Authors: Jackson Matsanga
Abstract: Curriculum reform does not improve educational quality automatically; its effects depend partly on the institutional conditions through which teachers and learners enact it. This study examined whether school administration moderates the relationship between curriculum implementation and the quality of ordinary-level secondary education in Elgon Zone, Eastern Uganda. A cross-sectional mixed-methods design was used. Quantitative evidence was obtained from 461 learners and 159 teachers selected from secondary schools across the zone, while qualitative evidence was generated through interviews and focus-group discussions involving selected headteachers, teachers, learners, Board of Governors members and Parent–Teacher Association representatives. Questionnaire items measured administrative transparency and collaboration, instructional supervision, provision of teaching and learning resources, stakeholder involvement, and accountability. Descriptive statistics, multiple regression and interaction analysis were complemented by thematic analysis. Learners reported substantial administrative weaknesses across all five dimensions: disagreement was highest for instructional supervision (59.6%), followed by transparency and collaboration (54.4%), stakeholder involvement (52.8%), resource provision (52.1%), and accountability (52.5% based on the table categories). The learners’ interaction model was statistically significant, R = .364, R² = .132, F(1, 458) = 5.974, p = .015. The positive interaction coefficient (β = .364, p = .015) indicates that stronger school administration enhances the positive association between curriculum implementation and educational quality. Teachers likewise reported weaknesses in administration. Their main-effects model was significant, R = .372, R² = .138, F(2, 157) = 2.991, p = .033; curriculum implementation (β = .380, p = .046) and school administration (β = .311, p = .016) were both positive predictors. Qualitative evidence supported the importance of regular meetings, collaborative leadership and administrative oversight. The study concludes that curriculum implementation is necessary but insufficient: its translation into quality outcomes is strengthened or weakened by school administration. Leadership development, routine instructional supervision, transparent accountability, stakeholder participation and needs-based resource allocation should therefore be treated as integral components of curriculum implementation.
