meet requirements for today’s competitive

and innovative market place. In addition ICT course provision was seen to be irrelevant by the

students in their specialist fields with technical software often being unavailable or used for

demonstration purposes in a theoretical delivery format.

According to the students, lecturer resistance where there is no institutional policy and no

capacity building to support integration, access where labs are closed after regular classes

requiring students to seek and pay for extra‐curricular technology upgrades outside the

institution, archaic technology tools in the institutions, low computer to student ratios, and a

mismatch between institutional curriculum with market place practices, as some of the

curriculum issues emerging from the survey.

In interpreting the student reflections on ICT use in the TIVET curriculum, it would seem at first

glance that the lack of ‘hard’ facilities (hardware and software) may represent the easiest aspect

to

blame

in

relation

to

lack

of

ICT

integration

in

course

delivery.

Yet

many

institutions

have

made great strides in upgrading facilities and access. The case may be that the real need is for

consideration of the softer dimension for capacity building, management structure and policy

enhancement to promote a culture of ICT use in curriculum design and course delivery.

Recommendations:

3. Introduce ICT as a core skill for all entry level students: Given that the majority of

students enter the TIVET institutions with low or no ICT skills, it is recommended that a

curriculum be developed for all entry level students to ensure that students do acquire

good foundational ICT skills which they will further build on while completing their

elected courses. Where already offered, the curriculum can be revised. MoHEST and

stakeholders can also explore globally recognized options or other internationally

certifiable ICT courses that are aligned to the job market and for which students can

earn additional certification should they wish to do so. This could also be at a national

level.

4. Review course schedules and timetables to allow for sufficient learning and practise

time as it related to the acquisition of ICT skills: Apart from its presence as a curriculum

subject,

there

needs

to

be

sufficient

learning

and

practise

time

to

enable

trainees

to

acquire ICT competencies. Additional attention needs to be given to ensure that

adequate time is built into class schedules to accommodate this. This it should also be

noted, will be in direct correlation to the ratio of computers and other ICT resources to

students (see recommendations under ICT Infrastructure)




of 114

5. Determine based on industry input crucial ICT skills sets per curriculum/course area :

The curriculum has been noted to not being in‐step with Industry requirements, and

partnerships with Industry have also been noted to be weak except for student

attachment in which only the students are involved. It is therefore recommended that

Industry involvement in TIVET education, and especially exploring ways of making the

curriculum and assessment relevant through ICT, should be developed. This could

include but not be limited to: curriculum, occupational standards and levels of

competency (ies).

3. Pedagogy

Even though a clear majority of the TIVET institutions require lecturers to use ICTs, more than

15% of the institutions do not have such requirements and almost 20% of the lecturers are not

using ICT at all in their teaching and learning.



developing lecturers own knowledge and for teaching students about computers. Facilitation of

virtual learning environments or using ICTs to develop students’ 21st Century skills is not yet

common practice. Lecturers are aware of the potential of ICTs in the art of teaching but they

neither have the skill‐sets nor access to ICT facilities to efficiently integrate the new tools and

methodologies in curriculum instruction.

If pedagogy in relation to ICT is the level of expertise on the use of appropriate applications and

other ICT tools and the frequency of use to enhance specific teaching strategies, then, the

lecturers and HoDs in TIVET institutions have room for improvement. This is because, the

registered frequency of use of ICTs tool in the teaching practice was rated poorly and when this

happens, it is on an ad hoc basis. Further, there is still a big challenge for lecturers and HoDs to

use ICT in teaching and learning as the comfort levels in using the tools are very low among.

Since the art of teaching and learning through and with ICTs is mainly driven by individual efforts

as opposed to institutional policies, ensuring that HODs and lecturers are comfortable with ICT

would greatly enhance ICT uptake.

Although a majority

of

the

institutions

require

HoDs

and

lecturers

to

use

ICTs,

this

is

not

being

implemented in a systemic and systematic way because the requirement is not supported by an

enabling environment with tools, structures, and policies. The lecturers also greatly lack the

skills to infuse ICT in their teaching practice.

Recommendations:




of 114

6. Finalise the ICT Competency Framework and formally adopt this as the guideline for

the skills standard for TIVET instructors: Significant work has already been undertaken

on the ICT Competency Framework, and the discussions around that have been

instrumental in the design of this baseline. It is therefore recommended that this be

validated and formally adopted as a measure for pre‐service training of TIVET lecturers.

It is recommended that the process be completed as soon as possible, as this will also

help to facilitate several of the other recommendations outlined in this report.

7. Review the curriculum at the level of the teacher training institutions: Similar to the

recommendations proposed for trainees, the curriculum of the TIVET trainers should

also be reviewed and brought in line with the above mentioned competency standards.

Access to tools and resources at the level of the educational institutions should also be

planned for and provided, and increased emphasis placed on acquiring new pedagogical

techniques. As it is expected that this process will occur in parallel with several other

recommendations given,

a phased

approach

is

also

suggested

and

may

include:

a. Undertaking an immediate audit of the curricula at the teacher training facilities

to see where ICTs could be integrated as a tool for teaching, as well as providing

a first exposure for pre‐service instructors in the use of ICTs as a teaching tool

within the various skill areas.

b. Providing additional teaching and learning resources based on the finalised

competency framework (see Recommendation 6) as a short term measure in

addressing competency gaps of current pre‐service instructors.

c. Implementing a series of Train the Trainer workshops (on and offline) for

present lecturers.

d. Facilitating final review and revision of curriculum based on finalised

competency framework (see Recommendation 7).


The learning environment in which ICT is used requires certain facilities and resources. These

include computers and servers, networking and Internet access, electricity and space. Further

resources include various types of software and content, computer peripherals, television sets,

video equipment, projectors, whiteboards and specialized tools.

Most institutions have implemented ICT policies in the form of computers being made available

to staff and students. Data collected from the institutions suggest that most of them use the

computer lab access model combined with laptops and projectors for integration. Most of the

equipment has been acquired recently in the last 2‐3 years. But enough data on student

population to analyze if the ratio of students per computer is adequate was not available.

However, in the absence of the said data, it was clear from the focus groups discussions that




of 114

This can in turn be provided as a guideline which institutions can then use to determine

their investments.

11. Software, content and Internet access should be improved: In order to satisfy

educational needs and adequately serve the number of students. Other that the

standard off the shelve softwares, raising awareness on different ways of evaluating

existing standard education content would also be one the capacity building activities

under MoHEST to improve and deepen subject knowledge for both lecturers and

students.


EMIS are not widely used in TIVET institutions and there is no policy governing their use. Its

implementation is being carried out in individual institutions at the discretion of the institution’s

management.

Data

and

information

required

for

planning

remains

scant

and

unavailable.

Wherever EMIS is in use it is introduced with applications for Finance, Administration and

Procurement. IT‐systems that are more integrated into course delivery and require two‐way

communication are not common.

The data implies that sensitization efforts towards TIVET management regarding the

opportunities and demand for IT systems in education management could be valuable in helping

institutions seize so far unrealized opportunities.


Further, lecturers and administrators at TIVET institutions are not trained on how to utilize the

data that is available. The use of web tools and other ICT related resources that are required for

service delivery is seemingly not discussed frequently at the institutional level as a result of

which active dialogue and initiatives on how to best make use of ICT remains a matter of

personal ambition rather than an institutional directive.

Both equipment and connectivity is foremost funded by the institutions themselves. Since

institutions predominantly are funding their operations through Governmental contributions,

tuition fees and internally generated incomes, these are indirectly also the sources supporting

computer equipment

acquisition.

The

Government

doesn’t

seem

to

tie

its

provided

funds

to

the

acquisition of computer equipment; rather it gives development funding that the institution can

use for development related activities under which ICT procurement falls.

TIVET institutions seem not to have elaborate partnerships with the Private sector except during

student attachment opportunities.




of 114

Almost one third of the institutions don’t have an ICT specific budget, signaling that ICT is not a




hence not as prioritized.

On an institutional level, professional development is however only separately stated in 33% of

the institutional ICT budgets. To efficiently integrate ICT into classroom practice, lecturers need

training in how to make good use of the new ICT‐based pedagogical tools. The different

priorities between equipment and classroom integration/training in ICT budgets at institutional

respective departmental level indicate inconsistent priorities by different professional groups at

TIVET institutes.

Recommendations

12. Define types of Education Management information Systems (EMIS) needed at the

institutional level to inform national as well as institutional planning: The TIVET

institutions have access to data and information that is critical at a number of levels –

including the national level – of planning. However, based on what was seen during the

baseline survey collection and use of this data/information is not systematically being

done. There is a need to have structure in how data should be collected and stored.

Such data can include but not be limited to :

‐ accounting, procurement and disbursements data for program management

and monitoring;

‐ TIVET provider data including staffing, registration, accredited course offerings,

fees, and trainee placement benchmarks;

Issues such as frequency of data collection must also be addressed within this

framework/strategy. It is also recommended that a sub‐set of the questions used for

purposes of this baseline be included in such an EMIS.

13. Earmark/Allocate ICT funding as an explicit part of development funding: As

institutions will have to develop their ICT infrastructure if the goals and objectives of an

ICT integration strategy are to be met, it is recommended that the Government

allocates

a

set

percentage

of

the

development

funding

given

to

the

institutions

specifically for ICT acquisition, purchase and maintenance. Clear guidelines must be

developed as to what this ear marked funding can and cannot be used for. This could

also include in‐house ICT professional development opportunities for staff.




of 114


Professional development in ICT is meant to enhance personal productivity and professional

practice of HODs and lecturers through ICT. As ICT is introduced into an education setting, there

is a tendency to move from discrete skills training to reflective practice. This requires budgetary

allocation, release

time

for

teacher

professional

development,

and

availability

of

resources

all

of

which can have a great impact on the ability of an institution to incorporate ICT in a meaningful

way.


lecturers. Peer learning is the modality of picking up ICT skills informally in institutions. There is


for institution‐based staff development that is focused on short regular in‐house workshops

using external and internal resource supports to promote experimentation and strategies for ICT

integration across curricular program areas.

Lecturer motivation in ICT training is for acquiring technology and occupational literacy to use

ICT at a functional and practice level that is integral to enhancing their professionalism and

coursework delivery. However there is little focus in the findings on the potential use of ICT as

an instructional tool or the pedagogical integration of ICT for enhancing TIVET course delivery in

a proactive and responsive manner. There is a need to define the important teacher technology

competencies for ICT integration as an instructional tool so as to avoid limiting the effective

integration of ICT in TIVET provision.

Teacher confidence

presents

a particular

challenge

for

ICT

integration,

even

in

instances

where

teachers have had training and where there is adequate infrastructure. This lack of confidence






provision. This selection would perhaps reflect the stress that practitioners feel with the

requirement for technology integration. Their choice of a blended approach would indicate their

need for both traditional and online training to create enabling conditions, community of

practice support structures and safe spaces for experimentation with the potential of

technology use in their practices.

There is a great demand for training in basic ICT literacy and training related to ICT usage in the

specialist fields of their TIVET course programs as in ICT applications in engineering and sciences.




of 114

Although the institutions are supportive of HoDs and lecturers use of ICT and actually require

them to use ICTs, an enabling environment to actualize this policy is far from ready. This

includes equipping the HoDs and lecturers with the skills required for the use of ICT as a

personal level and also in curriculum delivery. On‐going opportunities for professional

development in a tertiary sector which requires lecturers to keep abreast with their specialist

field and the demands of industry are required.

Recommendations:

14. Expand options for TIVET lecturers to purchase/own ICT equipment at reduced prices:

This can be achieved through Public‐Private‐Partnerships; the Ministry can facilitate

direct purchase of ICT equipment by TIVET lectures at reduced prices or through an

arranged check‐off system with arrangements between the financier and the employee.

This can

be

provided

as

a part

of

the

incentives

for

increasing

lecturer

use,

and

comfort

with using ICTs.

15. Facilitate periodic (regular) upgrade of ICT competencies for all lecturers, regardless of

the courses they are teaching: This can either be organized at the national level, using a

train the trainer approach to ensure that at least a set number of instructors/facilities

are trained or at the institutional level using a school‐based approach where the

institution organizes seminars / in‐house training that are supported by internal ICT

experts and practitioners and / or external expertise from national institutions such as

the Learning Resources Centre Project in KTTC established to build capacity in lecturers

and teachers not only to learn how to use ICT but to use ICT to learn.

16.

Provide opportunities for on‐line learning: With an identified progression path for

lecturers, school‐based courses can be provided through institutions of higher learning

or the TIVET lecturers training college (KTTC). Collaboration with Industry could also

provide avenues where lecturers upgrade their skills with the latest technologies and

skills.

17. Reduce the capacity gap: Provide training in the key areas of ICT use in TIVET

provision identified by respondents as being of high importance and having a low

level of development, namely:

a. The use of technology to connect teaching and learning activities related

to Industry

and

market

place

worlds;

b. The use of ICT to support formative and summative assessment in TIVET

coursework ;

c. The use of ICT to identify complex, real‐world industry related problems

to incorporate in TIVET subject matter;




of 114

d. The use of ICT to provide support to students for their deep

understanding of concepts in different technical areas;

e. The use of ICT to manage, monitor and assess progress of student

projects & progress;

f.

The use

of

ICT

for

managing

student

learning

in

a technology

‐enhanced

environment




of 114

Annex

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1 ‐

Demographic profile

of

the

TIVET

respondents

................................................

28

Table 2‐ Institutional Visions ............................................................................................. 30

Table 3‐ Existing policies and plans‐ HoDs ........................................................................ 30

Table 4‐ Existence of ICT policies and plans ‐ Lecturers ................................................... 31

Table 5 ‐ Tools available for ICT integration ..................................................................... 40

Table 6‐ Purpose of ICT use in TIVET courses ................................................................... 49

Table 7– Strategies to encourage lecturers to use ICTs ‐ HoDs ........................................ 53

Table 8‐ Contextualized ICT Competencies for lecturers ................................................. 88

Table 9‐ Quadrant Analysis – Development ‐ Importance matrix .................................... 93

Figure 1 ‐

2 –

Education

and

Training

Structure

in

Kenya

(Source:

Sessional

Paper

No.

1

of 2005) ............................................................................................................................. 18

Figure 3: Reasons for not implementing ICT policies – HoDs ........................................... 32

Figure 4: Reasons for not implementing ICT policies ‐ Lecturers ..................................... 32

Figure 5‐ Levels of satisfaction with policies and plans ‐ HoDs ........................................ 33

Figure 6‐ Levels of satisfaction with policies and plans – Lecturers ................................. 33

Figure 7 – How is ICT Policy Implemented – Lecturers and HoDs ..................................... 34

Figure 8‐ Challenges with TIVET course provision – HoDs and Lecturers ........................ 35

Figure 9‐ Challenges with ICT integration in TIVET course provision – HoDs and Lecturers

........................................................................................................................................... 36

Figure 10

‐Challenges

with

ICT

integration

in

course

provision

–

HoDs

and

Lecturers.

.. 39

Figure 11 ‐ ICT integration practices ‐ HoDs ..................................................................... 41

Figure 12‐ Uses of ICTs by lecturers and students ‐ IT Technicians .................................. 44

Figure 13 – Requirement of lecturers to use ICT – view of HoDs and Lecturers ............... 48

Figure 14 – Purpose of ICT use – Main 4 uses – Lecturers and HoDs ................................ 48

Figure 15– Frequency of ICT use in teaching process ‐ Lecturers .................................... 51

Figure 16– Frequency of ICT use by Lecturers in teaching process ‐ HoDs ...................... 51

Figure 17 – Comfort level of Lecturers in using technology ‐ HoDs .................................. 52

Figure 18 – Comfort level of lecturers in using technology ‐ Lecturers ............................ 52

Figure 19 – Training received ‐ IT Technicians ................................................................... 54

Figure 20 – Average number of computers per Institution ‐ IT Technicians ..................... 55

Figure 21 – Average number of computers per Institution ‐ IT Technicians .................... 55

Figure 22 – Location of computers ‐ HoDs ........................................................................ 56

Figure 23 – Functions of TIVET servers ‐ IT Technicians .................................................... 57

Figure 24 – Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training ‐ HoDs .................. 59

Figure 25 – Adequacy of equipment, software, Internet and training ‐ Lecturers ........... 59

Figure 26 – Existence of ICT related Policies and Plans ‐ IT Technicians ........................... 61

Figure 27 – Software in use‐ IT Technicians ...................................................................... 62




of 114

Figure 28 – Operating system in use ‐ IT Technicians ........................................................ 63

Figure 29 – TIVET partnerships with private sector – HoDs and Lecturers ....................... 66

Figure 30 – TIVET partnerships with education institutions – HoDs and Lecturers .......... 67

Figure 31 – TIVET partnerships with industry– HoDs and Lecturers ................................ 67

Figure 32 – TIVET partnerships with other organizations – HoDs and Lecturers .............. 68

Figure 33 –

EMIS

approach

adopted–

HoDs

......................................................................

69

Figure 34 – IT systems used to enable student access to education and training – HoDs 70

Figure 35 – Degree of training of lecturers to utilize data – HoDs and Lecturers ............. 72

Figure 36 – Sources of support or income for the institutions – HoDs ............................. 74

Figure 37 – Sources of funding for ICT activities – HoDs ................................................... 76

Figure 38 – Sources of funding for ICT activities – HoDs ................................................... 76

Figure 39 – ICT related activities with specific budget allocation – IT technicians ........... 77

Figure 40 – ICT confidence – Lecturers ............................................................................. 82

Figure 41– Mode of training – HoDs and Lecturers .......................................................... 84




of 114

List of Institutions that participated in the survey

Institutions that answered the survey, either in person or by email:

Institution

Answered questionnaires

Region HoDs Lecturers

IT

Technicians TNA

BUMBE TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE WESTERN 4 0 0 4

BUSHIANGALA TECHNICAL TRAINING

INSTITUTE WESTERN 2 0 1 2

ELDORET POLYTECHNIC RIFT VALLEY 3 2 1 6

GUSII INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NYANZA 3 4 1 7

KABETE TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE NAIROBI 4 4 1 8

KAIBOI TECHNICAL

TRAINING

INSTITUTE

RIFT

VALLEY

2 5 1

5KAIMOSI COLLEGE INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY WESTERN 3 3 1 5

KENYA TECHNICAL TEACHERS COLLEGE NAIROBI 0 0 1 0

KEROKA TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE NYANZA 3 0 1 2

KIAMBU INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY CENTRAL 4 4 1 9

KIRINYAGA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE OF


KISIWA TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE WESTERN 1 0 1 1

KISUMU POLYTECHNIC NYANZA 4 0 1 4

KITALE TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE RIFT VALLEY 4 3 1 7

MACHAKOS TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE EASTERN 3 4 1 8

MATHENGE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CENTRAL 5 3 1 7

MATILI TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE WESTERN 1 0 1 1

MAWEGO TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE WESTERN 4 4 1 6

MERU TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE EASTERN 0 0 1 1

MICHUKI TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE CENTRAL 1 3 1 2

MOI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NYANZA 4 4 1 4

MURANG'A COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY CENTRAL 3 3 1 7

NAIROBI TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE NAIROBI 4 4 1

9

NKABUNE TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE EASTERN 3 3 1 7

NORTH EASTERN PROVINCE

NORTH

EASTERN 1 3 0 6

NYANDARUA INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND


NYERI TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE CENTRAL 4 4 1 7




of 114

Institution

Answered questionnaires

Region HoDs Lecturers

IT

Technicians TNA

OL'LESSOS TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE RIFT VALLEY 2 0 0 0

PC KINYANJUI TECHNICAL TRAINING

INSTITUTE

NAIROBI 5 4 1

8

RAMOGI INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED

TECHNOLOGY NYANZA 5 3 1 6

RIFT VALLEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY RIFT VALLEY 1 0 0 4

RIFT VALLEY TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE RIFT VALLEY 3 5 1 7

SANGALO INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY WESTERN 4 2 1 7

SHAMBELELE TECHNICAL TRAINING

INSTITUTE WESTERN 3 0 1 3

SIAYA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NYANZA 4 8 1 10

SIGALAGALA TECHNICAL

TRAINING

INSTITUTE

WESTERN

4 0 1

4THIKA TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE CENTRAL 3 1 0 2

WOTE TECHNICAL TRAINING INSTITUTE EASTERN 0 4 1 6




of 114

Related documentation

- Several instruments were used to collect data. For more information about the

questionnaires

and

survey

process

see

separate

document:

TIVET

ICT

BASELINE

SURVEY

TOOLKIT.

- The collected answers to all questionnaires have been digitized and are available in XLS

format. Each XLS file corresponds to a survey, and contains all individual answers (in

separate sheets), a summary sheet with all the answers together (one row per answer)

and an analysis sheet with percentages and graphs, question by question.




of 114

References

Farrel, G. 2007. Survey of ICT in Education in Kenya [Online], available from infoDev at:

http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.409.html,

retrieved

14

April

2011

Government of Kenya, Ministry of Education Science and Technology (2005) ICTs in Education

Options Paper [Online], available at:

http://ict.aed.org/kenya/ICT_in_Ed_options_paper_Kenya.pdf, retrieved 14 April 2011

Government of Kenya, Ministry of Information and Communications (2006) National

Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Policy [Online], available at:

http://www.cck.go.ke/regulations/downloads/national_ict_policy.pdf, retrieved 14 April 2011

Government of Kenya (2007) Kenya Vision 2030: A Globally Competitive and Prosperous Kenya

[Online], available at:

http://www.safaricomfoundation.org/fileadmin/template/main/downloads/Kenya_VISION_203

0‐final_report‐October_2007.pdf, retrieved 12 March 2011

Government of Kenya, Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology (2010) ICT

Capacities and Capabilities in Secondary Schools in Kenya [Online] available at:

http://www.google.ie/search?q=ICT+capacity+and+capabilities+in+secondary+schools+in+Kenya

+2009&rls=com.microsoft:en‐ie:IE‐SearchBox&ie=UTF‐8&oe=UTF‐

8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SKPB_en , retrieved 14 April 2011

International

Monetary

Fund

(2005)

Kenya:

Poverty

Reduction

Strategy

Paper

[Online],

available at http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2005/cr0511.pdf , retrieved on 8th April

2011

Janssens‐Bevernage, A, Cornille, B & Mwaniki, N. (2005) Integrating ICT in Teacher Training:

Refelctions on Practice and Policy Implication – A case study o fhte Learning Resource Centre at

the Kenya Technical Teacher College [Online], available from IDRC at: http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev‐

93060‐201‐1‐DO_TOPIC.html, accessed 14 April 2011

King, K. and Palmer, R. (2010) Fundamentals of Educational Planning: Planning for Technical and

Vocational

Skills

Development

[Online],

available

at

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001895/189530e.pdf , retrieved 7 march 2011

Spring, J. (2008) Research on Globalization and Education. Review of Educational Research 78

(2), pp350‐365




Swarts, P. and Wachira, E. 2009. Kenya: ICT in Education Situational Analysis [Online], available

from GESCI at: http://gesci.org/old/files/docman/Kenya_ICT4E_Situational_Analysis_‐

_November_2009.pdf , retrieved 6 June 2010

UNESCO (2002). Information and Communication Technology in Education: A Curriculum for

Schools and Program for Teacher Development [Online], available at:

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001295/129538e.pdf , retrieved 18 March 2011

UNESCO Institute for Information technologies in Education (UNESCO‐IITE) (2003) Analytical

Survey: The Use of ICTs in Technical and Vocational Education and Training [Online], available at:

http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php‐

URL_ID=35518&URL_DO=DO_PRINTPAGE&URL_SECTION=201.html, retrieved 7 March 2011

UNESCO Institute for Information technologies in Education (UNESCO‐IITE) (2005) ICT

Application in

Technical

and

Vocational

Education

Training:

Specialized

Training

Course

[Online],

available at: http://ru.iite.unesco.org/pics/publications/en/files/3214643.pdf, retrieved 7 March

2011

UNESCO (2008). ICT Competency Standards for Teachers: Policy Framework [Online], available

from UNESCO at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001562/156210E.pdf, retrieved 11

April 2009

UNESCO Bangkok (2011) Performance Indicators on ICT for Education Matrix [Online], available

from

UNESCO

Bangkok

at:

http://www.unescobkk.org/education/ict/themes/measuring‐

and‐

monitoring‐change/indicators‐database‐asia‐pacific‐regional‐survey/performance‐indicators‐on‐

ict‐for‐education‐matrix/, retrieved 28 March 2011

kenya tvet baseline 2011.pdf

Documents