Scaling up successfully: Lessons from Kenya’s Tusome national literacy program

Sources of data

To answer the research questions posed above, we systematically examined several sources of data, from within the Tusome project and from a recently completed external evaluation. Tusome program documents provided an account of how benchmarks were established for student performance in reading (and math), and training documents and official reports recounted how expectations for teachers and students were defined and communicated (RQ1). Implementation of the national program included introducing the use of tablet-based computers to systematically record classroom observations and snapshots of student progress in reading skill development. Data gleaned from a “dashboard” (data visualization tool) that centralizes, compiles, and performs first-order analysis of those findings were reviewed to show how the system has been monitoring and holding itself accountable for meeting expectations (RQ2). Internal project monitoring information, derived in part from ongoing observations by project staff of the performance of ministry officials, enabled us to evaluate how well the education system is fulfilling its responsibilities vis-à-vis teachers and schools (RQ3). Lastly, the external evaluation provided data on learning outcomes showing whether student performance in reading was improving compared with baseline performance before the at-scale implementation of Tusome (RQ4).

Applying the core functions framework to Tusome

As noted earlier, to evaluate the Tusome literacy program’s contribution to system capacity at scale, we fit the core functions framework to the Tusome program. The Tusome program has included building the capacity of the Kenyan education system in each of the core functions mentioned in the model; therefore, we analyzed whether the core functions are operating effectively. The Tusome program has also worked alongside the relevant Kenyan government institutions to develop their capacity to set and communicate expectations, to have CSOs (or in the case of APBET schools, project-hired instructional coaches) monitor instructional change and learning outcomes, and to ensure basic inputs and ongoing, increasingly differentiated support for schools. Below, we examine the evidence from Tusome related to Kenya’s ability to fulfill each of these functions.