Students of Thimphu and Gasa dzongkhags performed better compared to students from other dzongkhags while teachers’ performances were found to be better in Chhukha and Sarpang, a study by the Royal Education Council has revealed.
The Annual Status of Student Learning (ASSL) and Teacher Needs Assessment (TNA) 2011 say the performance of most dzongkhags were closer to the national average.
Based on data from Class IV Science students, students of Thimphu and Gasa performed better while Zhemgang ranked among the bottom. Dzongkhags like Haa, Paro, Trashiyangtse and Lhuentse performed below the national average.
Schools in Punakha performed significantly better than Samtse, Dagana, Wangdue Phodrang, Samdrup Jongkhar, Haa, Paro, Trashiyangtse, Lhuentse and Zhemgang but not better than Sarpang, Pemagatshel, Chhukha, Trongsa, Bumthang, Tsirang, Trashigang and Mongar.
“In 2011, the performance of Thimphu and Sarpang continued to rank at the top of all the dzongkhags”, stated the report.
Dagana, Trashiyangtse, Gasa, Zhemgang and Lhuentse have performed significantly lower from the national average.
To picture the performances of teachers, tests on general skills, subject content and pedagogical skills were conducted.
About 28 teachers of Bumthang appeared in Math’s skills and the average teacher performance in the dzongkhag was 54.1%, with the standard deviation of 9.8.
The study revealed that teachers from Chhukha performed better in Math than those of from other dzongkhags.
Teachers of Mongar, Pemagatshel, Trashiyangtse, Trongsa and Zhemgang performed below the national average across all tests while teachers from Chhukha and Sarpang performed above the national average.
But the report said the difference in performance was not statistically significant
The ASSL 2011 study was carried out across students of classes IV, VI and VIII in 465 schools in English, Math and Science. The TNA study was carried out for teachers of class V to VIII in 433 schools, where 2,288 teachers participated. Dzongkha teachers were excluded from the study.
Confusing report. A graph would have explained everything.