On Understanding and Improving Teaching through Reflection on the Mathematics National Examinations and National Education Goals: A Case of Malawi
|Author(s)||by Nancy Chitera|
|Keywords||Validation; national examinations; national education goals; Secondary Education Goals, content validity|
|Open Access||Access PDF Open in New Tab|
There have been so many reports that discuss the importance of validating examinations to check if they assess what they are intended to assess. The aim of this article is not to discuss the importance of validating nor the validation process but rather reflections of the extent to which National Educational Goals (NEGs) and Secondary Education Goals (SEGs) are reflected in a National Examination paper. In order to do this, I have used content validity analysis of the Mathematics National examinations from the year 2005 to 2009 in relation to the NEGs and SEGs. This content validity, grounded on Burnstein’s (1990) work, is established in a three-point framework: (1) internal analysis of the examination papers, (2) comparison of their contents with the Topic Objectives, and (3) comparison of their content with Subject Objectives and Secondary Education Goals. The results of the analysis show that there is consistency between the examinations and the Topic Objectives however, 56% of the Subject Objectives are not covered in the national examinations. This article also presents a discussion of the implications of these findings in the mathematics teaching and learning. The article ends with a number of recommendations derived from the results of the analysis.
ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGE
Online Publication & Two Hard Copies
|International Journal of Empirical Finance||$ 100||$ 170|
|International Journal of Financial Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|International Journal of Management Sciences||$ 100||$ 170|
|Journal of Empirical Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Education and Literature||$ 60||$ 130|
|Quarterly Journal of Business Studies||$ 50||$ 120|
|Journal of Language and Communication||$ 30||$ 100|
|Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Social Economics||$ 30||$ 100|
|International Journal of Financial Markets||$ 30||$ 100|
|Journal of Public Policy & Governance||$ 30||$ 100|
For a peer-reviewed journal, the publication of articles plays an essential role in the development of a coherent network of knowledge. It is, therefore, essential that all publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers, in the process of publishing the journals, conduct themselves in accordance with the highest level of professional ethics and standards. The publisher is dedicated to supporting the vast efforts of the editors, the academic contributions of authors, and the respected volunteer work undertaken by reviewers. The publisher is also responsible for ensuring that the publication system works smoothly, and that ethical guidelines are applied to assist the editor, author, and reviewer in performing their ethical duties.
The editor has the following responsibilities:
1.The editor should acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within two working days of receipt and ensure an efficient, fair, and timely review process.
2.The editor should ensure that submitted manuscripts are processed in a confidential manner, and that no content of the manuscripts will be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
3.The editor should recuse himself or herself from processing manuscripts if he or she has any conflict of interest with any of the authors or institutions related to the manuscripts.
4.The editor should not disclose the names and other details of the reviewers to a third party without the permission of the reviewers.
5.The editor has the right to make the final decision on whether to accept or reject a manuscript with reference to the significance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal.
6.The editor should by no means make any effort to oblige the authors to cite his or her journal either as an implied or explicit condition of accepting their manuscripts for publication.
7.The editor should not use for his or her own research any part of any data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished articles.
8.The editor should respond promptly and take reasonable measures when an ethical complaint occurs concerning a submitted manuscript or a published paper, and the editor should immediately contact and consult with the author. In this case, a written formal retraction or correction may also be required.