Main Article Content
This study was aimed to examine the assessment of factors that hinder schools, mathematics teachers and students to prepare, organize and utilize instructional materials (IMs) for geometry instruction. It was also focused on examining the relationship between condition of working environment (CWE), teachers’ service year, qualification, and attitude towards instructional materials (TAIM). The study was conducted on ten (10) woredas of Hadiya Zone. To meet the purpose of the study, woredas were categorized as urban and rural. Subjects included students (240), mathematics teachers (41), school directors (10), Heads of wereda education bureau (10), Head of the zonal education beurea (01). To collect the data four types of instruments were developed namely: interview, questionnaire, focus group discussion and observational checklist. To accomplish the goal of this study, descriptive survey of both qualitative and quantitative approach were employed. Percentage (%), Chi-square (χ2) and Correlation (r) techniques were the main statistical tools for quantitative data analysis. Furthermore, narrative method of analysis was used for qualitative data. The finding revealed that the major factors which hinder the preparation and utilization of IMs were luck of opportunity teachers’ participating on workshop/seminar, absence of forming committee for evaluation of IMs, lack of standard SPC and professional trainee SPCC, low support and encouragement of school directors; and no room of creating of discussion and weak measurement taken to IMs production/ utilization by concerned body. Though teachers work in a poor environment, mathematics teachers have good attitude towards IMs. Moreover, the result of the study shows that service year has no relationship with CWE and TAIM (r=0.246, p>0.05) and (r=0.033, p>0.05), respectively. Additionally, the study showed that there is a significant difference (χ2=7.049, df =1, p<0.05) on measurement taken (follow up) by concerned bodies about the production and preparation of IMs. It reveals that concerned bodies of schools in urban location take necessary measurement better than schools in rural location. Furthermore, the result of the study shows that there were inadequate IMs for geometry instruction in all sample schools of Hadiya Zone; and all sample schools of this Zone do not allocate any budget for the production of IMs.
Nayon B, Khan. email@example.com, University of Michigan and firstname.lastname@example.org, Nizam Qatar University; 2010.
Kromydas T. Rethinking higher education and its relationship with social inequalities: Past knowledge, present state and future potential. Palgrave Communications. 2017;3(1):1.
Reinhartz. Teaching and learning in the elementary school. New Jersey; 1997.
Tesfeye Y. Assessment of the availability and utilization of instructional materials for physics instruction at the second cycle of selected secondary schools in West Shoa Zone of Oromia Regional State; Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia; 2008.
Heinich, et al. Instructional media and technology for learning. New Jersey; 1996.
Amare. Avaliablity and use of instructional materials in Tigray Primary School IER, Flambeau. 1999;7.
Aggrawal JC. Principles, Methods and Techniques of Teaching; 2001.
Abraham A. Preparation and utilization of instructional materials in primary schools of Wolita Zone; AAU, Ethiopia; 2001.
Newby, et al. The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated and reflective. Netherlands; 1996.
Tesfaye S, Mehadi A. Teachers of poor communities: The tale of instructional media use in Primary Schools of Gedeo Zone, Southern Ethiopia: Hawassa University, Ethiopia and University of Tübingen, Germany. 2010;35.
Judy S. Reliability and validity. University of California, Irvine; 2006.
Anto A, Girma A. General method of teaching: Teaching module for regular students. AAU, Ethiopia; 2007.
Aggraw JC. Principles, Methods and Techniques of Teaching; 1996.
Ogbondahi. An appraisal of instructional materials used to educate migrant fishermen’s children in Rivers State, Nigeria. 2008;1.
Esu AEO, Enukoha OIT, Umorem GU. Curriculum development in Nigeria for Colleges and Universities, Owerri: Whyte and Whyte Publishers; 2004.
Farrant JS. Principles and practices of education. Singapore; 1981.
Onasanya SA. Selection and utilization of instructional media for effective practice teaching. Institute Journal of Studies in Education. 2004;2:0795-2199.
Morgan DL. Focus groups as qualitative research. Beverly Hills; 1988.
Brown JW. Instructional technology and learning resource: Center-base community education. California: Ofiesh Associates; 1977.
Michealis JU. New designs for elementary curriculum and instruction. New York; 1975.
Armsey JW. An inguiry in to the use inasructional technology. New York: The Ford; 1973.
Beeby CE. Teachers, teacher education and research. (ND).
Louis C. Research methods in education. USA and Canada; 2007.
Altman D, Burton N, Cuthill I, Festing M, Hotton J, Playle J. Experimental design working group: National center for replacement, refinement and reduction of animals in research; 2006.
Blyth-Lord R. The educational media design handbook. London: Macimilan; 1991.
Tadesse K. Factors affecting utilization of instructional materials by primary environmental science teachers of Central Zone of Tigray. AAU; 2001.
Alemayehu Geda. Trade liberalization and regional economic integration in Africa: The case of COMESA. Policy Analysis Support Unit (PASU) of OAU, Addis Ababa; 1998.
Tahira K. Mathematics anxiety among secondary school students in India and its relationship to achievement in mathematics. 2010;16.
DeCoster J. Data analysis in SPSS; 2004.
(Retrieved May 15, 2014)